8 ms·

Internet Identity System Said Readied by Obama Administration

78 points by atularora 16y ago

mindcrime 16y ago
Yeah, right. Let me know how that works out for ya. Like anybody is going to trust something like this, when the US Federal Government has it's fingers in the pie. This thing is dead in the water from day 0. This idea is about as dead as the Norwegian Blue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE
- wmf 16y ago
  Americans just don't trust the government; that's why so few people have driver's licenses. Oh wait.
  - rorrr 16y ago
    You make no sense. Driver's licenses are required, if you want to drive any car.
    - wmf 16y ago
      1. Sarcasm. 2. Do you think the Federal Internet ID won't be required somewhere?
    - evilduck 16y ago
      False. Drivers licenses are only required if you want to drive on public roads. If you have a lot of property with private roads (farms, quarries, etc), you're free to drive unlicensed. Hell, you don't even have to get a license plate for your car if you never put it on a public road (although you'll probably have to register it with the state for property tax reasons).
      - rorrr 16y ago
        Oh yes, a very common case, people driving on their private roads.
      - Natsu 16y ago
        In other words, it will be possible to avoid this ID, but so ridiculously impractical for most people that almost everyone will be expected to have and use one. Yeah, that sounds about right to me.
  - noelchurchill 16y ago
    I have a government drivers license so I can drive on government roads. I don't need a government license to get online and check my email, thank you.
    - jf271 16y ago
      If you live in the USA you drivers license is issued by the state you live in. There is no USA national drivers license. Don't confuse state's rights with Federal Government rights.
      - OstiaAntica 16y ago
        American federalism is under siege. There is, in fact, a plan for a national driver's license called REAL ID, and the states are resisting it.
      - noelchurchill 16y ago
        If you live in the USA the states have governments too.
    - lwat 16y ago
      Not yet you don't!
  - anon_for_this_1 16y ago
    Drivers licenses are mandatory, and you get heavily fined if caught driving without it. This on the other hand is supposed to be voluntary. I certainly won't be volunteering any time soon.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- trotsky 16y ago
  arpanet
  - webXL 16y ago
    DARPA contracted with universities to create it. Just because the military's interests were once aligned with advancing communication technology between academics doesn't mean we should accept that all or even some of the current government's "involvement" is simply for the betterment of mankind. These people ultimately rely on the threat and use of force to do their "job" no matter how remotely connected its authority is to the U.S. Constitution.
jchrisa 16y ago
Doesn't seem so farfetched to me. If there is gonna be de facto centralized identity providers (Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc) the govt may as well get in on the game. Only makes it more important that we get decentralized identity mechanisms (key based id) up and running sooner rather than later.
- mindcrime 16y ago
  Only makes it more important that we get decentralized identity mechanisms (key based id) up and running sooner rather than later. Yeah, no doubt. :-)
- younata 16y ago
  and this is part of why every email I send is PGP-signed. <3 this decentralized way of identifying me. All you gotta do is trust a guy who trusts me, or semi-trust several guys who (semi-)trust me.
  - BCM43 16y ago
    It's nitpicky, but you're using the word trust wrong here. I don't have to completely trust the people who signed your key, and I don't have to trust you at all. I have to trust the people that signed your key to have done the proper background checking. That's all. I could think your a vile, lying, cheater, but still know that when you send me that lying email, it is indeed you sending it.
    - jchrisa 16y ago
      In the aggregate, you don't even need that much trust in any individual, just a spam filter on the trust endorsements.
    - younata 16y ago
      Yes, you're correct, thanks for enlightening me.
trotsky 16y ago
This has been out there for a while. Here is a draft of the plans from June 2010: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/ns_tic.pdf http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/ns_tic.pdf Basically an ecosystem of privately run PKI systems, with an independent governance board and standards body.
- thwarted 16y ago
  From the first sentence in the Executive Summary: Cyberspace – the interdependent network of information technology components that underpins many of our communications – is a crucial component of the Nation’s critical infrastructure. We use cyberspace to exchange information, buy and sell products and services, and enable many online transactions across a wide range of sectors, both nationally and internationally. As a result, a secure cyberspace is critical to the health of our economy and to the security of our Nation. As I posted on twitter after seeing that: The use of the word "Cyberspace" to refer to the Internet helps us identify the idiots, old white guys and just generally clueless people.
