PASS ID Act

[INRM]

Anyone heard of this? Sounds like the REAL ID act all over again

[Giggywig]

Here is the text: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s111-1261
Why don't you read it and tell us* all about it?

*By us I mean myself and the mouse in my pocket. He's interested in politics.

[fullflavormenthol]

Actually no. It really seems to clarify much of the Real ID act, and simply standardizes the system of State IDs. This is a good thing, which means that over time you won't have to worry that the guy in the gas station in Texas won't let you buy a 6 pack of beer because your on vacation from Missouri and he doesn't trust your ID. We need a unified system, and this helps set one up.

That aside it removes some of the ambiguity from the Real ID Act and lays out a series of requirements that from my experience most states follow anyway.

It simply lays out information that must be on an identification card, and what types of documents are sufficient to allow you to get one. For most people this will be a birth certificate, a SS card, and a current bill. Simple as that.

[The Fallen Serpent]

I would personally be in favor of a standardized ID system that ironed out some of the ambiguities. I do not mind state based personalization on the cards, but there is a tipping point when the differences are annoying to someone who once had to ID people for a living. Some state IDs looked easier to forge than my middle school ID was. Or at least did ten years ago.

[fullflavormenthol]

I would personally be in favor of a standardized ID system that ironed out some of the ambiguities. I do not mind state based personalization on the cards, but there is a tipping point when the differences are annoying to someone who once had to ID people for a living. Some state IDs looked easier to forge than my middle school ID was. Or at least did ten years ago.
I understand that. Some look really cheap, but I hated the time I was in Texas buying a 6 pack (I was 27 at the time) and the guy went to the back were a cop was hanging out, and had the nerve to come back and say, "Well we'll let you get away with it this time, but next time you need a Texas ID." Seriously?

A standard would take away the excuse for much of this, and like I said most states already meet the standards.

[The Fallen Serpent]

Agreed. Also, refusing your ID might be illegal. If I remember correctly that was the case in Oregon. There are specific legal types of ID that must be accepted. State ID and DL were included in that list. As were passports. I am unsure if it was specific Oregon regulations or Federal regulations however. It annoyed the military folk that military IDs were specifically not on the list and that the company worked for had an (oft ignored) policy of not accepting such IDs. In all fairness the policy was created when military IDs were comparable to elementary school IDs and "fakes" could be bought for a few dollars as long as you knew one of the guys who printed them out. At some recent point the services shifted focus and the IDs are in line with or more secure than state IDs.

ETA: Thinking over the situation, I believe Federal regulations mandated that all State IDs are given equal weight in the US. The Oregon regulation specified state ID and passports, meaning that all states IDs had to be given equal treatment since Federal regulations disallowed separate treatment of state IDs. We had a user manual with pictures of all State, District, Territorial and Federal IDs. By company policy I could accept a police badge as proof of ID to use a Credit Card but state law meant that same badge could not be used as defense if I had accidentally sold cigarrettes to a minor.

[casebro]

Real and ubiquitous IDs will go a long ways toward eliminating: 1) voter fraud, and 2) illegal aliens.

Want to sign a petition? Show your ID.

Want a job? Show your ID. Good ID? Get a job.

[INRM]

The problem I have with this is that it has an RFID chip in it, which can allow all people who need to carry around ID to be tracked wherever they go.

This ID would double as a drivers license, so we'd basically be required to carry this thing on us wherever we go, and it would allow us to be tracked.

I don't like the idea of a government following us wherever we go, it's not a good sign for a country that prides itself in valuing civil rights.

[richardm]

I was wondering when RFID chips would rear their ugly heads.

The problem I have with this is that it has an RFID chip in it, which can allow all people who need to carry around ID to be tracked wherever they go..

The abject limitations of RFID chips have been explained to you so many times and by so many people; yet you still keep vapouring about them. Frankly I begin to worry about you.

Don't want your card to be read by sooper sekrit tracking readers about town? Wrap it in tinfoil until you want to use it.

Don't want your card to be read by people who might make a note and pass it on to the government? Well now that card is not going to be very useful then is it, because you won't be able to show it to anyone just in case.

