6 ms·

Your own example proves how digital ID can be more private and secure. You go to a nightclub, you look a bit younger, person on the entrance asks proof of your

by ko27 4y ago

Your own example proves how digital ID can be more private and secure. You go to a nightclub, you look a bit younger, person on the entrance asks proof of your age: Option 1 - You give him your ID card and you expose a wealth of data, including your full name, address and SSN/OIB to that person Option 2 - He scans your phone app, gets a big green mark which proves your exact age, or even just that you are 18+ and nothing more

kettleballroll 4y ago
The question here is whether option 2 is implemented on the edge device (which in turn makes it more likely that someone can steal your identity) or goes over a government owned server (which means the government could soy on you)
lobocinza 4y ago
Option 2 has all the problems from Option 1 multiplied. Bouncer can ask for more information and you can't even lie about it. Asking for phone number and address is somewhat reasonable in our current dystopic present on the basis of KYC and "what if there's an emergency". And you can be sure that the data will be stored in local DB with poor oversight and security and it will be used for marketing and eventually leaked.
proc0 4y ago
I think "private and secure" mean two different things here. It may be private and secure from malicious actors trying to steal your ID, but it's probably not private or secure when government decides it needs to coerce you into doing something you don't want to do. Option 2 is more convenient, but at what cost? I would think the probabilities of the cost being high is proportional to the probability that government will have corruption and abuse the system, which seems high in history and even today in many countries.
bboygravity 4y ago
Option 1: one guy gets to see all of your ID data, but most likely won't keep a record of it and will forget all he saw within 10 seconds. Option 2: the same guy has no idea who you are. Instead: your ID gets scanned, the scan hits a government server for verification. A record is now kept forever of where you went, when and with whom and this information is added to create a profile of you (and your friends/partners). They can know if you were cheating on your partner, whether you where dating, if you went out "with the boys" that night, what political flavor the people you party with prefer, and so on and so forth. 100's of people and algorithms can access these records in the future in secret, including: the NSA (even if you're European, all secret service data is shared with the NSA), local secret services, the police if they want access, the tax-man, any future dictator(s) that rises up and his subordinates, same for others in other countries that are friendly to him, anybody in politics interested in you for whatever reason that may develop in the future when data access rules get weaker (or remain unpoliced), and so on and so forth. Furthermore, if for whatever reason your political preference becomes unwanted in the future, you can fully automatically be banned from public life at the press of a button with 100% efficiency (this already happens in countries such as China as we speak, Canada CAN'T WAIT to have such a system as well). I pick option 1. It blows my mind that people don't see where this is going after Snowden.
- burntwater 4y ago
  All of the data in option 2 is already free available even without the ID, because our smartphones are broadcasting our every move.
- leeroyjenkins11 4y ago
  It reminds me of a section from the gulag archipelago where the KGB would accuse you by taking a picture of you with someone who was thought to be a spy because they were seen with someone accused of being a spy by someone who was accused of being a spy. They came in with circumstantial evidence to take people away. Follow anyone for long enough and they will look guilty of something. And with the 1000s of laws, does anyone think they won't break one?
  - daniel-cussen 4y ago
    Right so there you just say, "As long as you didn't give them the picture of us together." And that stops the bullshit just enough for the next sentence: "If you want cheap labor just tell me where to sign to be exploited, a real communist wants to be exploited to understand it first hand." Look the guy in the eye, as long as it takes. Four minutes at least. He'll tell you..."you know..." and then he will either desist, because under the right circumstances he must, or he will put you in for ten years. Win-win.
- tluyben2 4y ago
  We proposed a way of doing option 2 with the green checkmark without hitting a server and with your private info encrypted on a device you own and it doesn’t leave the device unencrypted unless you approve parts of it; for instance passing your address for buying a house. But of course we are not Thales so it was not chosen.
- tokinonagare 4y ago
  > It blows my mind that people don't see where this is going after Snowden. The majority may actually approves it, instead of turning a blind eye. During the covid crisis, how much of the population was ok with the government (taking France as example here) excluding from social life, and in some case professional life, 10% of people, on the ground of them not pumping Pfizer et al. stock price? I bet on something like 70%. Those people think because there are in the "winner" side they'll always stay there, and don't realize how fast the wind turns, and the same method will apply to them soon for whatever reason.

