138 ms·
Maybe I just don't get it, but why would it be good to have information encoded on a card or passport? Wouldn't it be better to have an ID number on the card t
by mdasen 17y ago
Maybe I just don't get it, but why would it be good to have information encoded on a card or passport? Wouldn't it be better to have an ID number on the card that could then be linked up to a record on the computer?
Like, let's say that an officer needs my ID. What is he going to trust more: the information stored on my card that could be tampered with or the information in their database that I don't have as easy access to? If it just looked me up by ID number, they'd get my picture, name, address on their screen, but it would be harder for me to get in and fake that - since, even if I changed the ID number, I might be able to fake that I'm a different person until they compare the picture on file. And heck, if each card had a unique ID, you could then determine if a card was a stolen card. If the data is just on the card, it remains valid after being reported stolen. Heck, cryptographically sign the ID number so people can't fake it easily.
Not that I'm defending or promoting whatever their aim is, but even if you agree with their aim, why put the data on the card? Keep it secure and only have it available when the card is scanned by a legitimate person. The card carries whether state benefits are given to a person? How soon until someone can just switch that boolean on the card?
- stevecooperorg 17y agoThe information on the card should be digitally signed; the information on the card should be verifiably untampered. I'm convinced the article itself fails to take account of how digital signing works. The benefit of keeping signed data on the card is to avoid network lookups; a reader should be able to, for example, decode a jpeg photo of you held on the card and allow a policeman with a hand-held reader to tell that you are who you say you are.