Frankly you should be more worried about the DNA tracking cutlery that has been secretly introduced thanks to the miracle of Nanotechnology.

[The Fallen Serpent]

The problem I have with this is that it has an RFID chip in it, which can allow all people who need to carry around ID to be tracked wherever they go.


I assume this is a reference to this line:
‘(9) A common machine-readable technology, containing the data elements available on the face of a driver’s license or identification card. A person’s social security number may not be included in these data elements.

I know that RFID tech is a very real possibility and is being considered, but so are magnetic strips and barcodes. I would prefer one of the later for the very reason that even passive RFID chips can be tracked with the appropriate technology. I know California and Oregon IDs can be machine read. I found this to be highly advantageous with no known issues that have come up in practicality.

[richardm]

passive RFID chips can be tracked

Don't you start as well ;) Passive RFID chips have ranges measured in a few centimetres, usually. Some of them can be read at a range of feet, but in both cases that's in totally optimal reading conditions. By sticking them in a pocket, or in a wallet, or under your skin, or wherever, you're going to smack that range down to very nearly zero, no matter how super-sensitive your reader is. Active chips are a different story, but you're quite unlikely to find them in something like an ID card because that's adding bulk and expense to provide a facility that nobody needs or wants.

[The Fallen Serpent]

I should clarify, that such capability is severely weak and may never become significant to the point of a real worry. More I doubt the technology will stay this way and would prefer to err on the side of privacy. Hence my preference for the other technologies.

I would not oppose PASS ID on these grounds alone, and I so far support the act. I would just prefer the already used technology that has less potentional for future manipulation as advances are made.

Yes, I know bar codes can be read at a distance at times too.

[richardm]

I doubt the technology will stay this way and would prefer to err on the side of privacy.

That is probably a fair comment. But in the future, who knows what better, foolproof technology might come along to track innocent citizens? In the meantime however everyone cheerfully carries mobile phones around with them, usually without thinking twice that they could be tracked - and those things have tracking ranges of kilometres. Sure, you can turn your phone off. You could also leave your ID card at home. Unless you planned to use it, in which case the location of that usage could just as easily be logged when the card is verified.

I just fail to see the special difficulty that RFID chips present, versus all the other things we do on a daily basis, unless you start invoking improbable reading scenarios, or future technology which may or may not materialise, and which in any case isn't available for the foreseeable future.

Edit: To be a bit more on-topic, I generally feel uncomfortable about ID cards on the whole. It has a bit too much a of "Show me your papers!" feel to it. But in the USA where people often seem to have state issued ID cards, it seems to make sense to standardise them for the sort of reasons that FullFlavorMenthol gave.

[The Fallen Serpent]

I agree that cell phones are a much greater and realistic privacy risk. The big difference is the near legal necessity of an ID in many instances. When I go for a walk at night police do not stop and ask me for my cell phone. Admittedly, they no longer stop and ask me for my ID either. I was younger then. Now they just ask what I am doing then go about their business when I fail to admit to drug trafficking, prostitution or casing locations.

RFID chips are not something I intend to put any effort into worrying about. More that when the opportunity presents itself I would support other similar technologies that seemingly lack the same possible issues while still providing the nearly same level of utility.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Anyone heard of this? Sounds like the REAL ID act all over again

I haven't, but whatever it is, I bet teh Joohs are behind it!

[INRM]

Another problem with this act is that it imposes much lower financial loads on the states than the REAL ID act did, which makes it much more likely to pass.

As for broadcast range of RFID tags, that can always change. Technology does improve with time. Radars from the 1940's didn't have anywhere near the broadcast range available for the antenna size and power-requirements, than a radar developed in the 1950's.


The Fallen Serpent,

I agree that cell phones are a much greater and realistic privacy risk. The big difference is the near legal necessity of an ID in many instances. When I go for a walk at night police do not stop and ask me for my cell phone.

Exactly

[Sabrina]

I'd think we'd be more likely to lean toward biometrics rather than RFID technology.

Virtually impossible to counterfeit, from what little I've read on the subject.

[KoihimeNakamura]

You know, I'd rather they standarize ID's myself. Makes my job at work much easier..