  - electromagnetic 16y ago
    The very disturbing thing is that "cyberspace" by term literally means the space between yours and my connection to the internet, be it phone line, cable, whatever. Such broad usage of terminology and the idea of regulating it is wholly disturbing to me. This literally means everything from the last-mile connection from my ISP to my website is potentially up for interference from the government. Why do I have the feeling that this will somehow be related to a massive crackdown on piracy?
- recampbell 16y ago
  Why is the federal government's involvement necessary? We have a (mostly) workable PKI system for SSL certificates. Why does a consumer-focused PKI require government coordination? I think the lack of a widely deployed PKI for authenticating consumer's identities is an indicator that a novel approach is required, but what can the federal government do that an independent (perhaps multi-national) organization could not?
mycroftiv 16y ago
Whether or not this is a good idea is dependent on public knowledge of the algorithms and the availability of an open-source reference implementation. Simplifying and standardizing login/identification is obviously a worthwhile goal, and has been pursued by several projects already. I would much rather have an open, transparent standard than see something like facebook login become a de-facto standard. It would be terrible (in addition to potential privacy/big-brother issues), however, if the system ended up favoring large providers like Google and Amazon and Apple over potential competitors, because of barriers to entry into the system or onerous implementation costs. We will need a lot more information to make a judgment about the benefits and risks.
waterlesscloud 16y ago
Once this exists, it will just be a matter of time until it becomes mandatory. This is a guaranteed fact.
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  I wish I could give you more Karma for that. As soon as "approved id" exist, the liability for allowing comments "without approved id" will skyrocket.
- rewind 16y ago
  Based on what? Saying there is zero chance of it being optional (once it exists) seems pretty extreme.
  - waterlesscloud 16y ago
    Zero chance. It will be optional in the way that TSA searches are optional at airports. Public Safety, of course. Terrorists, child molesters, hate speech. We'll have to be protected. Really, this script writes itself.
    - jschuur 16y ago
      Relax. Breathe. Take a walk through a park and smell the roses. Don't let the fear and negative thoughts cloud your head constantly and ask yourself how you can be positive and productive, without polluting the conversation with baseless doom and gloom statements.
      - deleted 16y ago
        [deleted]
      - jschuur 16y ago
        Looks like urging for calm and sanity isn't popular with some folks here.
- gabrielroth 16y ago
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
T-R 16y ago
Atwood and others have been praising the idea of a centralized identification system for a while, and tying it to a government identification system makes sense, but tying this to the Obama administration could be a marketing disaster. I can already hear Glenn Beck associating it with Nazi Germany and advocating against its use. Similarly, its association with Verizon, AT&T, Paypal, Symantec, and Google is likely to bring its own breed of distrust. This strikes me as a project that doesn't deserve the politicization it's going to get. This is why we can't have nice things.
- nickpinkston 16y ago
  I don't think this is just for the Tin-Foil Hat crowd. Beck is on the extreme "gov't isn't natural, do away with it all!", but the other end of the spectrum is just as nutty in thinking that we can really control the US's corporatist system via the same gov't our big business use to gain their own influence. Am I crazy for not trusting the US to keep Corps. out of our internet?
  - T-R 16y ago
    It's not crazy at all, but it seems we've reached a point in the conversation where we can't produce anything meaningful without it getting drowned out by screams of "Fascism" and "Plutocracy". I think that both Government and Business stand to benefit from it enough that it's possible that there weren't underhanded motivations involved, or at least that they won't come to fruition.
    - thwarted 16y ago
