25 ms·

Switzerland votes against electronic ID system provided by private companies

619 points by bontoJR 6y ago

xiphias2 6y ago
Switzerland has this in its constitution: Article 13: Right to Privacy 1. All persons have the right to receive respect for their private and family life, home, and secrecy of the mails and telecommunications. 2. All persons have the right to be protected against the abuse of personal data. Also the constitution can be only changed by voting.
- elmo2you 6y ago
  Plenty of countries (if not most) have this or something similar, anchored in either their constitution or at least in regular law. This should not come as a surprise either, since it's essentially the implementation of Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Where it usually goes wrong, is with the interpretation of the words "privacy" and "communication". Also, governments have a habit of defining exceptional situations in which these laws can be violated in the name of some supposedly higher purpose (e.g. national security). Strictly speaking, the UDHR is rather clear about one thing: the declared human rights are inalienable (meaning, they can neither be taken away nor be given away freely), so all the exceptions are essentially bullshit excuses. Those should not exist in the first place, at least not according to the "inalienably" part of "inalienable human rights". Additionally, there is no law/treaty that explains why modern technologies should not be subject to Article 12. While plenty of governments/businesses would like to convince people otherwise, almost everything we do online is strictly speaking telecommunication of some sort or another. The sad truth is that pretty much all of today's online privacy issues are strictly speaking in violation of the UDHR. There is just way too much at stake for businesses and governments alike for them to ever acknowledge it. It doesn't change that they are blatantly violating a treaty they signed, ratified and should be upholding though.
  - akvadrako 6y ago
    Notably the US has no right to privacy, except a very vague implied right which as far as I know has only been invoked in the context of abortion.
    - bobthepanda 6y ago
      It certainly doesn’t help that the Constitution has more or less ossified over the past couple decades, with amendments becoming rarer and rarer. Heck, the last one has its origins as an academic exercise.
    - buzzert 6y ago
      4th amendment to the constitution? > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
      - akvadrako 6y ago
        Actually Roe vs Wade implied the right to privacy from the 14th amendment: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The alternative "right to privacy" has been found by other cases in the generic 9th amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
        TheCoelacanth 6y ago
        The 14th amendment is usually the basis of any case where a constitutional right binds a state government. Prior to its adoption, they were usually considered to only bind the federal government.
- dheera 6y ago
  > All persons have the right to receive respect for their private and family life, home, and secrecy of the mails and telecommunications. I really wish the US had this. Here, even simple acts like registering to vote or getting a driver license, bank account, credit card means your personal residence gets leaked to spammers, scammers, data brokers, and eventually, stalkers. There really should be laws saying that personal addresses cannot be given to third parties without explicit, optional, opt-in consent.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    The information in voter registration isn't "leaked." It's public as a matter of record. (The details probably vary by state.) So are real estate purchases. (Although the latter can be gotten around in various ways.) There are tradeoffs between transparency and privacy.
    - dheera 6y ago
      That's a problem. If I knew it was going to be given out, I would probably have not registered to vote, and I wasn't told about that by the people who helped me register. I don't think I agreed to any ToS that said that my address would be available to the public. As much as I think voter turnout is important, making personal addresses accessible to the public crosses the line for me.
  - KirillPanov 6y ago
    I'm thinking of buying a condemned, uninhabitable house in a tax foreclosure auction simply so I can list it as my residential address. Most places that demand a utility bill will accept a property tax bill, so it doesn't even have to have working water/power (the cheapest doomshacks have both shut off). You'd be surprised how cheap some of these places are. But it does have to show up as "residential" in the USPS databases.
    - dheera 6y ago
      My best solution right now is a UPS box, which gives you a proper street address. Most places that ask for utility bills will accept a phone bill or insurance bill or some such which you can have arranged to be sent to that address. I'd be interested to know if there are similar services that are cheaper and ideally less well-known than UPS but equally reliable. Delivery to my real address with the ability to trust them with my real address would also be cool to have. BTW -- if you have cash to burn, I'd think that renting a cheap studio somewhere that you don't actually live in (and as a bonus, can use as a storage unit, or sublease to someone if the lease allows) would be cheaper and more peace-of-mind than dealing with property taxes, crime, pests, and other issues around an uninhabitable house in your name.
- 101008 6y ago
  So taking a screenshot of a Instagram convesation and sharing on Twitter or Facebook or whenever is ilegal and against the constitution?
  - jeffrallen 6y ago
    Yes, and in fact avoiding abuses like this are part of the digital education offered in school. People are also pretty careful about asking for permission before publishing a person's photo. Swiss discretion is not only a marketing tactic, it is also a good habit many people keep.
    - dghughes 6y ago
      >...avoiding abuses like this are part of the digital education offered in school. I would hope that schools teach "don't publish anything you don't want shared" that would be smarter. If I post an add in a newspaper, many copies are sold, and then someone copies my add that should be expected. The Internet is one big newspaper it's a public forum and privacy shouldn't be expected or assumed.
    - 101008 6y ago
      So, for example, let's say I am a married guy hitting another woman. If this woman screenshots these chats and want to publish them on Instagram or even share them with my wife, that would be ilegal and they could be in trouble?
      - berkes 6y ago
        As far as I'm aware, none of the platforms you mention allow this, even. Regardless of laws, their T&C clearly forbid sharing private data of others.
- nemoniac 6y ago
  The European Union has the GDPR which offers protection of privacy and personal data. Mail and telecoms are covered by other legislation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regula...
eznzt 6y ago
https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss--burka-ban--vote-too-close-to-call/46420534 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss--burka-ban--vote-too-clos... >A decade after another national vote that banned the building of minarets, Switzerland will introduce a clause in its constitution to outlaw face coverings, including the Islamic burka and niqab, in public spaces. That's very cool, the EU has a lot to learn regarding direct democracy--I wonder if the refugee crisis would have happened at all if people were asked if they wanted to accept the refugees or not.
- tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
  > I wonder if the refugee crisis would have happened at all Pretty sure the main issue, the fact that people needed to leave their homes and countries, would still have happened.
  - wirrbel 6y ago