[AvalonXQ]

From a State's Rights point of view, creating a federal ID raises fewer issues than regulating state IDs.

[KoihimeNakamura]

I.. could care less what the states want in this debate. If you ever have to work in a gas station, start looking at the different ID's. Honestly, standardizing it would be easier because I would know roughly where to look *every* time since our scanner only reads WA/OR ID's. (Probably Idaho, but I have yet to see an Idaho ID.)

(Besides, typically, the states get money for agreeing sooo.)

[Ducky]

That is probably a fair comment. But in the future, who knows what better, foolproof technology might come along to track innocent citizens? In the meantime however everyone cheerfully carries mobile phones around with them, usually without thinking twice that they could be tracked - and those things have tracking ranges of kilometres. Sure, you can turn your phone off. You could also leave your ID card at home. Unless you planned to use it, in which case the location of that usage could just as easily be logged when the card is verified.

I just fail to see the special difficulty that RFID chips present, versus all the other things we do on a daily basis, unless you start invoking improbable reading scenarios, or future technology which may or may not materialise, and which in any case isn't available for the foreseeable future.

Edit: To be a bit more on-topic, I generally feel uncomfortable about ID cards on the whole. It has a bit too much a of "Show me your papers!" feel to it. But in the USA where people often seem to have state issued ID cards, it seems to make sense to standardise them for the sort of reasons that FullFlavorMenthol gave.

RFID isn't even effective as an anti-counterfeit measure. Check Bruce Schneier's blog about the RFID technology in ID's and bus passes that has been cloned successfully, in seconds, by thieves.

[INRM]

Ducky,

If RFID chips can be easily cloned, then this requirement for RFID tags would be entirely for the purpose of placing the citizens of the US under surveillance.

[Ducky]

Ducky,

If RFID chips can be easily cloned, then this requirement for RFID tags would be entirely for the purpose of placing the citizens of the US under surveillance.

Your "then" clause doesn't follow from the first assumption. Yes they can be cloned. No, that does not automatically mean they are only for the purpose of surveillance. It is very possible (and probable) that bureaucracy refuses or is slow to admit a failing in an intended security feature. Non-technical politicians everywhere are often enamored with technology they do not fully understand the failings of. The chips also can be used to speed up checking processes via a chip reader at checkpoints on the border. That they are easily cloned is nothing spectacular except the government is not very smart at making counterfeiting difficult in this case.

[Ducky]

Your "then" clause doesn't follow from the first assumption. Yes they can be cloned. No, that does not automatically mean they are only for the purpose of surveillance. It is very possible (and probable) that bureaucracy refuses or is slow to admit a failing in an intended security feature. Non-technical politicians everywhere are often enamored with technology they do not fully understand the failings of. The chips also can be used to speed up checking processes via a chip reader at checkpoints on the border. That they are easily cloned is nothing spectacular except the government is not very smart at making counterfeiting difficult in this case.

Also, if the purpose were tracking, the government would not want something easily cloned, as you could easily foil their tracking this way.

[JoeyDonuts]

As for broadcast range of RFID tags, that can always change. Technology does improve with time. Radars from the 1940's didn't have anywhere near the broadcast range available for the antenna size and power-requirements, than a radar developed in the 1950's.

Oh no. Ohhhh no.

For someone harping about broadcast range and radar technology, you sure seem to be having trouble with the 'active/passive' concept.

So how would they track you?

Be sure to account for the Doppler effect when the target is moving.

[ingoa]

As for broadcast range of RFID tags, that can always change. Technology does improve with time. Radars from the 1940's didn't have anywhere near the broadcast range available for the antenna size and power-requirements, than a radar developed in the 1950's.


Radar range is independent of the decade. It is dependent of the line of sight. This hopefully does not change much over time.
Of course reception quality can change.

Getting simple concepts wrong does not enhance your credibility.

[ServiceSoon]

I don't think China is going to buy anymore T-bills to fund this; perhaps Japan will.

I find it hilarious that this was passed and the states completely ignored it. Apparently arresting the state officials responsible for failing to implement this wasn't in the cards for the big bad fed.

