5/8: Robert Blake's Wife/Calif DMV

[lisa]

Heh, I love it. "If you fear the government having that information, shoot yourself, because they already have it." Now there is a statement that sure convinces me! I suppose I just as easily could say "if you want that information centralized, shoot yourself, because it isn't!"

Going back to sensible conversation for a moment, the threat of identity theft still affects VERY few people (percentagewise, not numeracally). If (and, I agree, it's a BIG if) the government were to start using this information incorrectly, be it intentionally or through carelessness, ALL the information of ALL citizens would be at risk.

As it is now, there is no ONE place where anyone can steal ALL my information and, in fact, the easiest place to get that information from *is* the government...

For example, I have several acquaintances that I have not seen in over 10 years yet I can find out in MINUTES where they live (their exact address, in fact). They are all pilots and the FAA sells a database of all licenced pilots and all their information... and, as a nice little side benefit, the pilot certificate # is, by default, the pilot's social security #.... Gee, name, address, and social security number all convienently located in one place! Everything you need to steal someone's identity. All courtsey of your federal government.

Oh, and as a little side comment, the FAA insists on having your street address. If you want to use a PO box or anything, you must write a dissertation on why you do NOT want your street address to be your "offical FAA" address. Every time I renew my license, I write a page or two (I have since saved it on my PC and no longer have to write it) explaining that I do not wish my street address published and I would therefore prefer that they us my PO box as my offical address. I do not want someone, who ONLY knows my name and the fact that I am a pilot, to be able to show up at my bedroom window some night at 3 AM. They accept, but they still require my street address to be on file.

I have no problem with the concept of a VOLUNTARY national database with two restrictions (1) it is, and REMAINS, truly voluntary in that no one may be required to belong to it to do ANYTHING -- no business or government agency can REQUIRE you to have an ID from them to do anything and (2) the information is NEVER desseminated without the individual's concent -- EVEN with a court order.

But, even with those restrictions, I am still uneasy. If I recall correctly, Social Security was supposed to NEVER be required and be very secure, but a number of states and federal agencies now require a social # unless you want to go through a LOT of red tape to get an alternative ID number generated. This compromises its security and makes it practically a requirement... *sigh*

[tw]

Originally posted by lisa
As it is now, there is no ONE place where anyone can steal ALL my information and, in fact, the easiest place to get that information from *is* the government...

For example, I have several acquaintances that I have not seen in over 10 years yet I can find out in MINUTES where they live (their exact address, in fact). They are all pilots and the FAA sells a database of all licenced pilots and all their information...

So you say it is not a problem but then you provide more proof to make my point? The government has all that information, AND more. The same information links directly over to find more in other databases. It is all there.

Currently how does one steal your ID? They go to the government for help in getting their ID confirmed. In reality that 'request for confirmation' is how they steal your ID - from the government - because there is no system to safely confirm your ID - no national ID confirmation system. No national ID system is just another reason why identity theft is so easy.

A National ID system is not a server of information on anyone to anyone. It is a confirmation system. In a national ID system, grossly less than 5% of current government information is installed in a database - that is not openly read, but requires the correct information to only confirm your identity. Why would anyone using logic fear this? Currently everyone can claim they need proof that they are you - and get all that information from the appropriate government agency. Therefore they get all the information on you they need - because there is no system established for you to prove who you are. No confirmation system means anyone can learn all about you from the government databases.

Notice that because every FAA licensed pilot is an open database, then you have assumed a national ID system is the same open database. This is the emotional fear previously cited - a fear created by broad assumptions rather than first looking at the problem. A national ID confirmation system does not provide the government any new information. They already have it all and attaches to much more in master databases. Ever been through a secret clearance? It is performed so quickly because the government already has all that information. If you fear government possessing all that information - your only logical alternative is to shoot yourself - or hide in the woods like Kazinsky. Government already has it all ... in spades.

A national ID system does not make your critical ID information open to all. Again that is already available throughout the government, phone companies, even your college, etc. A national ID system is setup not to let others learn about you. It is different from every other database. It is only about your confirming to others who you are - not telling the world about you.

But we still fear a national ID system because other systems designed to find you and not designed to help you prove yourself already exist? They already threaten your identity, in part, because they are also used to ID you. Why? Again, because they are doing the job, with minimal security, that a secure national ID system should be performing.

