| 26
February 2003 Future
Forecast Personal identity is an important human characteristic. The need to be identified or recognized as individuals is one element that separates humans from animals. With the increased collection and storage of personal information in private and public databases, and the ease at which “others” can usurp or misuse this information, identity is becoming of the utmost importance. In the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks, even more emphasis is being placed on being able to identify oneself to the authorities for purposes of security. Due to these influences, it is very likely that a strong push will be made to institute a national ID card. Although, good reasons abound as to why this is a bad idea, I feel that within the next two years, some sort of national ID system will be instituted in the United States, and in conjunction with this system, an increasing amount of personal information will be maintained on individuals in a centralized database. [1] An important issue that remains to be addressed involves the degree of control we, as citizens, will have over our personal information, and therefore, our identity? Introduction of legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives last July, HR-4633 also known as the Drivers License Modernization Act, is the most recent example of the push to institute some sort of National ID system. Although it is unclear to me as to the status of HR-4633 and it is possible that it was killed in committee, it is likely that this is far from finished as a topic for debate. Interestingly, this is not the first time that this has been a topic for legislators to decide. A Senate bill, S-1664 attempting to put into place a national ID system was voted on in 1996 but failed by a count of 54-46. [2] Recently, private business has been behind much of the hoopla regarding this topic. Both Scott McNealy of Sun Microsystems and Larry Ellison of Oracle have offered their versions of the technology for free to the government with, of course, a suspected payoff coming from the contract to support the system. [3] Over 30 countries worldwide have some form of national ID card. These cards possess, at the very least, some basic information including, a name, birth date, sex, country and province, ID number, date acquired, expiration date and picture. Supplementary informational and security elements on the card may include barcodes and holograms. It is not unreasonable to believe that a card adopted in the U.S. would have a similar look with additional elements such as an embedded microchip containing extended information, most likely biometric retina scans or fingerprints of the cardholder. During a scan, the card could be linked to a central database where biometric information on each card holder is kept and verification could be confirmed. [4] Will an ID card actually protect citizens? In the opening scenes of Terry Gilliam’s 1985 movie, Brazil, a dead fly caught in a teletype creates a case of mistaken identity. [5] The result is the arrest and eventual death of an innocent citizen at the hands of the secret police. Arguments against a national ID card generally evoke images of a national police state that gathers and misuses information similar to that portrayed in the movie. While it is unlikely that such practices would take place regularly, there is good reason to be suspicious. As recently as January of this year, a woman in Dayton, Ohio was mistakenly declared dead when someone had incorrectly entered her Social Security Number in place of the deceased. The result of this mistake required weeks to rectify. [6] Deliberate misrepresentation of identity by others for purposes of terrorism is one thing, but accidental misrepresentation by mistakes captured in “dumb” databases is quite another. The latter most likely being much more difficult to detect and correct. The fact is, ID cards would not offer prevention of database entry errors. The ability to prove beyond any doubt who you are, may or may not ameliorate the problem and could, in the example from the movie, make matters worse. Also, the security gains from using biometric data are clearly questionable. The problem is not a matter of uniqueness but rather in securing it digitally. Once a biometric scan becomes digitized, it is no different than non-biometric data, therefore it is just as susceptible to being stolen or misused. Once this occurs, biometric data, being limited in amount available per person, is impossible to replace. [7] Finally, there is additional potential for abuse of power that increases with an enhanced reliance on networked databases. In the 1950’s, Senator Eugene McCarthy harassed a noted China scholar from Johns Hopkins University, Owen Lattimore, for suspicion of communist ties. After enduring years of harassment, Lattimore commented that the file created by the FBI resulted in the prosecution of a “man who might have existed.” [8] The question here is to what extent could our identities be reworked in the favor of a malicious prosecutor or foe? Will a centralized system of identification help or hinder such a possibility? In my opinion, the centralized collection of information on individuals will only make it more likely that corruption could occur. While ID cards linked to databases will not negatively affect the great majority of citizens, it is the minority that it will affect in which we should be concerned. The potential for an implementation of a national ID card in the United States is real and it will most likely continue to be touted as a necessary tool in the war on terrorism. It is likely that many people would not be opposed to carrying a national I.D. The war on terrorism has perpetuated a feeling for many that stricter controls are in order. For, example, after September 11, a poll showed that 80 percent of Canadians said that they would be willing to submit fingerprints for a national ID card. [9] In the event of continued terrorist threats, opponents will only face stiffer odds of defeating such a measure as many Americans will fail to understand the implications that such a system will have, or quite possibly if they do understand, be willing to trade more of their privacy for the potential security offered by such a system. Since national ID cards remove more control of identity away from the individual and place it in a database, the potential to become a “man who might have existed” still remains a real scenario in the 21st century.
[1]
Several arguments against a national I.D. system can be found on the
Internet including http://msn.com.com/2100-1107-984835.html
and http://www.eagleforum.org/alert/2002/national-id-7-17-02.shtml
and [2]
For a copy of the legislation, search for HR-4633 at http://thomas.loc.gov.
For the results of the Senate on
S-1644 vote go to [3] Information about Larry Ellison and Scott McNealy's backing of this idea is available from several sources including http://www.cpsr.org/program/natlID/natlIDfaq.html [4] Author unknown. "Your ID Please, Citizen: What a national ID card might look like." Popular Science. 2003. Article available online at: http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/article/0,12543,335428,00.html [5] For further information about the movie go to the Internet Movie Database at http://us.imdb.com/Title?0088846 [6] For the news story go to: http://www.chronicletelegram.com/archive/html/2003/jan/010203/news/local3.html [7] Information found at http://www.cpsr.org/program/natlID/natlIDfaq.html [8] The de-classified FBI file can be read at http://foia.fbi.gov/owenlatt.htm [9]
Schneier, Bruce. Secrets
and Lies: Digital Security In
A Networked World. Wiley
Computer
Publishing, New York. 2000. |