Source: Casino Breaches Expose Identity Access Management Crisis
.
Critics:
Law enforcement officials claim that identity cards make surveillance and the search for criminals easier and therefore support the universal adoption of identity cards. In countries that don’t have a national identity card, there is concern about the projected costs and potential abuse of high-tech smartcards.
In many countries – especially English-speaking countries such as Australia, Canada, Ireland, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States – there are no government-issued compulsory identity cards for all citizens.
Ireland’s Public Services Card is not considered a national identity card by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection (DEASP), but many say it is in fact becoming that, and without public debate or even a legislative foundation.
There is debate in these countries about whether such cards and their centralized databases constitute an infringement of privacy and civil liberties. Most criticism is directed towards the possibility of abuse of centralised databases storing sensitive data.
A 2006 survey of UK Open University students concluded that the planned compulsory identity card under the Identity Cards Act 2006 coupled with a central government database generated the most negative response among several options.
None of the countries listed above mandate identity documents, but they have de facto equivalents since these countries still require proof of identity in many situations. For example, all vehicle drivers must have a driving licence, and young people may need to use specially issued “proof of age cards” when purchasing alcohol.
Arguments for identity documents as such: In order to avoid mismatching people and to fight fraud, there should be a secure way to prove a person’s identity. Every human being already carries their own personal identification in the form of DNA, which is extremely hard to falsify or to discard (in terms of modification).
Even for non-state commercial and private interactions, this may shortly become the preferred identifier, rendering a state-issued identity card a lesser evil than the potentially extensive privacy risks associated with everyday use of a person’s genetic profile for identification purposes.
Arguments against identity documents as such: The development and administrative costs of an identity card system can be high. Figures from £30 to £90 or even higher were suggested for the abandoned UK ID card. In countries such as Chile the identity card is paid for by each person up to £6; in other countries, such as France or Venezuela, the ID card is free.
This, however, does not disclose the true cost of issuing ID cards as some additional portion may be borne by taxpayers in general. Arguments against national identity documents: Rather than relying on government-issued ID cards, U.S. federal policy has encouraged a variety of identification systems that already exist, such as driver’s or firearms licences or private cards.
Arguments against overuse or abuse of identity documents: Cards reliant on a centralized database can be used to track someone’s physical movements and private life, thus infringing on personal freedom and privacy. The proposed British ID card proposes a series of linked databases managed by private sector firms.
The management of disparate linked systems across a range of institutions and any number of personnel is alleged to be a security disaster in the making. If race is displayed on mandatory ID documents, this information can lead to racial profiling.
Related contents:
Man accused of identity fraud involvement wanted in Avon, police say
Online Marketing Scoops 
Leave a Reply