Identity theft is quite widespread, growing quickly, and little reported because it does not happen quickly like a Bridgeport fire, or the murder of a wife, or money paid to a nude dancer. Identity theft is a common crime, growing in size, often never detected, and typically takes years to even learn about, as well as a threat to your bank accounts, and to national security. But since no one has died, we worry instead about a mythical government conspiracy to enslave us all? Are we are as mentally challenged as a Michigan Miltia recruit?

Yes, we so fear this mythical government that we cannot act unless enough people are killed - which is why a national ID confirmation system will not happen.

[tw]

Originally posted by sycamore
So, if we DID go to a "standard" national ID system, how would it work? Would I be number 200,123,418? What happens when people die, or move across state lines? How exactly would we ID people? By gender, race, or state of origin?

Once you have one's social security number, you have the first key to open everything in a persons life. How to find it? It is often used as the library card number in the back of old college library books it is that easy to find a SS#. Simply provide an IRS agent with some money and the SS#. He can ID your entire financial picture, criminal records, and numerous other facts. What he cannot provide, he can provide enough information for you to go elsewhere for the rest.

In most places, that SS can also be enough to own another man's birth certificate. Again, since we have no national ID system, then that can be enough to obtain one of the world's most prized documents - a US passport.

Everyone has unique features. Two more typical features are iris and fingerprints. In all database systems - every one - currently in use, this information is provided to the requestor because he is trying to find or confirm you. It is provided for the benefit of everyone else but you. In a national ID system, your unique features are submitted to the database that only says all that information is correct - you are who you say you are. A national ID confirmation system does not provide third parties with any useful information.

Big difference. Emotional enemies who see the boogy man behind every federal building and courthouse fear this - because government might learn about us - ignoring that they already have this information. Your biggest fear is that other third parties obtain that information. Currently they do so under the guises of trying to confirm who you are. IOW because we have no national ID system, then other systems make it easy for the criminal to obtain your ID.

Logical people would never have this fear of government information. The problem is that information is currently available to everyone who is willing to be deceiptful - because we have no national ID confirmation system - we have so many who emotionally fear anything new in government.

[jimbobjoe]

Hello all,

I specialize in driver's license privacy issues, and I just wanted to add my two cents really quickly.

First, one could easily defend that the national id infrastructure is already setup, and some states have adopted it, for more information, see http://www.aamva.org/aamvanet/standa...ndrd000630.pdf

I wrote this article a few weeks ago, perhaps it is an interesting way of discussing things. It was in the context of responding to someone who had said there was no point to fighting for privacy issues related to ID's.

____________________
"Personally, I don't think this [centralized governmental databases of
citizens' identifying information] is a truly worthy cause to fight for. The
way you have worded everything on your website is propaganda and you make it
sound like innocent people are going to be punished unfairly if they are
identified. I think these kinds of modern identification are very dependable
and useful in many areas, especially as criminals are becoming smarter. I
believe it is a waste of time to try and get people riled up over an issue
that is not of true danger to them, and that will probably benefit innocent
citizens because guilty parties cannot fake their identities if their DNA is
on file. People have nothing to fear...unless they are hiding something."

"Anonymous"

---------
May I take a few seconds to respond to Anonymous? Should it be "quote worthy" I encourage that it be posted to your list.

Perhaps you're right, after all, there is no mathematical proof that government will automatically take information on its citizens and use it for unsavory purposes. While we do have historical evidence that it almost always happens, we shall assume that modern democratic governments are much more serious about civil rights than their predecessors.

So lets discuss the meat of your response: controlling crime. You mention that criminals are getting smarter. I think that that is a defendable concept. But why should that be the case....? Is it the raising of the intelligence curve, or is the new opportunities available to them?

Identity theft is a crime that requires a lot of intelligence and cunning. Consider the fact that it's a crime that is relatively new. Have you ever read articles about people's identities being stolen fifty years ago? How about 25 years ago? Neither have I. In fact, it seems that identity theft is a new, and mostly American, phenomenon.

