Reflections on the Real ID act and identity privacy

Ideas, thoughts, and resources from the permanently curious.

Living

World

Politics

Reflections on the Real ID act and identity privacy (5/16/05)

Note: I've wanted to properly write up my thoughts on identity for awhile now but this Real ID act business has me concerned and so I'm setting this stuff down in a hurry. My apologies.

Sometime ago I had a discussion with a friend about tracking people, specifically folks attempting to live "off the grid". It was more of an academic exercise but one that I've some knowledge of, and so I responded:


Try not to think in terms of on or off the grid, but more in concentric circles and shades of gray.  For instance, you can order a fake ID from Canada and can use that to get some things setup.  Cops could spot it but utilities wouldn't care.  From their you've got the ID and a utility bill which adds more clout to the fake.  Add a fake newspaper birth announcement (also easy to come by) and that's the ID plus two forms of ID which is enough to get just about anything really.  So with the first fake your not all that legit to anyone, but now your legit to a lot of folks (utilities, creditors, maybe even some authorities like the Social Security folks) but not to others (DMV especially).


Identity isn't the bedrock most folks think it is.  Its made up of all the things we can do with it and so its possible to establish a sort of fractional fake identify without any issues.

The purpose of these ID cards is twofold. Firstly they're meant to make life easier for the folks who have to manage people, but secondly their there as a security check: are you who you say you are? But with the fractional identity business I'd introduced above I hope folks will see the stupidity in relying on an ID card for such matters. The fact of the matter is that regardless of how complicated the IDs are, it will always be possible to setup a fractional identity due to criminals or other countries faking the IDs, and even people offering bits of the identities as gag gifts. Those newspaper announcements of the births can be done because it is a gag gift, but paired with the other gag gifts their not much of a gag at all.

Just to push the point home, let's talk about what would be needed to really track folks using these ID cards. Back to my conversation with my friend:


So this isn't as clean as on or off the grid.  You've got to get to the sources of people's physical presence in the country and the sources of their exits.  I.e.:


Birth data (already done, in large part)

Immigration data (already done in large part)

Death data (already done in large part)

Expatriation data (not so easy)


Then use other data to fill in the "gaps"... the other parts of the bedrock:


Credit card info

DMV stuff

SSN stuff (a govt. construct on the physical existence, which is why it can't be used as the baseline)

Utilities

Service subscriptions

IM buddy lists

Loose "matches" such as all owners of credit cards used at a local pub.  Perhaps a group of twelve meets there weekly using a different CC each time.  This way their all included as related.  Hell, their all breathing the same air anyway.


So there are a lot of categories of people:


1.  Ones who shows up all over the place

2.  Ones who live a simple existence and show up rarely

3.  Ones that are "fake" and all over the place

4.  Ones that are "fake" and show up rarely


A number of these aren't nefarious as they sound.  People who use their middle name rather than first, women afraid of a past stalker, etc.. I've met both of those types.  Muslims have 5 names but only use 3 here because that's what we use.  So they can rotate combinations and wreak havoc.  Catholics get 4...


So you have to use the birth/death data as a baseline with a possibility of home births or illegal aliens, and then use fuzzy matches to fill those gaps, such as "Joe Smith@1 Main St. on 1/25/2005" rather than just a SSN.   That ought to get info on everyone, even the Ted Kazinski's of the world.  The populists were always afraid FEMA and the UN were going to take the US over and would live off the grid to escape it, but they'll still need to do some things on the grid.  It's just a matter of the fuzzy matches connecting the data points that are outliers.


So with a disease system like this we can now start to categorize those matches into probabilities of being a match. IM buddies are high, fellow restaurant customers (via CC DBs) is lower.  The system has got to track all of this and lock down those that need to be when needed.  Complicated stuff, but not at all impossible.

There is one huge problem though: doing this would completely blow away any concept of civil liberties we may have. Why is that bad? Because it points to a fundamental change in the perception of our government, from one that trusts its people to one that doesn't, and we've all seen how negatively countries perform in the governments which don't trust their people. It is a long and slippery slope that ends in a very bad area. While it may be true that you won't get in trouble if you're not doing anything wrong, the lack of freedom will quickly stifle any free thought or actions which have traditionally led to this country's greatest achievements.

So how do we ensure our security while also trusting our people? Technology, as it turns out, is a major component of answering this question because it is also a major component of what has created the need to ask this question. The system as it existed 200 years ago worked because we didn't have weapons of mass destruction and the like. But now we have all these advanced methods for killing, and in the background this sort of antiquated ID system based on public freedom. Investigators have always been able to show up at a city hall and pull records as they please, but so can the populace. This isn't anything new and it is, in fact, an important part of the American way because it ensures the people's ability to serve as a check and balance to government and those within it. But now technology has come along and made it easier to access that info, not over weeks or months but seconds. New fears have been created because of the havoc that can now be created by tying that info to our credit cards or by pretending to be a person and costing us our reputation, or worse. This is the root of people's legitimate privacy concerns that have many questioning the system.

On the flipside there are the government folks, who want to use this technology to catch those who want to hurt us. An admirable goal, of course, but executed poorly, as it has been, we risk changing the nature of the government which has served us so well over the years.

Vexing, isn't it?

Point of fact: when the Bill of Rights was created the founding fathers were still working within a dynamic of political issues, rather than technological ones. They didn't and couldn't have seen this issue and, seeing it now, we should address it. In whatever form that may take the people must have a right to timely privacy in order to create and maintain the trust that existed in the system as it was originally conceived. But how? Fortunately for us we've already got guidance on the issue as the breaches of information privacy the government wants to make are similar to the ones it makes when executing a search warrant, when breaching physical privacy. And so the gist of addressing the concerns of the people involves addressing both types of privacy as we currently address our physical privacy. How that is accomplished and what impact that will have on the numerous data "hucksters" out there I will leave to others, but it is only in solving that issue that we can begin to talk about a security system that can respect our privacy but still deal with the quicker pace of technology.

Once the people's rights have been respected then and only then will that question be able to be answered.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, data, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

There is a fundamental difference between issuing IDs or other security measures to the people and using it to track them, than there is to issuing privatized IDs with only a number (ala SSN) and using the existing system of judicially issued warrants or judicially audited "probable cause" to okay or deny the tracking and de-privatizing requests and track someone. It is the difference between a country that trusts its people and one that does not.

Those privatized IDs can have all of the tracking the government wants to do, but the second they want to investigate someone and tie that ID# to a name or address, they should need a warrant or at least probable cause. And I'm not saying that to be difficult - they should be able to get that warrant in a matter of seconds, not hours, but tying the number to a person is going to be a breach of privacy akin to a physical search.