    It amazes me how people buy into the right-wing narrative about politicians having invited refugees to Europe, when in fact, the EU is trying hard to keep them from entering in the first place. What might have prevented the refugee crisis might have been if the middle-east region had not been destabilised in the previous decades. And part of that destabilisation is due to the US Republican party pushing for an invasion in Iraq.
    - swayvil 6y ago
      People believe whatever is shouted loudest and longest. That's physics. It's inevitable.
    - eznzt 6y ago
      > It amazes me how people buy into the right-wing narrative about politicians having invited refugees to Europe, when in fact, the EU is trying hard to keep them from entering in the first place. Have they tried, I don't know, mounted machine guns? Might sound like a joke, but what other options do you have when hordes of young, able-bodied males are invading your country?
thitcanh 6y ago
This sounds like the Italian digital ID: required by the government, managed by multiple companies. It’s called SPID. It’s usually free, but there’s also certified email (PEC) that costs from 5€ to 30€ per year. Also required by the government in some cases and also offered by a small number of companies. Does Estonia offer their digital IDs directly?
- stefano 6y ago
  As an alternative to SPID you can also use your national electronic ID card, which is issued by the state without the involvement of private companies.
  - thitcanh 6y ago
    If a service uses SPID, you need SPID. The SPID login screen doesn’t offer “National ID card” as an option. Some services may offer alternative logins, but my guess is that they’ll be phased out like INPS is phasing out PIN-based logins.
- asadhaider 6y ago
  Estonia does, their identity card stuff is pretty amazing and I remember reading about it a few years ago thinking it was truly ahead of it's time [0]. Looks like anyone can become an e-resident and apply [1], I'm unsure if this extends to the e-identify cards also or if they're for Estonian nationals only. I remember previously that anyone could apply for one however you had to go to an Embassy to submit information and biometrics. [0] https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-identity/smart-id https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-identity/smart-id [1] https://e-resident.gov.ee/become-an-e-resident/ https://e-resident.gov.ee/become-an-e-resident/
- Etheryte 6y ago
  Digital ID in Estonia is government-managed and comes for free for everyone with your physical ID. When you get your physical ID you also get the corresponding passwords to use the same ID online with a card reader etc. You can use all online services etc with the above without any extra fees. In addition to that, all telecom companies offer a cheap (usually free if you're on a recurring plan) tie in authentication with your phone where you can use your mobile to authenticate instead of a card reader.
bondarchuk 6y ago
Almost every politician wants more power over citizens. That is why a binding popular referendum is necessary in cases like these. Congrats to the Swiss people, I am a little bit jealous.
- max_ 6y ago
  I really admire the swiss political system & culture. It's has all the modern postulates of liberty & governance that most countries are striving for without the "scam orchestration"
  - tompagenet2 6y ago
    The banning of minarets is a data point against this liberty.
    - fastball 6y ago
      They're also about to ban niqab / burka.
      - pell 6y ago
        They voted for the ban today. France showed that it had little positive effect for women. The University of Lucerne ran a study and came to the conclusion that there are around 20-30 women in all of Switzerland who wear a niqap or a burqa.
        fastball 6y ago
        So it's ok to outlaw clothing if only 30 people wear it, or...?
    - m_mueller 6y ago
      I’m not for that ban, but I think that bit of direct democratic building code gets overly dramatized. Things like this serve to moderate the political landscape. If people feel like they stay in control throughout rising immigration from cultures they deem problematic, there is less of a tendency towards extremism. And so far I haven’t seen any extreme counter reaction in Muslim communities either. The soup is cooked hotter than it’s eaten.
malthaus 6y ago
Really proud of this result; the failsafe once again has done its job against heavy lobbying. There was so much misinformation around mostly due to lack of technical understanding (e.g. "it's a digital passport!") and the (yellow) press heavily pushed for a yes.
- dashdot 6y ago
  It was painfully obvious that heavy lobbying was involved... I was amazed how that problem somehow was never addressed by the opponents.
- a_imho 6y ago
  In my very own experience in a very different country I found if a mouthpiece tries to tell you what to do or think, as a first approximation it is better to do the exact opposite. People usually don't need to be told to look out for their own interests and thus no one pays for it.
esja 6y ago
Quite a few people who voted against this did so purely because they didn’t want private companies controlling the system. If the proposal had been for the government to issue and control the identities, it may well have passed.
- krastanov 6y ago
  It does not seem like such a terrible idea if it is government run to me. But it depends on having trust in the checks and balances implemented in your system of governance.
  - MeinBlutIstBlau 6y ago
    It's fine if a majority of the people can overrule a political policy by a referendum. It's not fine if the government was like the US or China.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- Ericson2314 6y ago
  Yes, and that's a good thing. Balkanizing ID info between a gazillion government databases as we do in the US just creates inefficiency, and raises the thirst for more intensive surveillance to counter the inefficiency with which the data is used. (Consider the talk after 9/11 on the FBI and CIA not sharing info, and then we get the Patriot Act.)
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - XorNot 6y ago
    That article about effective government policy being a database access policy a month or so ago was particularly illuminating (and made a lot of sense to me). That any given policies effectiveness really depends on whether you can actually construct - functionally - an appropriate database view to implement it's stages.
ddeyar 6y ago
I'm super happy about this result. I hope the government will learn from this case.
aseerdbnarng 6y ago
“It is key for Switzerland to catch up with other countries when it comes digitalisation“ Why?
- ThePadawan 6y ago
  Because person hours are expensive (because food is expensive because person hours are expensive because socialized health care is expensive). Every process that currently involves reams of paperwork (like the ~20 page tax declaration that is due this month - yikes) that can be done digitally instead saves the taxpayer or customer money. And the Swiss do like their money.
  - bobthepanda 6y ago
    Also, person-based systems break down when asked to scale suddenly, because it takes a while to hire and train more people. We already saw this with how quickly even contact tracing systems break down when infections go above a certain point. Depending on economic conditions, there also may not be people to hire; pre-COVID, there were public transport funds in Seattle being unused, because there was not enough drivers to spend the funds on. Another example, comparing how digital COVID payments in South Korea were a lot simpler and faster than in paperwork-heavy Japan: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-20/in-virus-relief-tech-savvy-korea-beats-paperwork-heavy-japan https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-20/in-virus-...
  - lwkl 6y ago