Does anybody even remember why we NEEDED the real id? It was a matter of national security!!!

[Fishstick]

Belgium has had electronic ID's for a few years now
http://www.maldegem.be/infokrant_juli08/0702.jpg

They're pretty nifty, handy for a lot of services (eg; Train pass, hospital visits, e-gov) and smaller than the old ones.

[WildCat]

Actually no. It really seems to clarify much of the Real ID act, and simply standardizes the system of State IDs. This is a good thing, which means that over time you won't have to worry that the guy in the gas station in Texas won't let you buy a 6 pack of beer because your on vacation from Missouri and he doesn't trust your ID. We need a unified system, and this helps set one up.

That aside it removes some of the ambiguity from the Real ID Act and lays out a series of requirements that from my experience most states follow anyway.

It simply lays out information that must be on an identification card, and what types of documents are sufficient to allow you to get one. For most people this will be a birth certificate, a SS card, and a current bill. Simple as that.
But but but - then the government will know who you are!!11!!1!!!!!1

[WildCat]

It has a bit too much a of "Show me your papers!" feel to it.
What does an ID card have to do with getting government permission to travel within the country?

[fullflavormenthol]

What does an ID card have to do with getting government permission to travel within the country?
I have no clue. I think some people just hate the idea of having to carry around identification.

[Alareth]

It simply lays out information that must be on an identification card, and what types of documents are sufficient to allow you to get one. For most people this will be a birth certificate, a SS card, and a current bill. Simple as that.


So Obama couldn't get one then? :boxedin:

[fullflavormenthol]

So Obama couldn't get one then? :boxedin:
I'll take it you're joking, but given that we both have a COLB I doubt there is a problem considering I got my identification in a Real ID complaint state.

[TieDyedGuy]

That is probably a fair comment. But in the future, who knows what better, foolproof technology might come along to track innocent citizens? In the meantime however everyone cheerfully carries mobile phones around with them, usually without thinking twice that they could be tracked - and those things have tracking ranges of kilometres. Sure, you can turn your phone off. You could also leave your ID card at home. Unless you planned to use it, in which case the location of that usage could just as easily be logged when the card is verified.

I just fail to see the special difficulty that RFID chips present, versus all the other things we do on a daily basis, unless you start invoking improbable reading scenarios, or future technology which may or may not materialise, and which in any case isn't available for the foreseeable future.

Edit: To be a bit more on-topic, I generally feel uncomfortable about ID cards on the whole. It has a bit too much a of "Show me your papers!" feel to it. But in the USA where people often seem to have state issued ID cards, it seems to make sense to standardise them for the sort of reasons that FullFlavorMenthol gave.


As someone in the Label Industry, thank you for actually knowing the facts about RFID and speaking them.

Also, I love that your username could be mine, same firstname/last initial :)

[Foolmewunz]

Belgium has had electronic ID's for a few years now
http://www.maldegem.be/infokrant_juli08/0702.jpg

They're pretty nifty, handy for a lot of services (eg; Train pass, hospital visits, e-gov) and smaller than the old ones.

That's a lot like the Hong Kong ID. We've been on them for years, and have even gone to thumb prints. You no longer have to wait in the Immigration line if you have one. Put the card into the machine - go through the first gates and then put your thumb on the little scanner and wait for the second gate to open.

We also have a prepaid RFID "Octopus" card that we use on the MTR and public transportation and which can be used in 7/11 stores and in my case, is actually my key to my apartment building.

I like 'em. I also work in Logistics and know the limitations of "active" RFID. I mean, sometimes the card doesn't work when you swipe your wallet over the surface - you have to remove it and swipe it again. That doesn't sound like they can track me very far. I suppose if I ever make Interpol's Most Wanted, they could track my movements back and forth to work, but the minute I wanted to stop them from doing so, I'd just have to revert to buying individual tickets. Big Brother's still got a long way to go.

[Alareth]

We could go the British route. Spend millions on electronic ID's and not buy the equipment needed to actually read them ...

[WildCat]

I have no clue. I think some people just hate the idea of having to carry around identification.
What part of the bill requires anyone to carry around identification?