This is sure not an academic exercise.
We MUST design an Open Source Prototype for this and present it to the potential customer (Government of India?). The complete system should be practical and economically viable.
I think we need to figure out what this can be used for, before we get into other details.
I can think of 2 use cases for such system 1) social or business networking (orkut, linked in types).. a more casual usage
in this case, you probably want to keep its contect voluntary and open.. (ie members can put in whatever they want) If I can get your hotmail password or something else based on getting the answer to your secret question (mothers maiden name, date of birth, pets name).. it is your problem.
2) a system used by government .. ie legally binding.. ( in future, maybe other services like credit rating agencies, organizations trying to verify your identiry?).. this is more formal.. its content are deemed to be reliable by everyone.. it could be used by police across the country to track criminals..
in this case, you may keep a read-only access to the publicly avaialable info.. maybe more access to some paid subscribers (potential customers would be someone issuing a credit card, home loan, or a car loan to you and hence trying to do an identity check/credit or criminal history check on you)
unique id for a citizen? well.. we dont have any unique ID so far.. US has a social security #, UK has a national Insurance #... maybe this is the major benefit of having such a system in the first place - as it can be a single identity for people having (or not having) various diverse id's .. (passport#, DL#, voter id# (for 18+), PAN# (for the few tax payers)).. why not have some biometric ID to make it really foolproof..
u can confidently say that ram ral, s/o shyam lal, living in pin code 100 020 (and with the given biometric ID details) has id 100 and has no criminal records or bad credit history.. so it is safe to lend money to him.. whereas ram lal s/o manmohan singh has defaulted on that previous loan paid to him.. in fact his current address is tihar jail..
but, then you can only design a technical framework to hold this data, and access/amend it. implementation details such as who enters and keeps on updating data would depend on sarkari babus sitting in the villages who are normally happier to exploit and harass the citizens than in serving them.
On 14/09/06, Vivek Rai vivek.rai@gmail.com wrote: 2) a system used by government .. ie legally binding.. ( in future, maybe other services like credit rating agencies, organizations trying to verify your identiry?).. this is more formal.. its content are deemed to be reliable by everyone.. it could be used by police across the country to track criminals.. excelent idea. and with a lot of terrorist activity going on and people having feque identities with actually criminal records this will work good.
in this case, you may keep a read-only access to the publicly avaialable info.. maybe more access to some paid subscribers How do you define more access? I think such records should be read only to every one for that matter. (potential customers would be someone issuing a credit card, home loan, or a car loan to you and hence trying to do an identity check/credit or criminal history check on you) most common is issuing a sim card for a mobile phone. car lones, home lones, credit card etc, all right there is a big mass of people going for all this. but almost every one these days wants a mobile phone and this same identity check comes into question. this will indeed serve this particularly big market. unique id for a citizen? well.. we dont have any unique ID so far.. US has a social security #, UK has a national Insurance #... maybe this is the major benefit of having such a system in the first place - as it can be a single identity for people having (or not having) various diverse id's .. (passport#, DL#, voter id# (for 18+), PAN# (for the few tax payers)).. why not have some biometric ID to make it really foolproof.. yes, that will give a big boost to the system. if some thing good has to happen with our system, let it be a good start. u can confidently say that ram ral, s/o shyam lal, living in pin code 100 020 (and with the given biometric ID details) has id 100 and has no criminal records or bad credit history.. so it is safe to lend money to him.. whereas ram lal s/o manmohan singh has defaulted on that previous loan paid to him.. in fact his current address is tihar jail.. oh, in this case just pay a few thousand rs to the babu in the clearical department and see what and how you can do with this system? but, then you can only design a technical framework to hold this data, and access/amend it. implementation details such as who enters and keeps on updating data would depend on sarkari babus sitting in the villages who are normally happier to exploit and harass the citizens than in serving them. this can be seen in different perspective. while what I said above holds true, but we can look at the positive side of it. just remember the villages had one phone in the post offices and they exploited people who came to make an std call. they loved the system because people were at their feet. but one man called sam pitroda came and changed it all. today every village (well almost) has lot of phone connections. so what I want to say here is that just like bad things, if good things are pushed smartly and sharply with firm force, things can happen. signing off on that happy note. Krishnakant.
On Thursday 14 September 2006 10:19 am, krishnakant Mane wrote:
slightly ot but...
but one man called sam pitroda came and changed it all.
Actually it was the late PM Rajiv Gandhi. He brought in the technocrats. He was the one who forced powerful vested interests in the system on the backfoot and shoved India on the road to modernisation. Telecommunications ( he forced the DOT to permit use fax machines !. It was ILLEGAL !!! until 86 afair ), Internet, computerisation. If it werent for him we would still be stuck with designing "modern" bullockcarts to the exclusion of everything else. We are where we are cause this man stuck his neck out.