    Taxes? You fill in the form in on your computer and can file it digitally. And if you print it it‘s encoded in a format similar to QR codes. Tax offices are fully digital since at least 10 years. If you file with paper it‘s scanned and destroyed. Your local tax office receives all the documents digitally. Of course this could vary by canton.
    - ThePadawan 6y ago
      > Of course this could vary by canton. It does. Zurich still sends me a thick envelope with the 20 pages and tells me to throw away 90% of it if I do my taxes digitally.
williesleg 6y ago
Too late they already do it
ILikeBikes 6y ago
If even SWITZERLAND votes for socialism : congrats, capitalism, you've played yourself
- sparkling 6y ago
  uhm, what?
- Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
  Not sure if it is helpful to reduce every issue to a one-dimensional scale of capitalism/socialism. Particularly this specific issue is about privacy culture, corruptability of big tech, government and use of technologies, surveillance, etc... There are so many more societal and just plain epistemological axis than just socialism/capitalism.
  - ILikeBikes 6y ago
    That can also be read on the scale of "privatize anything because the state should just make 'laws'"/"have a public sector to offer basic services to citizens", that is a debate in Europe
  - ILikeBikes 6y ago
    And the results are pretty similar to the 2018 vote on cancelling their public broadcaster, which also highlighted questions of corruptibility of big companies, but was not around privacy, technology, or surveillance. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/vote-march-4--2018_attack-on-public-broadcast-licence-fee-set-to-fail/43935166 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/vote-march-4--2018_att...
- paddim8 6y ago
  In what way is this a vote for socialism?
  - ILikeBikes 6y ago
    They don't trust private companies, and they'd rather have their government to manage their IDs. As explained in the article.
dunefox 6y ago
Meanwhile in Germany: "Hey, wouldn't it be so swell if people needed to provide their ID when signing up for email accounts and instant messengers?"
- ketzu 6y ago
  It's currently only a request by the ministry of interior, not actually in the discussed law, isn't it? It's not like switzerland politics didn't propose the thing that's been voted out, either.
  - dunefox 6y ago
    Yes, it's just a request but it's quite a worrying trend that it's okay to even have a politician propose this - especially with the Stasi not long ago...
jariel 6y ago
This is bad populism. It's understandable people fear Google/FB etc., but an entity contracted by the state to do digital ID services is not going to be selling your phone number if doing so would put them out of business and land them in jail. Sadly, the notion of basic digital ID would be very useful for so many things and maybe even help with privacy if content providers switched to this kind id vs. social logins. Ironically, these 'government IDs' may be a vanguard in the fight for privacy because they establish a privacy-based alternative that doesn't currently exist. (Edit) There are already private institutions that manage ID data (Finance, Health) no our behalf and generally we are not concerned. (Although VISA is owned by banks and that's a concern). In Canada, they have temporarily allocated ID literally to the banking system - you can login to the gov. tax portal using your banking login. So, de-facto, the banks provide ID services to gov. already. It's irrational populism. ID services are sensitive obviously, but governments already deal in such types of sensitive information and there's no reason 3rd parties can't manage those services with the right kind of oversight.
- fyleo 6y ago
  The entity in question does not have the best reputation.
  - jariel 6y ago
    "The risk of data abuse by commercial providers would undermine the effort to make digitalisation more democratic, they say." It's as though citizens have no understanding of how contracts, oversight and regulations work. If the government requires certain parameters to be kept, they will be. The notion that these ID providers are going to 'abuse the data' is conspiratorially absurd to the extent that basic information control is written into the process. If the financial incentives for 'abuse' don't exist, then really it's a matter of operational capability and pragmatism, in which case, private sector is an ok choice, just as it is for so many other things. The government could feasibly do it, but there's no reason it can't be outsourced. It's a bit short-sighted.
layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
They are also incredibly xenophobic (i.e. Japanese levels).
- 101008 6y ago
  Care to expand this? I went to Switzerland once (I was young, 20ish) and I spent only one day at Geneva. It didn't look xenophobic, but very strict. I am interested in knowing more about this, thanks!
  - DetroitThrow 6y ago
    Most people who travel to japan as tourists don't see the underlying xenophobia either, and that's very well documented. As far as xenophobia towards non-swiss - I think the popular referendum to add a constitutional ban on minarets in their country is a good example of how that reared its head in somewhat recent history. However, the corporate culture that is much more liberal in Geneva is very different than the vast majority of the country as well. I felt more welcome there than in a few places I visited in nearby Germany.
  - layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
    Sure, there are tons of foreigners in Geneva, since e.g. CERN is there. But native Swiss people will never consider you their equal. You can live and work in Switzerland for your whole life, but they will never consider you Swiss. Of course, they are also very polite about it. I’m not talking about US-redneck-tier xenophobia.
    - wsc981 6y ago
      > But native Swiss people will never consider you their equal. You can live and work in Switzerland for your whole life, but they will never consider you Swiss. But it's the same in many countries. I don't necessarily see a problem with that. Do you view this issue as problematic and if so, why? I live in Thailand and Thai people will never consider me a Thai, even if I would speak fluent Thai and would conform to all societal norms. I've moved to Thailand and decided that regardless of this, it's a decent place for me to stay, better than The Netherlands where I came from.
wombatmobile 6y ago
Switzerland has an awesome electoral system [1]. Instead of being ruled by a president or a prime minister who can be polarising, divisive, or selective, Switzerland has an Executive Council. The 7 member Executive Council is composed of the top 7 candidates from each election. The chairperson of the executive council rotates each year, so that the top 4 vote winners each get a turn at being chairperson. This means that different social and political priorities get implemented in turn. It also means the way the government works is more cooperative, because each council member, including the chairperson, knows there will be a new chairperson next year. So, if a pro-business candidate places 1st, and an environment candidate 2nd, and a social welfare candidate 3rd, and a libertarian candidate 4th, it is in all their interests to cooperate and create legislation that serves all of their interests as much as possible. Instead of disregarding the environment, the pro-business council member is encouraged to develop green business initiatives that will be supported for the full 4 year term under the different chairs. The system creates a leadership team that looks for win-win, rather than a sole victor who can abuse majority rule. [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Council_(Switzerland) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Council_(Switzerland)
- marcod 6y ago
