15 ms·

EU votes to create gigantic biometrics database

258 points by donohoe 8y ago

drinkcrudeoil 8y ago
In CIR "S" stands for Security
mirimir 8y ago
Ah, but you see, it's the government doing it. So it's OK. </s>
- Ygg2 8y ago
  Yeah, it's not like any government ever used massive population databases to exterminate parts of their population. Certainly not a European government. And definitely not around middle of 20th century.
  - puzzle 8y ago
    Or, in more recent times, it's not as if wiretapping abuse was discovered in places like Greece or Italy.
- skbly7 8y ago
  Will it have opt out, download your information and....? </s>
docdeek 8y ago
Why would it be limited to 350 million people - isn’t the EU around 500 million or more? Are children excluded?
- AdamGibbins 8y ago
  > The European Parliament voted last week to interconnect a series of border-control, migration, and law enforcement systems into a gigantic, biometrics-tracking, searchable database of EU and non-EU citizens. It is only people already known to the EU.
  - docdeek 8y ago
    Understood - but most EU states would have a national ID card which would make them ‘known’ to their own government. Not sure if all include biometrics (I know that the ID cards here in France are not all like that, though passports today are) but national ID cards cover all adults and children. Just seems weird that they would not include a couple of hundred million people that they definitely know something about by virtue of their citizenship of an EU country.
    - tapland 8y ago
      At least in Sweden very few people use national id-cards. Most people have ones issued by banks. A lot of people became painfully aware of this when they were refused re-entry into the country with their other ID-cards when border checks towards Denmark were implemented, since it's common to commute to Copenhagen. Most Swedes do have passports though.
      - Daniel_sk 8y ago
        Interesting fact. I thought that having an ID card is pretty much mandatory in whole EU. In Slovakia you get one at age of 15 (I think) and it has biometric data - picture and fingerprints. You are not required by law to carry it with you, but it can cause delays if need to be verified by police or other authority. It’s also used to login into e-gov services with a card reader and your pin - but it’s quite limited at this point.
        nutjob2 8y ago
        In several EU countries you're required to carry id at all times. In the US Green Card holders are required to carry the card at all times.
        swarnie_ 8y ago
        > In several EU countries you're required to carry id at all times. Any idea what the punishment is for not carrying?
zaarn 8y ago
Merging existing databases into one big one might be more accurate but that's modern journalism.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  Not quite. There is no database in some countries. I am not going to give the EU biometrical data, even if that means skipping some "services". Edit: I would also guess it is incompatible with recently introduced legislation.
  - nutjob2 8y ago
    So you're never going to hold an EU passport or never enter the EU? Do you feel more comfortable giving the same information to the US?
    - paganel 8y ago
      It is still possible to hold an EU passport which does not contain any biometric data, even though it's getting harder and harder and I suspect the still available loopholes will be eliminated pretty soon. For example I live in an Eastern-European country that is also an EU member and I hold a passport which does not have any incorporated biometric data in it, but that only happens because I specifically chose a temporary (meaning one-year) passport instead of the normal 5-year or 10-year passports, the latter requiring you giving your biometric info away. As I was saying, I suspect this loophole will be closed pretty soon.
      - nutjob2 8y ago
        Wow, besides the possible expense, having a one year passport must be a pain. It's essentially valid for 6 months less the time of your trip since most places require six months validity beyond your departure from their jurisdiction. It's like you almost have to apply for a new passport for each trip! Also having a one year total duration is sure to attract attention from foreign authorities, they'll assume you're restricted for some reason. Telling them that you got it to avoid being fingerprinted is not going to please them. If you want true misery, try getting flagged by the UK, EU or US and enjoy up getting detained for hours (in a holding cell) each time you try to cross their border. Have you actually travelled on such a passport?
ptidhomme 8y ago
Yet another step to make things more straightforwardly hackable for interested actors. Sorry for the cynicism, but I can't help thinking that all this digitalization and automation is just plain blessing for foreign intel agencies, if not the main goal.
- lowdose 8y ago
  This, it seems like the Overton window is moving in one direction.
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    Isn't it an Overton conveyor belt at this point? The kind of you see on airports, for moving people. No matter which side you start on, in the end, you'll be pushed over there.
- eega 8y ago
  I doubt that it is a goal to make it easier for foreign intel agencies to get this data. But I also strongly doubt that they are capable of preventing it ...
  - garmaine 8y ago
    No one said it's a goal. Just reality.
    - tasubotadas 8y ago
      > if not the main goal.
    - coldtea 8y ago
      Grantparent above literally said it's a goal.
    - lucideer 8y ago
      @sibling commenters I believe the gp meant it's the goal of foreign intel agencies to encourage worldwide digitization/automation of everything (not the goal of the EU).
return1 8y ago
this is a necessary step forward if we want to create a borderless union where you can't trust your neighbours.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  Underrated criticism. The EU currently isn't going in the direction of a borderless union. 15 years ago, I would have thought that a sad development. Currently not so sure anymore. Legislation from EU bodies has been abysmal the last 10 years, not only relating digital spaces.