      Underhanded? I agree, most likely not. Created by busybodies though? Highly likely. EDIT: And I say this because I was reading something about this (can't find the link now) where it said something like the rate of on-line retail is growing and is now a 30 billion dollar business (I might be misremembering the numbers). And we must do something about this to protect it, protect it from fraud and a bunch of other "problems" that were presented like . If things like fraud were real threats to the rate of growth and our dependence on on-line transactions, would we be seeing the rates of growth we're seeing? Wouldn't vendors be scaling back their sales (being more picky about who they sell to, or going out of business due to fraud) and consumers not choosing to buy online because things like identity theft were more prevalent. From the OP: Under the new program, consumers would sign in just once and be able to move among other websites, eliminating the inconvenience that causes consumers to drop many transactions. Are the number of transactions being dropped really a threat, especially considering the growth? I'm all for making things actually more secure, but doing so under the guise that the current status-quo, which is on a growth curve, is under attack is disingenuous. These are contrived reasons. Contrived by someone who wants to push this because they perceive a problem (legitimately or just because they like their solution) that is actually smaller than they make it out to be. Busybodies.
nickpinkston 16y ago
Wait... this doesn't add up for me: "[This will] limit fraud and streamline online transactions, leading to a surge in Web commerce" - Is this really that big of a factor in constraining online retail, or is there a greater chance of it imposing stupid rules. Who's behind this? "Verizon Communications Inc., Google Inc., PayPal Inc., Symantec Corp. and AT&T" - Oh yea, this sounds perfectly benevolent... But who's overseeing this? "[McConnell,] a senior counselor..." "Dept. Homeland Security..." "big reduction in the size of Internet help desks" - Since when is it the DHS's job to worry about internet help desks? Who else wants this? "Clippinger..." "Board member... "advises...Equifax...PWC..." Nothing to see here... I may be tin-foil hat about this, but it seems like where the companies (incl. GOOG) are trying to take net neutrality - into a controllable space with gov't teeth... http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/jclippinger http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/jclippinger
- waterlesscloud 16y ago
  You'll just be able to use your government issued id to make your book purchases on Amazon. Sounds good!
  - joe_the_user 16y ago
    You'll be able to use your government issued id and your credit card to buy stuff on Amazon that now you have to buy with ... your credit card.
- javert 16y ago
  but it seems like where the companies (incl. GOOG) are trying to take net neutrality - into a controllable space with gov't teeth... This is why I'm opposed to net neutrality. Net neutrality has always been about "a controllable space with gov't teeth." Net "neutrality" is a contradiction in terms because it requires the government and corporate cronies to make it work, and the government and corporate cronies are not neutral. It's unbelievable how the liberal crowd buys it, hook, line, and sinker. I hate to use a corny Star Wars quote but it's appropriate, something like this: "Liberty always dies to the sound of applause."
sdghjrjyt 16y ago
Happy New Year◎,◎appy shopping ●---------------------------------------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●---------------------------------------● Happy New Year◎,◎appy shopping
shooll 16y ago
( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) (( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) We need your support and trust!!! Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps To our website Walk around A look at Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth You'll find our price is more suitable for you. Welcome to our website ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) Thanks to the support! ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com /
Bystander 16y ago
“There’s going to be a huge bump and a huge increase in the amount and kind of data retailers are going to have.” And government control too? Count me out. There are already plenty of people buying things on the web - I don't see a real problem here that the govt needs to fix.
jeisc 16y ago
Why would we trust the government to secure our identities online? Does the government have any kind of interest to manipulate this system from the inside to respond to its needs? The federal intelligence community for one would be very interested by creating fake identities for its operatives thus creating a potential security hole for others to exploit. On the US money is written, 'In God we trust' but NOT 'In the Government we trust'.
sunny_s 16y ago
“What is holding back the growth of e-commerce is not technology, it’s policy. This gives us the rules, the policies that we need to really move forward.” Epic Lol!
shivannaidoo 16y ago
Since the web is a global community I'm not convinced that a US public / private partnership can be that effective. For better or worse (probably the latter), I think FB with it's substantial global presence is the horse to beat on this one... and if FB gets invited to the US gov's little slumber party, I'm pretty sure competing identity systems - potentially led by other governments - will spring up faster than you can order a Chinese takeout...