  Well, that same system also voted on banning Muslim face coverings ("Experts estimate that at most a few dozen Muslim women wear full-face coverings in the country of 8.5 million people."), while a pandemic is going on and face coverings for protection are recommended. https://apnews.com/article/health-legislation-coronavirus-pandemic-carnivals-switzerland-131b4130766ad37fa5faa27d096c8b09 https://apnews.com/article/health-legislation-coronavirus-pa...
  - wombatmobile 6y ago
    You seem to be expressing an opinion about banning Muslim face coverings. I am not responding to your expression of opinion - just clarifying how the Swiss electoral system is structured. That vote was a referendum, which is another component of the Swiss system, separate and complimentary to the Executive Council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland
jrochkind1 6y ago
it's surprising to me there was a vote on this.
ncphil 6y ago
"... almost no government has the IT capacity and resources to single-handedly develop an eID quickly and to the appropriate standards." Bullshit. We're talking identity management here. Any government that can't handle that internally doesn't deserve to exist. What that's really about is feathering the nests of tech industry donors (and/or the non-tech middlemen or middlewomen who seem to grow like weeds around the tech sector). A handful of IdM SMEs with serious field experience could set it up in six months: assuming they had sufficient backing from their government employer to overcome static at Layer 8 of the OSI Model, you know,"politics".
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  Indeed. Someone’s making excuses to support a privatized deployment.
- ChuckNorris89 6y ago
  This. In Europe you'll find the likes of Capgemini, Accenture, Cognizant, etc. hovering like flies around government IT projects.
  - osrec 6y ago
    And they keep getting awarded contracts despite their continued poor delivery. I really don't understand how their terrible track record never seems to impact their ability to win more business. I can only assume corruption, but I have no evidence of this.
    - random5634 6y ago
      Prior delivery is not generally a major consideration in a govt RFP award. This is in part because no score is ever released related to prior delivery (ie, no central assessment record), and attempts to include it get tied up in process issues (ie, rights to respond, litigation) or claims it is subjective. It also overlaps with govt agency disfunction around scope and requirements and no govt manager wants a failed project, so everyone just sweeps them under the rug and keeps moving. It is crazy though, you are literally hiring the same HORRIBLE firms over and over. What is PARAMOUNT is that you be willing spend absolute metric tons of UNPAID time responding to RFP's, have enough money in bank to lose 4 out of 5, be willing to go through 2 year RFP processes, be willing to agree to every item on the requirements lists filled with further buzzwords and "standards". This does NOT attract high performing companies, no competent engineer would even put up with this / sit through this. So you get body shop type consulting firms, using giant java framework and other solutions, and everything is insanely siloed. The crazy pricing is often justified because the hassle in dealing with these contracts from a contract admin overhead can absolutely DWARF actual deliverables, and nothing has to be logical (and sometimes is not). My recommendations here would be either: a) just pay to bring stuff in house so you get cooperation, develop open source apps and prohibit any scope creep outside of absolute minimum needed until project is in operation. EVERY freaking agency hangs 100's of new requirements they never even used before onto these projects - solutions can be undeliverable and unusable as a result, for example 40 questions PER VACINNE SHOT here in California is the height of stupidity to make these idiots feel important. b) pay for actual use / adoption, and let there be a somewhat free market. A lot of time the users of any govt system have ZERO input. Oddly, if they let agencies find their own solutions on a smaller scale, whatever you lose in "efficiency" by not having the megaproject (hint nothing - mega projects = disaster in govt land) you would see some natural winning solutions start to bubble up. I worked with an agency with a totally fantastic contract management / invoicing system, and I kept on wondering, holy hell, they actually got it right. I started to see other agencies use it in neighboring govts - it was great - people really liked it (super easy use, allowed users to do the google, Microsoft etc login even which is unheard of) and it was fast which is also rare. But then someone convinced the head tech folks they should stomp on everything with the new and improved people. They actually had to roll back the mega project for another year (after years of dev) because it didn't even cover a fraction of what old systems easily did.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
RedComet 6y ago
This is unsurprising, especially given what happened with recent elections in third-world countries (like the United States).
ddingus 6y ago
Great, as they should. The basic civics should not be private, open and performed under the public eye.
audessuscest 6y ago
Common sense
wmkn 6y ago
If these private companies are anything like Serafe I can see why this referendum ended in a no.
throwaway3535f 6y ago
I’m a bit sad the referendum passed as the law was creating a regulated environment were anyone could start an ID provider and other providers would be forced to interoperate. Basically it mandated a distributed protocol. The alternative to my dream of having a cooperative of my choice handling my metadata seems will be to have the state know everything about me. Let’s see how it will play out. Maybe we will put some privacy by design concepts in the implementation. On the plus side all the lobbyist that were involved in this story have been recalled to order.
- specialist 6y ago
  The irony of privacy is that encrypting all data at rest (true privacy) requires ubiquitous identifiers. Meaning a central authority issuing those identifiers.
inetsee 6y ago
The caption under the photograph at the top of the article reads "The government has called for joint efforts to push ahead with digitalisation despite voters' rejection of the eID on Sunday." So much for the will of the people.
alberth 6y ago
Did the title change because from the article I see it as “ Digital identity scheme shot down by voters over data privacy concerns” ... which is much different than HN “Switzerland bites against electronic ID systems provided by private companies”
brunobronosky 6y ago
I haven't read the details of the proposal, but I'll compare it to my ideal situation. I'm in the US so my view is influenced that way. I loathe that my Social Security number and/or signature is the key to my identity. I think every individual should be able to choose how they are "identified". If you choose to be identified by the government system, fine. If you choose to be identified by Equifax, fine. If I choose to be identified by a gpg private/public key pair, I should also have that right.
deepstack 6y ago
Good for Switzerland! The only reason US (or maybe other countries) out source their gov contract to private companies is because it makes kickbacks for their friends. Public sector ought to be separated from private. And electronic ID may be counter productive for a democratic government.
hypnotortoise 6y ago
Hopefully the next time Swiss people will have a chance to vote for an electronic ID (legislative process takes time, so thinking in timeframe of 3-5y), the solution will contain some parts of a self-sovereign identity / DID [1] with the state as original issuer and trusted multiparty keyholder in case the self-sovereign is to hard for folks. It would fit quite well with their other decentralized systems. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_identifiers https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_identifiers