  - Mirioron 8y ago
    More than 10 years. Don't forget the Data Retention Act that required ISPs to keep logs of every single IP you visit and collect it in a database.
    - raxxorrax 8y ago
      How could I forget. People start asking for VPN, even non-techies. I still believe it to be illegal. But many rules were already broken...
      - Mirioron 8y ago
        It was found to be illegal. The ECJ struck it down in 2014: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-area-of-justice-and-fundamental-rights/file-data-retention-directive http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-area-o... It doesn't mean that there can't be national legislation that does something similar "for fighting crime" though.
lanevorockz 8y ago
Wouldn't be surprised if they soon move to track everyone's DNA and we will be living in a "Brave new World" future.
- pmlnr 8y ago
  1984. "Brave New World" doesn't need things like that, it's a much more terrifying future, when everyone is happy in their little golden cage.
  - squarefoot 8y ago
    That would be more close to The Matrix.
    - pmlnr 8y ago
      Have you read "Brave New World"? Genetically engineered people, sorted into categories of capabilities, with all their needs for happiness provided, including recreational drugs.
      - oAlbe 8y ago
        > sorted into categories of capabilities Artificially and massively genetically engineered and bred into categories, not sorted. It's an important distinction.
        pmlnr 8y ago
        This is a better description indeed.
        jfk13 8y ago
        So today, even if we haven't gone far down the genetic engineering path yet, we do have the tools for massive-scale social engineering. I wonder which will prove the more critical enabling factor for our very own dystopia?
        8y ago
mothsonasloth 8y ago
Cookie law, Article 13, now this. Who are driving these motions?
- petre 8y ago
  Just vote these morons out of parliament. I'm not surprised if they're the same ones that voted for article 13/17.
- r3bl 8y ago
  Where's the malice in the cookie law? It's an absurd law that's a prime example of how incompetence at a regulative level leads to a negative outcome in a specific sector. I 100% agree with that, but I fail to see how it can be compared to your other two examples. Cookie law doesn't affect your privacy in any way (and certainly not for the worse), it just gives you annoyances you have to deal with.
  - nicky0 8y ago
    There is no malice in any of them.
- rezeroed 8y ago
  The EU flavour of democracy. Do what you're told, livestock.
- swarnie_ 8y ago
  United states of Europe. Just wait till the chatter about a combined EU army crops up again...
- orbifold 8y ago
  Basically the majority of laws are now written by the EU. Welcome to democracy 2.0, where the campaign slogans for the EU parliament elections are something along the lines of - "We love Europe... " - "If you love peace then you should love Europe..." - "Isn't Europe great... " - "We should make Europe even better ... " basically content free. and then there are the right wing nationalists, which are equally deluded.
Proven 8y ago
After the 80's terrorism in the EU basically died off, with some exceptions like North Ireland which lasted a bit longer. Then came the EU, Merkel and Co and look it it now. After crackdowns on cash and crypto, the next Big Brother pet project is biometrics. What a globalist shithole!
fyoving 8y ago
Yet further proof that their online legislations are not about privacy but attacks on US companies.
- EuroShill 8y ago
  Not surprising. Many European nations and their citizens are extremely jealous of the success of US companies (how many big, famous and innovative brands from the past 3 decades have come out of Europe? Let's name a few. [crickets] Exactly) Don't worry though, their excellent PR and damage control team will be out shortly to commence the circlejerk on how much the EU actually cares about privacy and that everybody is for privacy there, while US=Spying evil no privacy land forever.
- pergadad 8y ago
  How is that even linked to US corporations?
cptviridian 8y ago
Where do I opt out? As a EU citizen my rights are protected by GDPR yes?
- anshargal 8y ago
  GDPR does not apply to goverments
- undreren 8y ago
  Sort of. But there is no penalty for governments if they break the regulation. Only companies are fined for breaking the regulation.
  - mimsee 8y ago
    Couldn’t you still get compensated for it? Assuming it went to trial and you won.
- ferongr 8y ago
  The state does not willingly handicap itself.
- oaiey 8y ago
  The GDPR has a clause like "if not required by law". States are funny here: they operate the system and define the law.
rezeroed 8y ago
This is too dystopian for me. I'm increasingly thinking of moving somewhere less technological. Let the fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
baq 8y ago
NSA didn't need the vote, so I guess we're even now
thefounder 8y ago
I wonder how is this different than the US's system where even as a tourist I have to give them my biometrics so they can store it in their big database.
- rglullis 8y ago
  If you are foreign to the US and want to get in you need to accept their conditions that they deem needed for your entry. Even though is a questionable practice, you are doing something (provide biometrics) in order to get something else (access to a foreign country) The point here is that you are a CITIZEN of the EU, you need to subject to conditions that give you no benefit when traveling abroad.
  - pjc50 8y ago
    > "The systems covered by the new rules would include the Schengen Information System, Eurodac, the Visa Information System (VIS) and three new systems: the European Criminal Records System for Third Country Nationals (ECRIS-TCN), the Entry/Exit System (EES) and the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS)," It looks like those are all travel-related systems rather than national identity systems? (e.g. the UK operates SIS: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen-information-system_en https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/border... while not being either a member of Schengen or having a national identity system?)