78 points by atularora 16y ago

Yeah, right. Let me know how that works out for ya. Like anybody is going to trust something like this, when the US Federal Government has it's fingers in the pie. This thing is dead in the water from day 0. This idea is about as dead as the Norwegian Blue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npjOSLCR2hE

wmf 16y ago
Americans just don't trust the government; that's why so few people have driver's licenses. Oh wait.
- rorrr 16y ago
  You make no sense. Driver's licenses are required, if you want to drive any car.
  - wmf 16y ago
    1. Sarcasm. 2. Do you think the Federal Internet ID won't be required somewhere?
  - evilduck 16y ago
    False. Drivers licenses are only required if you want to drive on public roads. If you have a lot of property with private roads (farms, quarries, etc), you're free to drive unlicensed. Hell, you don't even have to get a license plate for your car if you never put it on a public road (although you'll probably have to register it with the state for property tax reasons).
    - rorrr 16y ago
      Oh yes, a very common case, people driving on their private roads.
    - Natsu 16y ago
      In other words, it will be possible to avoid this ID, but so ridiculously impractical for most people that almost everyone will be expected to have and use one. Yeah, that sounds about right to me.
- noelchurchill 16y ago
  I have a government drivers license so I can drive on government roads. I don't need a government license to get online and check my email, thank you.
  - jf271 16y ago
    If you live in the USA you drivers license is issued by the state you live in. There is no USA national drivers license. Don't confuse state's rights with Federal Government rights.
    - OstiaAntica 16y ago
      American federalism is under siege. There is, in fact, a plan for a national driver's license called REAL ID, and the states are resisting it.
    - noelchurchill 16y ago
      If you live in the USA the states have governments too.
  - lwat 16y ago
    Not yet you don't!
- anon_for_this_1 16y ago
  Drivers licenses are mandatory, and you get heavily fined if caught driving without it. This on the other hand is supposed to be voluntary. I certainly won't be volunteering any time soon.
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
trotsky 16y ago
arpanet
- webXL 16y ago
  DARPA contracted with universities to create it. Just because the military's interests were once aligned with advancing communication technology between academics doesn't mean we should accept that all or even some of the current government's "involvement" is simply for the betterment of mankind. These people ultimately rely on the threat and use of force to do their "job" no matter how remotely connected its authority is to the U.S. Constitution.

jchrisa 16y ago

Doesn't seem so farfetched to me. If there is gonna be de facto centralized identity providers (Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc) the govt may as well get in on the game. Only makes it more important that we get decentralized identity mechanisms (key based id) up and running sooner rather than later.

mindcrime 16y ago
Only makes it more important that we get decentralized identity mechanisms (key based id) up and running sooner rather than later. Yeah, no doubt. :-)
younata 16y ago
and this is part of why every email I send is PGP-signed. <3 this decentralized way of identifying me. All you gotta do is trust a guy who trusts me, or semi-trust several guys who (semi-)trust me.
- BCM43 16y ago
  It's nitpicky, but you're using the word trust wrong here. I don't have to completely trust the people who signed your key, and I don't have to trust you at all. I have to trust the people that signed your key to have done the proper background checking. That's all. I could think your a vile, lying, cheater, but still know that when you send me that lying email, it is indeed you sending it.
  - jchrisa 16y ago
    In the aggregate, you don't even need that much trust in any individual, just a spam filter on the trust endorsements.
  - younata 16y ago
    Yes, you're correct, thanks for enlightening me.

trotsky 16y ago

This has been out there for a while. Here is a draft of the plans from June 2010: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/ns_tic.pdf http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/ns_tic.pdf Basically an ecosystem of privately run PKI systems, with an independent governance board and standards body.