619 points by bontoJR 6y ago

Switzerland has this in its constitution: Article 13: Right to Privacy 1. All persons have the right to receive respect for their private and family life, home, and secrecy of the mails and telecommunications. 2. All persons have the right to be protected against the abuse of personal data. Also the constitution can be only changed by voting.

elmo2you 6y ago
Plenty of countries (if not most) have this or something similar, anchored in either their constitution or at least in regular law. This should not come as a surprise either, since it's essentially the implementation of Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Where it usually goes wrong, is with the interpretation of the words "privacy" and "communication". Also, governments have a habit of defining exceptional situations in which these laws can be violated in the name of some supposedly higher purpose (e.g. national security). Strictly speaking, the UDHR is rather clear about one thing: the declared human rights are inalienable (meaning, they can neither be taken away nor be given away freely), so all the exceptions are essentially bullshit excuses. Those should not exist in the first place, at least not according to the "inalienably" part of "inalienable human rights". Additionally, there is no law/treaty that explains why modern technologies should not be subject to Article 12. While plenty of governments/businesses would like to convince people otherwise, almost everything we do online is strictly speaking telecommunication of some sort or another. The sad truth is that pretty much all of today's online privacy issues are strictly speaking in violation of the UDHR. There is just way too much at stake for businesses and governments alike for them to ever acknowledge it. It doesn't change that they are blatantly violating a treaty they signed, ratified and should be upholding though.
- akvadrako 6y ago
  Notably the US has no right to privacy, except a very vague implied right which as far as I know has only been invoked in the context of abortion.
  - bobthepanda 6y ago
    It certainly doesn’t help that the Constitution has more or less ossified over the past couple decades, with amendments becoming rarer and rarer. Heck, the last one has its origins as an academic exercise.
  - buzzert 6y ago
    4th amendment to the constitution? > The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
    - akvadrako 6y ago
      Actually Roe vs Wade implied the right to privacy from the 14th amendment: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The alternative "right to privacy" has been found by other cases in the generic 9th amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
      - TheCoelacanth 6y ago
        The 14th amendment is usually the basis of any case where a constitutional right binds a state government. Prior to its adoption, they were usually considered to only bind the federal government.
dheera 6y ago
> All persons have the right to receive respect for their private and family life, home, and secrecy of the mails and telecommunications. I really wish the US had this. Here, even simple acts like registering to vote or getting a driver license, bank account, credit card means your personal residence gets leaked to spammers, scammers, data brokers, and eventually, stalkers. There really should be laws saying that personal addresses cannot be given to third parties without explicit, optional, opt-in consent.
- ghaff 6y ago
  The information in voter registration isn't "leaked." It's public as a matter of record. (The details probably vary by state.) So are real estate purchases. (Although the latter can be gotten around in various ways.) There are tradeoffs between transparency and privacy.
  - dheera 6y ago
    That's a problem. If I knew it was going to be given out, I would probably have not registered to vote, and I wasn't told about that by the people who helped me register. I don't think I agreed to any ToS that said that my address would be available to the public. As much as I think voter turnout is important, making personal addresses accessible to the public crosses the line for me.
- KirillPanov 6y ago
  I'm thinking of buying a condemned, uninhabitable house in a tax foreclosure auction simply so I can list it as my residential address. Most places that demand a utility bill will accept a property tax bill, so it doesn't even have to have working water/power (the cheapest doomshacks have both shut off). You'd be surprised how cheap some of these places are. But it does have to show up as "residential" in the USPS databases.
  - dheera 6y ago
    My best solution right now is a UPS box, which gives you a proper street address. Most places that ask for utility bills will accept a phone bill or insurance bill or some such which you can have arranged to be sent to that address. I'd be interested to know if there are similar services that are cheaper and ideally less well-known than UPS but equally reliable. Delivery to my real address with the ability to trust them with my real address would also be cool to have. BTW -- if you have cash to burn, I'd think that renting a cheap studio somewhere that you don't actually live in (and as a bonus, can use as a storage unit, or sublease to someone if the lease allows) would be cheaper and more peace-of-mind than dealing with property taxes, crime, pests, and other issues around an uninhabitable house in your name.
101008 6y ago
So taking a screenshot of a Instagram convesation and sharing on Twitter or Facebook or whenever is ilegal and against the constitution?
- jeffrallen 6y ago
  Yes, and in fact avoiding abuses like this are part of the digital education offered in school. People are also pretty careful about asking for permission before publishing a person's photo. Swiss discretion is not only a marketing tactic, it is also a good habit many people keep.
  - dghughes 6y ago
    >...avoiding abuses like this are part of the digital education offered in school. I would hope that schools teach "don't publish anything you don't want shared" that would be smarter. If I post an add in a newspaper, many copies are sold, and then someone copies my add that should be expected. The Internet is one big newspaper it's a public forum and privacy shouldn't be expected or assumed.
  - 101008 6y ago
    So, for example, let's say I am a married guy hitting another woman. If this woman screenshots these chats and want to publish them on Instagram or even share them with my wife, that would be ilegal and they could be in trouble?
    - berkes 6y ago
      As far as I'm aware, none of the platforms you mention allow this, even. Regardless of laws, their T&C clearly forbid sharing private data of others.
nemoniac 6y ago
The European Union has the GDPR which offers protection of privacy and personal data. Mail and telecoms are covered by other legislation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regula...

eznzt 6y ago

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss--burka-ban--vote-too-close-to-call/46420534 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss--burka-ban--vote-too-clos... >A decade after another national vote that banned the building of minarets, Switzerland will introduce a clause in its constitution to outlaw face coverings, including the Islamic burka and niqab, in public spaces. That's very cool, the EU has a lot to learn regarding direct democracy--I wonder if the refugee crisis would have happened at all if people were asked if they wanted to accept the refugees or not.