  - NotPaidToPost 8y ago
    You already need to submit biometric data in order to get a passport. That's how they get these data in the first place. In EU countries that have ID cards you also already need to submit biometric data when applying for one. This only merges existing databases, which is a reasonable thing to do when you have a single border (Schengen area) and obviously want to quickly check anyone.
  - Someone1234 8y ago
    If you're a US Citizen you also need to submit in order to get re-admitted into your country of birth, or just to gain a US Passport (after 2007). So I'm not defending the EU, but the US is already doing exactly this.
johnnycab 8y ago
In the section for 'Schengen Border Checks', under the image of the Russian passport, there is a picture of a scowling Gérard Depardieu[1], which is a thinly veiled attempt at a display of mirth and disdain in equal parts, by the Directorate General of EU Commission - Migration and Home Affairs. Although, his body of work and extracurricular activities could provide a further source of fodder for ridicule. However, it reveals the general message from EU after this vote i.e. we don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead [2]. [1] https://www.securityresearch-cou.eu/sites/default/files/02.Rinkens.Secure%20safe%20societies_EU%20interoperability_4-3_v1.0.pdf https://www.securityresearch-cou.eu/sites/default/files/02.R... [2] https://www.gemalto.com/govt/coesys/eborder/entry-exit-system https://www.gemalto.com/govt/coesys/eborder/entry-exit-syste...
- christudor 8y ago
  "We don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead." The EU seems to have done this for at least twenty-five years, the prime example being their stubborn insistence on monetary union despite the mountains of expert opinion saying that monetary union made no sense economically.
  - raxxorrax 8y ago
    And those experts were pretty much on point. I doubt the EU will survive long with its attitude. I wouldn't mind, since something new is preferable to this.
  - NotPaidToPost 8y ago
    This misses the point. You could also say that monetary union between the US states makes no sense economically. The point is that the people decided to have a political union and to belong to the same country, the USA. Monetary union follows. The aim is to have a federal union in Europe. In a way, going straight to monetary union is to 'force' further political union because they know full well that it requires it in order to work. It's crucial to have the economics work but economics does not control culture and politics, it's the other way round.
LeonM 8y ago
I see a lot of concerns here about the obvious security and privacy issues that a database like this would create. I share those concerns, but there is one other issue that I don't see mentioned here. These sorts of government IT projects are always plagued with delays and tremendous budget overruns. It wouldn't surprise me if this takes at least 10 years and a billion euro to complete, if it isn't cancelled before that.
sho 8y ago
Basically every first world country has this now, or is well on the way to having it. Just today, for a JetBlue flight in the US: https://twitter.com/TallGlassofStyL/status/1119974641605459972 https://twitter.com/TallGlassofStyL/status/11199746416054599... The question is not whether Governments should have this information - that horse has left the barn. The question now is what they should be allowed to do with it.
- oaiey 8y ago
  That is exactly what the gdpr also wants to make sure: make it clear what happens to your data. I just hope they stick to the same rules :)
modzu 8y ago
borders are legitimized racism it's fine if my country has certain policies that are different than your country. BUT LET INDIVIDUALS DECIDE WHICH SIDE THEY WANT TO BE ON. NOBODY CHOSE WHERE TO BE BORN
- oaiey 8y ago
  I would formalize it differently. Borders are established by a society of people who live in it. Historically, often based on racial, linguisitic or cultural differences. There is no right to any outsider to declare himself member of a society (just think of your book reading club). It is the right of the society to define the rationale for its membership. Is it unfair to many people to live in worse conditions: yes. Does it change anything of the above: no. Does it change the right of the society to deny entry: no. And for the hard individual cases, there is the Human rights declaration which for example the EU has put into law.
  - modzu 8y ago
    well first of all i think you are equating society and territory, but even so, a society/territory is not akin to a book club. if there is only one club, that you are born into, does that analogy still make sense? if "outsiders" have no right to declare themselves members of a society -- by what principle does the society earn this right? it seems that this principle is merely the georgraphy beneath your feet when you were born. i can think of many alternative "rationales for membership" that are much less trivial. remember modern states were born out of "patriotism". i think that is still what defends them. the insider/outsider distinction is precisely the problem.
    - oaiey 8y ago
      You are right about the territory. I had a paragraph about it but deleted it :). Territory is a tricky aspect. Over time, territory changes its value. The Inka territory/society in Middle America were once the peak of evolution. Now the territory/society is not that interesting anymore. Same story for the territories we nowadays know as Egypt, Iraq or Syria. After the Oil you can count Saudi Arabia to it. The UK was much more interesting 100 years ago. Territory is indeed a factor. But one which is volatile as an aspect how well a society develops on it. And regards being born in a society: There is nothing stronger than the bound of a family. Why we are surprised that the societies select this as a primary membership rule. And this is universal like that in every spot of the world.