thwarted 16y ago
From the first sentence in the Executive Summary: Cyberspace – the interdependent network of information technology components that underpins many of our communications – is a crucial component of the Nation’s critical infrastructure. We use cyberspace to exchange information, buy and sell products and services, and enable many online transactions across a wide range of sectors, both nationally and internationally. As a result, a secure cyberspace is critical to the health of our economy and to the security of our Nation. As I posted on twitter after seeing that: The use of the word "Cyberspace" to refer to the Internet helps us identify the idiots, old white guys and just generally clueless people.
- electromagnetic 16y ago
  The very disturbing thing is that "cyberspace" by term literally means the space between yours and my connection to the internet, be it phone line, cable, whatever. Such broad usage of terminology and the idea of regulating it is wholly disturbing to me. This literally means everything from the last-mile connection from my ISP to my website is potentially up for interference from the government. Why do I have the feeling that this will somehow be related to a massive crackdown on piracy?
recampbell 16y ago
Why is the federal government's involvement necessary? We have a (mostly) workable PKI system for SSL certificates. Why does a consumer-focused PKI require government coordination? I think the lack of a widely deployed PKI for authenticating consumer's identities is an indicator that a novel approach is required, but what can the federal government do that an independent (perhaps multi-national) organization could not?

mycroftiv 16y ago

Whether or not this is a good idea is dependent on public knowledge of the algorithms and the availability of an open-source reference implementation. Simplifying and standardizing login/identification is obviously a worthwhile goal, and has been pursued by several projects already. I would much rather have an open, transparent standard than see something like facebook login become a de-facto standard. It would be terrible (in addition to potential privacy/big-brother issues), however, if the system ended up favoring large providers like Google and Amazon and Apple over potential competitors, because of barriers to entry into the system or onerous implementation costs. We will need a lot more information to make a judgment about the benefits and risks.

waterlesscloud 16y ago

Once this exists, it will just be a matter of time until it becomes mandatory. This is a guaranteed fact.

joe_the_user 16y ago
I wish I could give you more Karma for that. As soon as "approved id" exist, the liability for allowing comments "without approved id" will skyrocket.
rewind 16y ago
Based on what? Saying there is zero chance of it being optional (once it exists) seems pretty extreme.
- waterlesscloud 16y ago
  Zero chance. It will be optional in the way that TSA searches are optional at airports. Public Safety, of course. Terrorists, child molesters, hate speech. We'll have to be protected. Really, this script writes itself.
  - jschuur 16y ago
    Relax. Breathe. Take a walk through a park and smell the roses. Don't let the fear and negative thoughts cloud your head constantly and ask yourself how you can be positive and productive, without polluting the conversation with baseless doom and gloom statements.
    - deleted 16y ago
      [deleted]
    - jschuur 16y ago
      Looks like urging for calm and sanity isn't popular with some folks here.
gabrielroth 16y ago

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

T-R 16y ago

Atwood and others have been praising the idea of a centralized identification system for a while, and tying it to a government identification system makes sense, but tying this to the Obama administration could be a marketing disaster. I can already hear Glenn Beck associating it with Nazi Germany and advocating against its use. Similarly, its association with Verizon, AT&T, Paypal, Symantec, and Google is likely to bring its own breed of distrust. This strikes me as a project that doesn't deserve the politicization it's going to get. This is why we can't have nice things.

nickpinkston 16y ago
I don't think this is just for the Tin-Foil Hat crowd. Beck is on the extreme "gov't isn't natural, do away with it all!", but the other end of the spectrum is just as nutty in thinking that we can really control the US's corporatist system via the same gov't our big business use to gain their own influence. Am I crazy for not trusting the US to keep Corps. out of our internet?
- T-R 16y ago
  It's not crazy at all, but it seems we've reached a point in the conversation where we can't produce anything meaningful without it getting drowned out by screams of "Fascism" and "Plutocracy". I think that both Government and Business stand to benefit from it enough that it's possible that there weren't underhanded motivations involved, or at least that they won't come to fruition.
  - thwarted 16y ago
    Underhanded? I agree, most likely not. Created by busybodies though? Highly likely. EDIT: And I say this because I was reading something about this (can't find the link now) where it said something like the rate of on-line retail is growing and is now a 30 billion dollar business (I might be misremembering the numbers). And we must do something about this to protect it, protect it from fraud and a bunch of other "problems" that were presented like . If things like fraud were real threats to the rate of growth and our dependence on on-line transactions, would we be seeing the rates of growth we're seeing? Wouldn't vendors be scaling back their sales (being more picky about who they sell to, or going out of business due to fraud) and consumers not choosing to buy online because things like identity theft were more prevalent. From the OP: Under the new program, consumers would sign in just once and be able to move among other websites, eliminating the inconvenience that causes consumers to drop many transactions. Are the number of transactions being dropped really a threat, especially considering the growth? I'm all for making things actually more secure, but doing so under the guise that the current status-quo, which is on a growth curve, is under attack is disingenuous. These are contrived reasons. Contrived by someone who wants to push this because they perceive a problem (legitimately or just because they like their solution) that is actually smaller than they make it out to be. Busybodies.