tuwtuwtuwtuw 6y ago
> I wonder if the refugee crisis would have happened at all Pretty sure the main issue, the fact that people needed to leave their homes and countries, would still have happened.
- wirrbel 6y ago
  It amazes me how people buy into the right-wing narrative about politicians having invited refugees to Europe, when in fact, the EU is trying hard to keep them from entering in the first place. What might have prevented the refugee crisis might have been if the middle-east region had not been destabilised in the previous decades. And part of that destabilisation is due to the US Republican party pushing for an invasion in Iraq.
  - swayvil 6y ago
    People believe whatever is shouted loudest and longest. That's physics. It's inevitable.
  - eznzt 6y ago
    > It amazes me how people buy into the right-wing narrative about politicians having invited refugees to Europe, when in fact, the EU is trying hard to keep them from entering in the first place. Have they tried, I don't know, mounted machine guns? Might sound like a joke, but what other options do you have when hordes of young, able-bodied males are invading your country?

thitcanh 6y ago

This sounds like the Italian digital ID: required by the government, managed by multiple companies. It’s called SPID. It’s usually free, but there’s also certified email (PEC) that costs from 5€ to 30€ per year. Also required by the government in some cases and also offered by a small number of companies. Does Estonia offer their digital IDs directly?

stefano 6y ago
As an alternative to SPID you can also use your national electronic ID card, which is issued by the state without the involvement of private companies.
- thitcanh 6y ago
  If a service uses SPID, you need SPID. The SPID login screen doesn’t offer “National ID card” as an option. Some services may offer alternative logins, but my guess is that they’ll be phased out like INPS is phasing out PIN-based logins.
asadhaider 6y ago
Estonia does, their identity card stuff is pretty amazing and I remember reading about it a few years ago thinking it was truly ahead of it's time [0]. Looks like anyone can become an e-resident and apply [1], I'm unsure if this extends to the e-identify cards also or if they're for Estonian nationals only. I remember previously that anyone could apply for one however you had to go to an Embassy to submit information and biometrics. [0] https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-identity/smart-id https://e-estonia.com/solutions/e-identity/smart-id [1] https://e-resident.gov.ee/become-an-e-resident/ https://e-resident.gov.ee/become-an-e-resident/
Etheryte 6y ago
Digital ID in Estonia is government-managed and comes for free for everyone with your physical ID. When you get your physical ID you also get the corresponding passwords to use the same ID online with a card reader etc. You can use all online services etc with the above without any extra fees. In addition to that, all telecom companies offer a cheap (usually free if you're on a recurring plan) tie in authentication with your phone where you can use your mobile to authenticate instead of a card reader.

bondarchuk 6y ago

Almost every politician wants more power over citizens. That is why a binding popular referendum is necessary in cases like these. Congrats to the Swiss people, I am a little bit jealous.

max_ 6y ago
I really admire the swiss political system & culture. It's has all the modern postulates of liberty & governance that most countries are striving for without the "scam orchestration"
- tompagenet2 6y ago
  The banning of minarets is a data point against this liberty.
  - fastball 6y ago
    They're also about to ban niqab / burka.
    - pell 6y ago
      They voted for the ban today. France showed that it had little positive effect for women. The University of Lucerne ran a study and came to the conclusion that there are around 20-30 women in all of Switzerland who wear a niqap or a burqa.
      - fastball 6y ago
        So it's ok to outlaw clothing if only 30 people wear it, or...?
  - m_mueller 6y ago
    I’m not for that ban, but I think that bit of direct democratic building code gets overly dramatized. Things like this serve to moderate the political landscape. If people feel like they stay in control throughout rising immigration from cultures they deem problematic, there is less of a tendency towards extremism. And so far I haven’t seen any extreme counter reaction in Muslim communities either. The soup is cooked hotter than it’s eaten.

malthaus 6y ago

Really proud of this result; the failsafe once again has done its job against heavy lobbying. There was so much misinformation around mostly due to lack of technical understanding (e.g. "it's a digital passport!") and the (yellow) press heavily pushed for a yes.

dashdot 6y ago
It was painfully obvious that heavy lobbying was involved... I was amazed how that problem somehow was never addressed by the opponents.
a_imho 6y ago
In my very own experience in a very different country I found if a mouthpiece tries to tell you what to do or think, as a first approximation it is better to do the exact opposite. People usually don't need to be told to look out for their own interests and thus no one pays for it.

esja 6y ago

Quite a few people who voted against this did so purely because they didn’t want private companies controlling the system. If the proposal had been for the government to issue and control the identities, it may well have passed.

krastanov 6y ago
It does not seem like such a terrible idea if it is government run to me. But it depends on having trust in the checks and balances implemented in your system of governance.
- MeinBlutIstBlau 6y ago
  It's fine if a majority of the people can overrule a political policy by a referendum. It's not fine if the government was like the US or China.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
Ericson2314 6y ago
Yes, and that's a good thing. Balkanizing ID info between a gazillion government databases as we do in the US just creates inefficiency, and raises the thirst for more intensive surveillance to counter the inefficiency with which the data is used. (Consider the talk after 9/11 on the FBI and CIA not sharing info, and then we get the Patriot Act.)
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- XorNot 6y ago
  That article about effective government policy being a database access policy a month or so ago was particularly illuminating (and made a lot of sense to me). That any given policies effectiveness really depends on whether you can actually construct - functionally - an appropriate database view to implement it's stages.

ddeyar 6y ago

I'm super happy about this result. I hope the government will learn from this case.

aseerdbnarng 6y ago

“It is key for Switzerland to catch up with other countries when it comes digitalisation“ Why?

ThePadawan 6y ago
Because person hours are expensive (because food is expensive because person hours are expensive because socialized health care is expensive). Every process that currently involves reams of paperwork (like the ~20 page tax declaration that is due this month - yikes) that can be done digitally instead saves the taxpayer or customer money. And the Swiss do like their money.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  Also, person-based systems break down when asked to scale suddenly, because it takes a while to hire and train more people. We already saw this with how quickly even contact tracing systems break down when infections go above a certain point. Depending on economic conditions, there also may not be people to hire; pre-COVID, there were public transport funds in Seattle being unused, because there was not enough drivers to spend the funds on. Another example, comparing how digital COVID payments in South Korea were a lot simpler and faster than in paperwork-heavy Japan: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-20/in-virus-relief-tech-savvy-korea-beats-paperwork-heavy-japan https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-20/in-virus-...
- lwkl 6y ago
  Taxes? You fill in the form in on your computer and can file it digitally. And if you print it it‘s encoded in a format similar to QR codes. Tax offices are fully digital since at least 10 years. If you file with paper it‘s scanned and destroyed. Your local tax office receives all the documents digitally. Of course this could vary by canton.
  - ThePadawan 6y ago
    > Of course this could vary by canton. It does. Zurich still sends me a thick envelope with the 20 pages and tells me to throw away 90% of it if I do my taxes digitally.