258 points by donohoe 8y ago

drinkcrudeoil 8y ago

In CIR "S" stands for Security

mirimir 8y ago

Ah, but you see, it's the government doing it. So it's OK. </s>

Ygg2 8y ago
Yeah, it's not like any government ever used massive population databases to exterminate parts of their population. Certainly not a European government. And definitely not around middle of 20th century.
- puzzle 8y ago
  Or, in more recent times, it's not as if wiretapping abuse was discovered in places like Greece or Italy.
skbly7 8y ago
Will it have opt out, download your information and....? </s>

docdeek 8y ago

Why would it be limited to 350 million people - isn’t the EU around 500 million or more? Are children excluded?

AdamGibbins 8y ago
> The European Parliament voted last week to interconnect a series of border-control, migration, and law enforcement systems into a gigantic, biometrics-tracking, searchable database of EU and non-EU citizens. It is only people already known to the EU.
- docdeek 8y ago
  Understood - but most EU states would have a national ID card which would make them ‘known’ to their own government. Not sure if all include biometrics (I know that the ID cards here in France are not all like that, though passports today are) but national ID cards cover all adults and children. Just seems weird that they would not include a couple of hundred million people that they definitely know something about by virtue of their citizenship of an EU country.
  - tapland 8y ago
    At least in Sweden very few people use national id-cards. Most people have ones issued by banks. A lot of people became painfully aware of this when they were refused re-entry into the country with their other ID-cards when border checks towards Denmark were implemented, since it's common to commute to Copenhagen. Most Swedes do have passports though.
    - Daniel_sk 8y ago
      Interesting fact. I thought that having an ID card is pretty much mandatory in whole EU. In Slovakia you get one at age of 15 (I think) and it has biometric data - picture and fingerprints. You are not required by law to carry it with you, but it can cause delays if need to be verified by police or other authority. It’s also used to login into e-gov services with a card reader and your pin - but it’s quite limited at this point.
      - nutjob2 8y ago
        In several EU countries you're required to carry id at all times. In the US Green Card holders are required to carry the card at all times.
        swarnie_ 8y ago
        > In several EU countries you're required to carry id at all times. Any idea what the punishment is for not carrying?

