Department of Non-Security

[twincityhacker]

Basic summation of 100+ pages about the REAL ID Act: We're fucked if we do, and slightly less fucked if we don't, as the basic architecture of the system is messed up as birth certificates are primary method of identification for just about everything and they're fairly easy to forge.

Those warehouses of information totally freak me out - though they are already complied and sold to "legitimate users" which means that market researchers and private detectives can but you and i can't. ( Which is funny, 'cause the reason why that law was passed was because a person hired a private detective to find out where someone lived, and then the employer shot them. )

Even though you need a REAL ID to get on federal properties where you need ID, according to the Department of Homeland of Security it's not a mandate. Please excuse me for a moment while I laugh and laugh and laugh. You could call it blackmail, I suppose?

Oh, best part of all? The Secretary of Homeland Security gets to decide what you need ID for and what you don't. So while you don't need one to get into the post office now.

Don't live in California and get a driver's license, as there's mandatory fingerprinting and law enforcement can go though the database of DMV fingerprints whenever they want. Not that it matters to me, as my fingerprints are already on record since I got fingerprinted when I was little for a lost child project. Which still goes though fingerprint database checks for crime scenes, 'cause it's there.

The Actual Good News: The start date has been pushed back to December of 2009. So if you save up for a month and put in your application this December, you might actually have it by compliance date!


Reading List:
"The REAL ID Act: Fixing Identity Documents with Duct Tape," by Serge Egelman and Lorrie Faith Cranor.
Federal ID plan raises privacy concerns
Federal REAL ID requirements and “official purpose”
California Response to REAL ID Act

Comments

[hideyuki-tah.livejournal.com]

:D I don't know what any of that means.

Okay, that's selling me short, I get the idea behind it, but I don't exactly get it.

Though I really don't get what's bad about having a fingerprint database >_>

[msp-hacker.livejournal.com]

The bad thing about the fingerprint database is that you used to have to get a warrant to get someone's fingerprint's, as to do so without their permission was a pretty much direct violation of the constitutional rights over unreasonable search and seizure of themselves/papers/effects.

Now, since the data is government property they don't need a warrant to generate the information. I consider moving from "needing a warrant" to "not needing a warrant" as bad.

[ladyamarra.livejournal.com]

Hello,

We are glad to welcome you to the tardis_bigbang Challenge as a
writer and thank you for your participation.

You will be invited as a member to the community within the next days,
so please keep checking your invites and accept the invitation. (We
have only a limited amount of invites to give out at once, so please
accept as soon as possible!!) This step is necessary for you to be
able to see all the locked organisation and cheer up posts within the
community and to actively participate in the future.

Sincerely yours,
the Maintainers of TARDIS_bigbang