williesleg 6y ago

Too late they already do it

ILikeBikes 6y ago

If even SWITZERLAND votes for socialism : congrats, capitalism, you've played yourself

sparkling 6y ago
uhm, what?
Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
Not sure if it is helpful to reduce every issue to a one-dimensional scale of capitalism/socialism. Particularly this specific issue is about privacy culture, corruptability of big tech, government and use of technologies, surveillance, etc... There are so many more societal and just plain epistemological axis than just socialism/capitalism.
- ILikeBikes 6y ago
  That can also be read on the scale of "privatize anything because the state should just make 'laws'"/"have a public sector to offer basic services to citizens", that is a debate in Europe
- ILikeBikes 6y ago
  And the results are pretty similar to the 2018 vote on cancelling their public broadcaster, which also highlighted questions of corruptibility of big companies, but was not around privacy, technology, or surveillance. https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/vote-march-4--2018_attack-on-public-broadcast-licence-fee-set-to-fail/43935166 https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/politics/vote-march-4--2018_att...
paddim8 6y ago
In what way is this a vote for socialism?
- ILikeBikes 6y ago
  They don't trust private companies, and they'd rather have their government to manage their IDs. As explained in the article.

dunefox 6y ago

Meanwhile in Germany: "Hey, wouldn't it be so swell if people needed to provide their ID when signing up for email accounts and instant messengers?"

ketzu 6y ago
It's currently only a request by the ministry of interior, not actually in the discussed law, isn't it? It's not like switzerland politics didn't propose the thing that's been voted out, either.
- dunefox 6y ago
  Yes, it's just a request but it's quite a worrying trend that it's okay to even have a politician propose this - especially with the Stasi not long ago...

jariel 6y ago

This is bad populism. It's understandable people fear Google/FB etc., but an entity contracted by the state to do digital ID services is not going to be selling your phone number if doing so would put them out of business and land them in jail. Sadly, the notion of basic digital ID would be very useful for so many things and maybe even help with privacy if content providers switched to this kind id vs. social logins. Ironically, these 'government IDs' may be a vanguard in the fight for privacy because they establish a privacy-based alternative that doesn't currently exist. (Edit) There are already private institutions that manage ID data (Finance, Health) no our behalf and generally we are not concerned. (Although VISA is owned by banks and that's a concern). In Canada, they have temporarily allocated ID literally to the banking system - you can login to the gov. tax portal using your banking login. So, de-facto, the banks provide ID services to gov. already. It's irrational populism. ID services are sensitive obviously, but governments already deal in such types of sensitive information and there's no reason 3rd parties can't manage those services with the right kind of oversight.

fyleo 6y ago
The entity in question does not have the best reputation.
- jariel 6y ago
  "The risk of data abuse by commercial providers would undermine the effort to make digitalisation more democratic, they say." It's as though citizens have no understanding of how contracts, oversight and regulations work. If the government requires certain parameters to be kept, they will be. The notion that these ID providers are going to 'abuse the data' is conspiratorially absurd to the extent that basic information control is written into the process. If the financial incentives for 'abuse' don't exist, then really it's a matter of operational capability and pragmatism, in which case, private sector is an ok choice, just as it is for so many other things. The government could feasibly do it, but there's no reason it can't be outsourced. It's a bit short-sighted.

layoutIfNeeded 6y ago

They are also incredibly xenophobic (i.e. Japanese levels).

101008 6y ago
Care to expand this? I went to Switzerland once (I was young, 20ish) and I spent only one day at Geneva. It didn't look xenophobic, but very strict. I am interested in knowing more about this, thanks!
- DetroitThrow 6y ago
  Most people who travel to japan as tourists don't see the underlying xenophobia either, and that's very well documented. As far as xenophobia towards non-swiss - I think the popular referendum to add a constitutional ban on minarets in their country is a good example of how that reared its head in somewhat recent history. However, the corporate culture that is much more liberal in Geneva is very different than the vast majority of the country as well. I felt more welcome there than in a few places I visited in nearby Germany.
- layoutIfNeeded 6y ago
  Sure, there are tons of foreigners in Geneva, since e.g. CERN is there. But native Swiss people will never consider you their equal. You can live and work in Switzerland for your whole life, but they will never consider you Swiss. Of course, they are also very polite about it. I’m not talking about US-redneck-tier xenophobia.
  - wsc981 6y ago
    > But native Swiss people will never consider you their equal. You can live and work in Switzerland for your whole life, but they will never consider you Swiss. But it's the same in many countries. I don't necessarily see a problem with that. Do you view this issue as problematic and if so, why? I live in Thailand and Thai people will never consider me a Thai, even if I would speak fluent Thai and would conform to all societal norms. I've moved to Thailand and decided that regardless of this, it's a decent place for me to stay, better than The Netherlands where I came from.

wombatmobile 6y ago

Switzerland has an awesome electoral system [1]. Instead of being ruled by a president or a prime minister who can be polarising, divisive, or selective, Switzerland has an Executive Council. The 7 member Executive Council is composed of the top 7 candidates from each election. The chairperson of the executive council rotates each year, so that the top 4 vote winners each get a turn at being chairperson. This means that different social and political priorities get implemented in turn. It also means the way the government works is more cooperative, because each council member, including the chairperson, knows there will be a new chairperson next year. So, if a pro-business candidate places 1st, and an environment candidate 2nd, and a social welfare candidate 3rd, and a libertarian candidate 4th, it is in all their interests to cooperate and create legislation that serves all of their interests as much as possible. Instead of disregarding the environment, the pro-business council member is encouraged to develop green business initiatives that will be supported for the full 4 year term under the different chairs. The system creates a leadership team that looks for win-win, rather than a sole victor who can abuse majority rule. [1]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Council_(Switzerland) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Council_(Switzerland)

marcod 6y ago
Well, that same system also voted on banning Muslim face coverings ("Experts estimate that at most a few dozen Muslim women wear full-face coverings in the country of 8.5 million people."), while a pandemic is going on and face coverings for protection are recommended. https://apnews.com/article/health-legislation-coronavirus-pandemic-carnivals-switzerland-131b4130766ad37fa5faa27d096c8b09 https://apnews.com/article/health-legislation-coronavirus-pa...
- wombatmobile 6y ago
  You seem to be expressing an opinion about banning Muslim face coverings. I am not responding to your expression of opinion - just clarifying how the Swiss electoral system is structured. That vote was a referendum, which is another component of the Swiss system, separate and complimentary to the Executive Council. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_in_Switzerland

jrochkind1 6y ago

it's surprising to me there was a vote on this.