zaarn 8y ago

Merging existing databases into one big one might be more accurate but that's modern journalism.

raxxorrax 8y ago
Not quite. There is no database in some countries. I am not going to give the EU biometrical data, even if that means skipping some "services". Edit: I would also guess it is incompatible with recently introduced legislation.
- nutjob2 8y ago
  So you're never going to hold an EU passport or never enter the EU? Do you feel more comfortable giving the same information to the US?
  - paganel 8y ago
    It is still possible to hold an EU passport which does not contain any biometric data, even though it's getting harder and harder and I suspect the still available loopholes will be eliminated pretty soon. For example I live in an Eastern-European country that is also an EU member and I hold a passport which does not have any incorporated biometric data in it, but that only happens because I specifically chose a temporary (meaning one-year) passport instead of the normal 5-year or 10-year passports, the latter requiring you giving your biometric info away. As I was saying, I suspect this loophole will be closed pretty soon.
    - nutjob2 8y ago
      Wow, besides the possible expense, having a one year passport must be a pain. It's essentially valid for 6 months less the time of your trip since most places require six months validity beyond your departure from their jurisdiction. It's like you almost have to apply for a new passport for each trip! Also having a one year total duration is sure to attract attention from foreign authorities, they'll assume you're restricted for some reason. Telling them that you got it to avoid being fingerprinted is not going to please them. If you want true misery, try getting flagged by the UK, EU or US and enjoy up getting detained for hours (in a holding cell) each time you try to cross their border. Have you actually travelled on such a passport?

ptidhomme 8y ago

Yet another step to make things more straightforwardly hackable for interested actors. Sorry for the cynicism, but I can't help thinking that all this digitalization and automation is just plain blessing for foreign intel agencies, if not the main goal.

lowdose 8y ago
This, it seems like the Overton window is moving in one direction.
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  Isn't it an Overton conveyor belt at this point? The kind of you see on airports, for moving people. No matter which side you start on, in the end, you'll be pushed over there.
eega 8y ago
I doubt that it is a goal to make it easier for foreign intel agencies to get this data. But I also strongly doubt that they are capable of preventing it ...
- garmaine 8y ago
  No one said it's a goal. Just reality.
  - tasubotadas 8y ago
    > if not the main goal.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    Grantparent above literally said it's a goal.
  - lucideer 8y ago
    @sibling commenters I believe the gp meant it's the goal of foreign intel agencies to encourage worldwide digitization/automation of everything (not the goal of the EU).

return1 8y ago

this is a necessary step forward if we want to create a borderless union where you can't trust your neighbours.

raxxorrax 8y ago
Underrated criticism. The EU currently isn't going in the direction of a borderless union. 15 years ago, I would have thought that a sad development. Currently not so sure anymore. Legislation from EU bodies has been abysmal the last 10 years, not only relating digital spaces.
- Mirioron 8y ago
  More than 10 years. Don't forget the Data Retention Act that required ISPs to keep logs of every single IP you visit and collect it in a database.
  - raxxorrax 8y ago
    How could I forget. People start asking for VPN, even non-techies. I still believe it to be illegal. But many rules were already broken...
    - Mirioron 8y ago
      It was found to be illegal. The ECJ struck it down in 2014: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-area-of-justice-and-fundamental-rights/file-data-retention-directive http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-area-o... It doesn't mean that there can't be national legislation that does something similar "for fighting crime" though.

lanevorockz 8y ago

Wouldn't be surprised if they soon move to track everyone's DNA and we will be living in a "Brave new World" future.

pmlnr 8y ago
1984. "Brave New World" doesn't need things like that, it's a much more terrifying future, when everyone is happy in their little golden cage.
- squarefoot 8y ago
  That would be more close to The Matrix.
  - pmlnr 8y ago
    Have you read "Brave New World"? Genetically engineered people, sorted into categories of capabilities, with all their needs for happiness provided, including recreational drugs.
    - oAlbe 8y ago
      > sorted into categories of capabilities Artificially and massively genetically engineered and bred into categories, not sorted. It's an important distinction.
      - pmlnr 8y ago
        This is a better description indeed.
      - jfk13 8y ago
        So today, even if we haven't gone far down the genetic engineering path yet, we do have the tools for massive-scale social engineering. I wonder which will prove the more critical enabling factor for our very own dystopia?
      - 8y ago

mothsonasloth 8y ago

Cookie law, Article 13, now this. Who are driving these motions?