Let me give you an anecdote. Several months ago a person walked into an Ohio Savings Bank right here in Columbus. In their hand they had a fraudulent death certificate, a fraudulent will claiming that they were the executor the deceased's estate. Within minutes they cashed a life insurance policy and walked out with $60,000 in cash. I believe that the person has not been caught yet.

Most financial institutions these days tend to be pretty vigilant about checking and double checking identity. I'm sure he was asked to show a photographic ID. And of course, they double checked the Social Security Number on the death certificate to make sure it corresponded with the SSN on the life insurance policy.

And that's all they did. The name on the death certificate was wrong, the birthdate of the individual was wrong, the names of the parents of the individual were wrong, in fact, the only thing that was correct was the Social Security Number.

You can't blame the bank teller...their attitude was if the SSN was correct, then it all must be good, since it's so hard for a criminal to get the SSN in the first place.

Welcome to the world of cause and effect relationships--a world seemingly little understood by modern law enforcement. Perhaps another example will help you.

In 1992 the California DMV introduced their new driver's license...at that time probably the world's most sophisticated identity card. It had holograms, it had color changing materials, it was printed on PVC plastic that reacted specially to different solvents. It was protected by a database full of Social Security Numbers, digitized pictures and fingerprints.

So the DMV went out of its way to advertise the security of its new document. Several months later, perfect copies of new California driver's licenses started to appear, much to the suprise and chagrin of the DMV. How could this happen?

Turns out that the licenses were made by DMV employees who were bribed, in some instances thousands of dollars per fraudulent document.

The cause was this...the advertising campaign. By convincing people the new license was significantly more secure than the previous one, people would be more likely to assume that the new license was genuine, therefore they probably would be less likely to do other types of identity checks which they may have done with the seemingly less secure previous license. The effect was that criminals then had more justification to put time and resources into getting the harder to counterfit document, thereby beating all its silly anti-counterfitting mechanisms.

As they say, security is only as good as its weakest link. When people think of the weakest link associated with driver's licensing, they may think of how easy it may be to reproduce the document, or the original documents submitted to get the license in the first place (birth certificates, et cetera) or perhaps the amount of information collected on the person (SSN's, photographs, fingerprints, et cetera.) The fact is, California's problem was caused by neither of these, in fact, it occurred in spite of securing all of them.

Actually, I say the weakest link security wise with driver's licenses is the sheer number of participants. If the technology used for the California license was used to issue ID badges for a building in which only 500 people worked, and there was only one or two entrances to said building, then you would have a fairly reliable security structure. But the California license is held by some 25 million people, issued by hundreds of DMV offices with thousands of employees (all of whom have access to the ID making equipment), and it is verified not just at one or two places, verification can occur at millions of places all around the state, banks, airline ticket counters, liquor stores, et cetera. I don't care if California did collect DNA and encode the magnetic stripe with the individuals sequence; it is entirely absurd to believe that you can create anything that can be secure under such unwieldly circumstances.

The second weakest link is the association of convenience with photographic ID's. I'll let you in on a secret: security and convenience are mutually exclusive and there's an inverse tradeoff between them. In the long run, it is impossible to have something which is inherently more secure *and* convenient at the same time.

Here's an extreme example. I have to admit that instead of using a key to open my apartment, it probably would be more secure to have a device that reads my fingerprint to unlock the door. And I wouldn't have to have my keys on me, all I need is my thumb. I admit that that security may also be desired for my computer, both at home and at work. And it also would be neat to use it to access my bank accounts as well.

It is hard to fool a fingerprint reader...but the assumption that it isn't possible is folly. I bet it is possible if a lot of resources were put into it. Is it worth putting those resources to get into my apartment? Probably not...I barely like coming into my apartment as it is. How about my computer? Not really. My work computer...well some interesting things are there...but it still would be a lot of effort. And I don't need to go into details about my bank account. However, if you could access all of those things with just one fake fingerprint, then it may become worth the time and money invested.

I could just add the fingerprint reader in addition to the key on my apartment, the password of my work and home computers, the ATM card for my bank accounts...but that's more inconvenient than what I am doing now and is not worth my time. In the long run, I am sacrificing convenience for security, although it appears that security is somehow strengthened by using my fingerprint...for everything. Which would be my folly.