nickpinkston 16y ago

Wait... this doesn't add up for me: "[This will] limit fraud and streamline online transactions, leading to a surge in Web commerce" - Is this really that big of a factor in constraining online retail, or is there a greater chance of it imposing stupid rules. Who's behind this? "Verizon Communications Inc., Google Inc., PayPal Inc., Symantec Corp. and AT&T" - Oh yea, this sounds perfectly benevolent... But who's overseeing this? "[McConnell,] a senior counselor..." "Dept. Homeland Security..." "big reduction in the size of Internet help desks" - Since when is it the DHS's job to worry about internet help desks? Who else wants this? "Clippinger..." "Board member... "advises...Equifax...PWC..." Nothing to see here... I may be tin-foil hat about this, but it seems like where the companies (incl. GOOG) are trying to take net neutrality - into a controllable space with gov't teeth... http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/jclippinger http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/jclippinger

waterlesscloud 16y ago
You'll just be able to use your government issued id to make your book purchases on Amazon. Sounds good!
- joe_the_user 16y ago
  You'll be able to use your government issued id and your credit card to buy stuff on Amazon that now you have to buy with ... your credit card.
javert 16y ago
but it seems like where the companies (incl. GOOG) are trying to take net neutrality - into a controllable space with gov't teeth... This is why I'm opposed to net neutrality. Net neutrality has always been about "a controllable space with gov't teeth." Net "neutrality" is a contradiction in terms because it requires the government and corporate cronies to make it work, and the government and corporate cronies are not neutral. It's unbelievable how the liberal crowd buys it, hook, line, and sinker. I hate to use a corny Star Wars quote but it's appropriate, something like this: "Liberty always dies to the sound of applause."

sdghjrjyt 16y ago

Happy New Year◎,◎appy shopping ●---------------------------------------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●------ http://goo.gl/l5v0b http://goo.gl/l5v0b ------● ●---------------------------------------● Happy New Year◎,◎appy shopping

shooll 16y ago

( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) (( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) We need your support and trust!!! Dear friends, please temporarily stop your footsteps To our website Walk around A look at Maybe you'll find happiness in your sight shopping heaven and earth You'll find our price is more suitable for you. Welcome to our website ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) Thanks to the support! ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com / ) ( http://www.findsoso.com http://www.findsoso.com /

Bystander 16y ago

“There’s going to be a huge bump and a huge increase in the amount and kind of data retailers are going to have.” And government control too? Count me out. There are already plenty of people buying things on the web - I don't see a real problem here that the govt needs to fix.

jeisc 16y ago

Why would we trust the government to secure our identities online? Does the government have any kind of interest to manipulate this system from the inside to respond to its needs? The federal intelligence community for one would be very interested by creating fake identities for its operatives thus creating a potential security hole for others to exploit. On the US money is written, 'In God we trust' but NOT 'In the Government we trust'.

sunny_s 16y ago

“What is holding back the growth of e-commerce is not technology, it’s policy. This gives us the rules, the policies that we need to really move forward.” Epic Lol!

shivannaidoo 16y ago

Since the web is a global community I'm not convinced that a US public / private partnership can be that effective. For better or worse (probably the latter), I think FB with it's substantial global presence is the horse to beat on this one... and if FB gets invited to the US gov's little slumber party, I'm pretty sure competing identity systems - potentially led by other governments - will spring up faster than you can order a Chinese takeout...