by ko27 4y ago

kettleballroll 4y ago

The question here is whether option 2 is implemented on the edge device (which in turn makes it more likely that someone can steal your identity) or goes over a government owned server (which means the government could soy on you)

lobocinza 4y ago

Option 2 has all the problems from Option 1 multiplied. Bouncer can ask for more information and you can't even lie about it. Asking for phone number and address is somewhat reasonable in our current dystopic present on the basis of KYC and "what if there's an emergency". And you can be sure that the data will be stored in local DB with poor oversight and security and it will be used for marketing and eventually leaked.

proc0 4y ago

I think "private and secure" mean two different things here. It may be private and secure from malicious actors trying to steal your ID, but it's probably not private or secure when government decides it needs to coerce you into doing something you don't want to do. Option 2 is more convenient, but at what cost? I would think the probabilities of the cost being high is proportional to the probability that government will have corruption and abuse the system, which seems high in history and even today in many countries.

bboygravity 4y ago

Option 1: one guy gets to see all of your ID data, but most likely won't keep a record of it and will forget all he saw within 10 seconds. Option 2: the same guy has no idea who you are. Instead: your ID gets scanned, the scan hits a government server for verification. A record is now kept forever of where you went, when and with whom and this information is added to create a profile of you (and your friends/partners). They can know if you were cheating on your partner, whether you where dating, if you went out "with the boys" that night, what political flavor the people you party with prefer, and so on and so forth. 100's of people and algorithms can access these records in the future in secret, including: the NSA (even if you're European, all secret service data is shared with the NSA), local secret services, the police if they want access, the tax-man, any future dictator(s) that rises up and his subordinates, same for others in other countries that are friendly to him, anybody in politics interested in you for whatever reason that may develop in the future when data access rules get weaker (or remain unpoliced), and so on and so forth. Furthermore, if for whatever reason your political preference becomes unwanted in the future, you can fully automatically be banned from public life at the press of a button with 100% efficiency (this already happens in countries such as China as we speak, Canada CAN'T WAIT to have such a system as well). I pick option 1. It blows my mind that people don't see where this is going after Snowden.

burntwater 4y ago
All of the data in option 2 is already free available even without the ID, because our smartphones are broadcasting our every move.
leeroyjenkins11 4y ago
It reminds me of a section from the gulag archipelago where the KGB would accuse you by taking a picture of you with someone who was thought to be a spy because they were seen with someone accused of being a spy by someone who was accused of being a spy. They came in with circumstantial evidence to take people away. Follow anyone for long enough and they will look guilty of something. And with the 1000s of laws, does anyone think they won't break one?
- daniel-cussen 4y ago
  Right so there you just say, "As long as you didn't give them the picture of us together." And that stops the bullshit just enough for the next sentence: "If you want cheap labor just tell me where to sign to be exploited, a real communist wants to be exploited to understand it first hand." Look the guy in the eye, as long as it takes. Four minutes at least. He'll tell you..."you know..." and then he will either desist, because under the right circumstances he must, or he will put you in for ten years. Win-win.
tluyben2 4y ago
We proposed a way of doing option 2 with the green checkmark without hitting a server and with your private info encrypted on a device you own and it doesn’t leave the device unencrypted unless you approve parts of it; for instance passing your address for buying a house. But of course we are not Thales so it was not chosen.
tokinonagare 4y ago
> It blows my mind that people don't see where this is going after Snowden. The majority may actually approves it, instead of turning a blind eye. During the covid crisis, how much of the population was ok with the government (taking France as example here) excluding from social life, and in some case professional life, 10% of people, on the ground of them not pumping Pfizer et al. stock price? I bet on something like 70%. Those people think because there are in the "winner" side they'll always stay there, and don't realize how fast the wind turns, and the same method will apply to them soon for whatever reason.