petre 8y ago
Just vote these morons out of parliament. I'm not surprised if they're the same ones that voted for article 13/17.
r3bl 8y ago
Where's the malice in the cookie law? It's an absurd law that's a prime example of how incompetence at a regulative level leads to a negative outcome in a specific sector. I 100% agree with that, but I fail to see how it can be compared to your other two examples. Cookie law doesn't affect your privacy in any way (and certainly not for the worse), it just gives you annoyances you have to deal with.
- nicky0 8y ago
  There is no malice in any of them.
rezeroed 8y ago
The EU flavour of democracy. Do what you're told, livestock.
swarnie_ 8y ago
United states of Europe. Just wait till the chatter about a combined EU army crops up again...
orbifold 8y ago
Basically the majority of laws are now written by the EU. Welcome to democracy 2.0, where the campaign slogans for the EU parliament elections are something along the lines of - "We love Europe... " - "If you love peace then you should love Europe..." - "Isn't Europe great... " - "We should make Europe even better ... " basically content free. and then there are the right wing nationalists, which are equally deluded.

Proven 8y ago

After the 80's terrorism in the EU basically died off, with some exceptions like North Ireland which lasted a bit longer. Then came the EU, Merkel and Co and look it it now. After crackdowns on cash and crypto, the next Big Brother pet project is biometrics. What a globalist shithole!

fyoving 8y ago

Yet further proof that their online legislations are not about privacy but attacks on US companies.

EuroShill 8y ago
Not surprising. Many European nations and their citizens are extremely jealous of the success of US companies (how many big, famous and innovative brands from the past 3 decades have come out of Europe? Let's name a few. [crickets] Exactly) Don't worry though, their excellent PR and damage control team will be out shortly to commence the circlejerk on how much the EU actually cares about privacy and that everybody is for privacy there, while US=Spying evil no privacy land forever.
pergadad 8y ago
How is that even linked to US corporations?

cptviridian 8y ago

Where do I opt out? As a EU citizen my rights are protected by GDPR yes?

anshargal 8y ago
GDPR does not apply to goverments
undreren 8y ago
Sort of. But there is no penalty for governments if they break the regulation. Only companies are fined for breaking the regulation.
- mimsee 8y ago
  Couldn’t you still get compensated for it? Assuming it went to trial and you won.
ferongr 8y ago
The state does not willingly handicap itself.
oaiey 8y ago
The GDPR has a clause like "if not required by law". States are funny here: they operate the system and define the law.

rezeroed 8y ago

This is too dystopian for me. I'm increasingly thinking of moving somewhere less technological. Let the fools rush in where angels fear to tread.

baq 8y ago

NSA didn't need the vote, so I guess we're even now

thefounder 8y ago

I wonder how is this different than the US's system where even as a tourist I have to give them my biometrics so they can store it in their big database.

rglullis 8y ago
If you are foreign to the US and want to get in you need to accept their conditions that they deem needed for your entry. Even though is a questionable practice, you are doing something (provide biometrics) in order to get something else (access to a foreign country) The point here is that you are a CITIZEN of the EU, you need to subject to conditions that give you no benefit when traveling abroad.
- pjc50 8y ago
  > "The systems covered by the new rules would include the Schengen Information System, Eurodac, the Visa Information System (VIS) and three new systems: the European Criminal Records System for Third Country Nationals (ECRIS-TCN), the Entry/Exit System (EES) and the European Travel Information and Authorisation System (ETIAS)," It looks like those are all travel-related systems rather than national identity systems? (e.g. the UK operates SIS: https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/borders-and-visas/schengen-information-system_en https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/what-we-do/policies/border... while not being either a member of Schengen or having a national identity system?)
- NotPaidToPost 8y ago
  You already need to submit biometric data in order to get a passport. That's how they get these data in the first place. In EU countries that have ID cards you also already need to submit biometric data when applying for one. This only merges existing databases, which is a reasonable thing to do when you have a single border (Schengen area) and obviously want to quickly check anyone.
- Someone1234 8y ago
  If you're a US Citizen you also need to submit in order to get re-admitted into your country of birth, or just to gain a US Passport (after 2007). So I'm not defending the EU, but the US is already doing exactly this.