ncphil 6y ago

"... almost no government has the IT capacity and resources to single-handedly develop an eID quickly and to the appropriate standards." Bullshit. We're talking identity management here. Any government that can't handle that internally doesn't deserve to exist. What that's really about is feathering the nests of tech industry donors (and/or the non-tech middlemen or middlewomen who seem to grow like weeds around the tech sector). A handful of IdM SMEs with serious field experience could set it up in six months: assuming they had sufficient backing from their government employer to overcome static at Layer 8 of the OSI Model, you know,"politics".

toomuchtodo 6y ago
Indeed. Someone’s making excuses to support a privatized deployment.
ChuckNorris89 6y ago
This. In Europe you'll find the likes of Capgemini, Accenture, Cognizant, etc. hovering like flies around government IT projects.
- osrec 6y ago
  And they keep getting awarded contracts despite their continued poor delivery. I really don't understand how their terrible track record never seems to impact their ability to win more business. I can only assume corruption, but I have no evidence of this.
  - random5634 6y ago
    Prior delivery is not generally a major consideration in a govt RFP award. This is in part because no score is ever released related to prior delivery (ie, no central assessment record), and attempts to include it get tied up in process issues (ie, rights to respond, litigation) or claims it is subjective. It also overlaps with govt agency disfunction around scope and requirements and no govt manager wants a failed project, so everyone just sweeps them under the rug and keeps moving. It is crazy though, you are literally hiring the same HORRIBLE firms over and over. What is PARAMOUNT is that you be willing spend absolute metric tons of UNPAID time responding to RFP's, have enough money in bank to lose 4 out of 5, be willing to go through 2 year RFP processes, be willing to agree to every item on the requirements lists filled with further buzzwords and "standards". This does NOT attract high performing companies, no competent engineer would even put up with this / sit through this. So you get body shop type consulting firms, using giant java framework and other solutions, and everything is insanely siloed. The crazy pricing is often justified because the hassle in dealing with these contracts from a contract admin overhead can absolutely DWARF actual deliverables, and nothing has to be logical (and sometimes is not). My recommendations here would be either: a) just pay to bring stuff in house so you get cooperation, develop open source apps and prohibit any scope creep outside of absolute minimum needed until project is in operation. EVERY freaking agency hangs 100's of new requirements they never even used before onto these projects - solutions can be undeliverable and unusable as a result, for example 40 questions PER VACINNE SHOT here in California is the height of stupidity to make these idiots feel important. b) pay for actual use / adoption, and let there be a somewhat free market. A lot of time the users of any govt system have ZERO input. Oddly, if they let agencies find their own solutions on a smaller scale, whatever you lose in "efficiency" by not having the megaproject (hint nothing - mega projects = disaster in govt land) you would see some natural winning solutions start to bubble up. I worked with an agency with a totally fantastic contract management / invoicing system, and I kept on wondering, holy hell, they actually got it right. I started to see other agencies use it in neighboring govts - it was great - people really liked it (super easy use, allowed users to do the google, Microsoft etc login even which is unheard of) and it was fast which is also rare. But then someone convinced the head tech folks they should stomp on everything with the new and improved people. They actually had to roll back the mega project for another year (after years of dev) because it didn't even cover a fraction of what old systems easily did.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

RedComet 6y ago

This is unsurprising, especially given what happened with recent elections in third-world countries (like the United States).

ddingus 6y ago

Great, as they should. The basic civics should not be private, open and performed under the public eye.

audessuscest 6y ago

Common sense

wmkn 6y ago

If these private companies are anything like Serafe I can see why this referendum ended in a no.

throwaway3535f 6y ago

I’m a bit sad the referendum passed as the law was creating a regulated environment were anyone could start an ID provider and other providers would be forced to interoperate. Basically it mandated a distributed protocol. The alternative to my dream of having a cooperative of my choice handling my metadata seems will be to have the state know everything about me. Let’s see how it will play out. Maybe we will put some privacy by design concepts in the implementation. On the plus side all the lobbyist that were involved in this story have been recalled to order.

specialist 6y ago
The irony of privacy is that encrypting all data at rest (true privacy) requires ubiquitous identifiers. Meaning a central authority issuing those identifiers.

inetsee 6y ago

The caption under the photograph at the top of the article reads "The government has called for joint efforts to push ahead with digitalisation despite voters' rejection of the eID on Sunday." So much for the will of the people.

alberth 6y ago

Did the title change because from the article I see it as “ Digital identity scheme shot down by voters over data privacy concerns” ... which is much different than HN “Switzerland bites against electronic ID systems provided by private companies”

brunobronosky 6y ago

I haven't read the details of the proposal, but I'll compare it to my ideal situation. I'm in the US so my view is influenced that way. I loathe that my Social Security number and/or signature is the key to my identity. I think every individual should be able to choose how they are "identified". If you choose to be identified by the government system, fine. If you choose to be identified by Equifax, fine. If I choose to be identified by a gpg private/public key pair, I should also have that right.

deepstack 6y ago

Good for Switzerland! The only reason US (or maybe other countries) out source their gov contract to private companies is because it makes kickbacks for their friends. Public sector ought to be separated from private. And electronic ID may be counter productive for a democratic government.

hypnotortoise 6y ago

Hopefully the next time Swiss people will have a chance to vote for an electronic ID (legislative process takes time, so thinking in timeframe of 3-5y), the solution will contain some parts of a self-sovereign identity / DID [1] with the state as original issuer and trusted multiparty keyholder in case the self-sovereign is to hard for folks. It would fit quite well with their other decentralized systems. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_identifiers https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralized_identifiers