Consider the usefullness of the driver's license as any identifying document, and all the neat things it can do...other than being able to drive a car. No one is trying to counterfit licenses just to drive a car. They'll just drive. Perhaps they are doing it to have an ID stating an older age than they are, but they aren't going to spend thousands of dollars to do it. And please do not tell me that we are collecting Social Security Numbers, fingerprints and driver's images just so that we can make it that much harder for a 17 year old to get a good fake ID.

In my long winded way, I'm saying that people do in fact have a lot to fear--misguided attempts at protecting people and their identity are more likely to backfire than anything. Add to that the potential danger of governments misusing this information, then how can you not think this "is a truly worthy cause to fight for"?

[tw]

Presently the only ID method is anything you choose to use - driver's license, birth certificate, green card etc. All those ID methods are counterfeited by the dumbest of criminals because none is intended for the purpose we need - ID verification.

Teenage college kids aren't savvy. And yet, even in the days before ink jet printers, one bar collected under 1000 phoney IDs just in one summer. Identity fraud now require less intelligence - it is that easy to obtain what is considered the most reliable ID - a picture driver's license.

The problem is just starting to get bad - and it will only worsen as more learn ID theft becomes simpler. The only way to create any security with IDs is to confirm the ID via a master database. Even if the system is compromised temporarily by criminal employees (a crime that ends quickly when such employees are easily identified by database activity) - that is still reams better than the joke we have today for ID confirmation.

Of couse the Ohio bank employee will routinely not catch phoney ID. They must be trained in so many ID methods - all inferior- that, often, it is but joke to them. In that shore bar, one employee had a photogenic memory which he used only for one type of ID - the driver's license. As a result, look at how many phony ID he located - long before identity theft was even considered a problem.

Our current ID systems are so bad that if an employee does suspect fraud, it is more often just an ID system failure - which is just another problem with current ID systems that are not designed for the purposes they are being used. We don't have an ID system that is intended for you to confirm who you are. Nada - not one.

We have no valid ID verification, and we have a society that is putting ID theft equipment now into every home. Furthermore we are building a society where ID theft can do more personal damage every year - and leave the damage undetected for years or decades. Don't worry, be happy? It can't happen to me? That is the current attitude to ID theft mostly because not enough people are dying.

[elSicomoro]

Originally posted by tw
Presently the only ID method is anything you choose to use - driver's license, birth certificate, green card etc. All those ID methods are counterfeited by the dumbest of criminals because none is intended for the purpose we need - ID verification.

Well sure. I mean, all I needed to get my drivers license in 1991 was a birth certificate and a SS card.

Of couse the Ohio bank employee will routinely not catch phoney ID. They must be trained in so many ID methods - all inferior- that, often, it is but joke to them. In that shore bar, one employee had a photogenic memory which he used only for one type of ID - the driver's license. As a result, look at how many phony ID he located - long before identity theft was even considered a problem.

I don't necessarily agree with this. Almost all banks/businesses that handle cash should have (or damned well should order) the ID guide. It is a booklet reissued every year that shows every drivers license or state/province ID issued by every state, territory, and Canadian province. It shows you new issues as well as ones that have expired. Any bank employee that is not sure of an ID should grab that book and take a gander at it. Not to mention, in most cases, you can at least verify a signature with a signature card. In the end, if it's fake, what can you do, as long as you're covering your ass.

Our current ID systems are so bad that if an employee does suspect fraud, it is more often just an ID system failure - which is just another problem with current ID systems that are not designed for the purposes they are being used. We don't have an ID system that is intended for you to confirm who you are. Nada - not one.

Actually, tw, you got me thinking with this one. In the end, the only TRUE identity--the only real way we can tell who we really are--is DNA. If not what your name is, at least it can tell us that we are the child of so-and-so and so-and-so.

We have no valid ID verification, and we have a society that is putting ID theft equipment now into every home. Furthermore we are building a society where ID theft can do more personal damage every year - and leave the damage undetected for years or decades. Don't worry, be happy? It can't happen to me? That is the current attitude to ID theft mostly because not enough people are dying.

Yet, how can we truly protect ourselves, particularly in a society where you can go to the Ultimates and get a person's address and phone number like that? And with a little more poking and prodding, you can get a social.