johnnycab 8y ago

In the section for 'Schengen Border Checks', under the image of the Russian passport, there is a picture of a scowling Gérard Depardieu[1], which is a thinly veiled attempt at a display of mirth and disdain in equal parts, by the Directorate General of EU Commission - Migration and Home Affairs. Although, his body of work and extracurricular activities could provide a further source of fodder for ridicule. However, it reveals the general message from EU after this vote i.e. we don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead [2]. [1] https://www.securityresearch-cou.eu/sites/default/files/02.Rinkens.Secure%20safe%20societies_EU%20interoperability_4-3_v1.0.pdf https://www.securityresearch-cou.eu/sites/default/files/02.R... [2] https://www.gemalto.com/govt/coesys/eborder/entry-exit-system https://www.gemalto.com/govt/coesys/eborder/entry-exit-syste...

christudor 8y ago
"We don't care if you object and irrespective of your views, this project is going ahead." The EU seems to have done this for at least twenty-five years, the prime example being their stubborn insistence on monetary union despite the mountains of expert opinion saying that monetary union made no sense economically.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  And those experts were pretty much on point. I doubt the EU will survive long with its attitude. I wouldn't mind, since something new is preferable to this.
- NotPaidToPost 8y ago
  This misses the point. You could also say that monetary union between the US states makes no sense economically. The point is that the people decided to have a political union and to belong to the same country, the USA. Monetary union follows. The aim is to have a federal union in Europe. In a way, going straight to monetary union is to 'force' further political union because they know full well that it requires it in order to work. It's crucial to have the economics work but economics does not control culture and politics, it's the other way round.

LeonM 8y ago

I see a lot of concerns here about the obvious security and privacy issues that a database like this would create. I share those concerns, but there is one other issue that I don't see mentioned here. These sorts of government IT projects are always plagued with delays and tremendous budget overruns. It wouldn't surprise me if this takes at least 10 years and a billion euro to complete, if it isn't cancelled before that.

sho 8y ago

Basically every first world country has this now, or is well on the way to having it. Just today, for a JetBlue flight in the US: https://twitter.com/TallGlassofStyL/status/1119974641605459972 https://twitter.com/TallGlassofStyL/status/11199746416054599... The question is not whether Governments should have this information - that horse has left the barn. The question now is what they should be allowed to do with it.

oaiey 8y ago
That is exactly what the gdpr also wants to make sure: make it clear what happens to your data. I just hope they stick to the same rules :)

modzu 8y ago

borders are legitimized racism it's fine if my country has certain policies that are different than your country. BUT LET INDIVIDUALS DECIDE WHICH SIDE THEY WANT TO BE ON. NOBODY CHOSE WHERE TO BE BORN

oaiey 8y ago
I would formalize it differently. Borders are established by a society of people who live in it. Historically, often based on racial, linguisitic or cultural differences. There is no right to any outsider to declare himself member of a society (just think of your book reading club). It is the right of the society to define the rationale for its membership. Is it unfair to many people to live in worse conditions: yes. Does it change anything of the above: no. Does it change the right of the society to deny entry: no. And for the hard individual cases, there is the Human rights declaration which for example the EU has put into law.
- modzu 8y ago
  well first of all i think you are equating society and territory, but even so, a society/territory is not akin to a book club. if there is only one club, that you are born into, does that analogy still make sense? if "outsiders" have no right to declare themselves members of a society -- by what principle does the society earn this right? it seems that this principle is merely the georgraphy beneath your feet when you were born. i can think of many alternative "rationales for membership" that are much less trivial. remember modern states were born out of "patriotism". i think that is still what defends them. the insider/outsider distinction is precisely the problem.
  - oaiey 8y ago
    You are right about the territory. I had a paragraph about it but deleted it :). Territory is a tricky aspect. Over time, territory changes its value. The Inka territory/society in Middle America were once the peak of evolution. Now the territory/society is not that interesting anymore. Same story for the territories we nowadays know as Egypt, Iraq or Syria. After the Oil you can count Saudi Arabia to it. The UK was much more interesting 100 years ago. Territory is indeed a factor. But one which is volatile as an aspect how well a society develops on it. And regards being born in a society: There is nothing stronger than the bound of a family. Why we are surprised that the societies select this as a primary membership rule. And this is universal like that in every spot of the world.