On 14/09/06, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
On Thursday 14 September 2006 10:19 am, krishnakant Mane wrote:
Actually it was the late PM Rajiv Gandhi. He brought in the technocrats. He was the one who forced powerful vested interests in the system on the backfoot and shoved India on the road to modernisation. Telecommunications ( he forced the DOT to permit use fax machines !. It was ILLEGAL !!! until 86 afair ), Internet, computerisation. If it werent for him we would still be stuck with designing "modern" bullockcarts to the exclusion of everything else. We are where we are cause this man stuck his neck out.
-- Rgds JTD
yes you are right. now not to start politics on the thread. but actually it was he who is the reason for the existance of India as the would be IT super power which will happen any time. hats off to him. as a human being and as a leader he was great. Krishnakant.
On Thursday 14 September 2006 12:16 am, Vivek Rai wrote:
I think we need to figure out what this can be used for, before we get into other details.
Absolutely. without compelling reasons for the customer - in this case the government - this will be an academic excercise. And the compelling reasons is not the reasons that citizens have but what the government has. These reasons may well be contradictory to the users needs. Dinesh will have to work very hard to rconcile the two.
unique id for a citizen? well.. we dont have any unique ID so far.. US has a social security #, UK has a national Insurance #... maybe this is the major benefit of having such a system in the first place - as it can be a single identity for people having (or not having) various diverse id's .. (passport#, DL#, voter id# (for 18+), PAN# (for the few tax payers)).. why not have some biometric ID to make it really foolproof..
Biometric id other than DNA is not related (some are but more on that later) to upstream (parents), lateral 9siblings) and downstream (children).
but, then you can only design a technical framework to hold this data, and access/amend it. implementation details such as who enters and keeps on updating data would depend on sarkari babus sitting in the villages who are normally happier to exploit and harass the citizens than in serving them.
With DNA a malicious enrollement will not work because of the up and down dependencies. I will be relatively easy to spot sitting on a terminal anywhere rather than require actual physical verification in some remote village.
Vivek Rai wrote:
but, then you can only design a technical framework to hold this data, and access/amend it. implementation details such as who enters and keeps on updating data would depend on sarkari babus sitting in the villages who are normally happier to exploit and harass the citizens than in serving them.
The id system should be strictly id based not history based. A person I know had once mentioned that after it was compulsory for army jawans to wear their name on their uniform, their behavior was more civilised. Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
On 15/09/06 20:14 +0530, Rony wrote: <snip>
Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb
Those who would give up essential liberty ...
and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
And there are perfectly good reasons for anonymous speech. Particularly when you want to criticise the government. I see absolutely no reason to trust a government which goes about banning blogs terming them "anti-national".
Citizen Information System sounds like it provides information TO citizens. Instead, it provides information ABOUT citizens. Now, from when do we start wearing the star of david^W^W^Wthe cresent^W^W... ? (I lose here).
May I recommend Nineteen Eighty-Four? While you are at it, Brave New World, Farenheit 451, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, The rise and fall of the Third Reich are also good to read.
Devdas Bhagat
Hi!
On 9/14/06, Devdas Bhagat devdas@dvb.homelinux.org wrote:
On 15/09/06 20:14 +0530, Rony wrote:
<snip> > Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a > person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply > goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb
Those who would give up essential liberty ...
I think there is a great misconception between identity and privacy. Establishing an identity does not necessarily lead to lose of privacy or liberty.
and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
And there are perfectly good reasons for anonymous speech. Particularly when you want to criticise the government. I see absolutely no reason to trust a government which goes about banning blogs terming them "anti-national".
The anonymous speech can not and will not be stopped. Having an identity does not mean that you can not have an anonymous or free speech.
Citizen Information System sounds like it provides information TO citizens. Instead, it provides information ABOUT citizens. Now, from when do we start wearing the star of david^W^W^Wthe cresent^W^W... ? (I lose here).
The 1st step has to be ABOUT the citizen which can lead to better governance, security and services to TO the citizens.
May I recommend Nineteen Eighty-Four? While you are at it, Brave New World, Farenheit 451, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, The rise and fall of the Third Reich are also good to read.
I would call it pure paranoia.
Since electricity gives a shock and it can be fatal one must not generate or use electricity. :-)
Same arguments are given for nuclear, genetic and other technologies .
We must remember that technology per say is never evil. It is the technology in the wrong hands which leads to disaster.
And I think you and many have great distrust in our government. But remember that this is the government elected by you and me. :-) (It does not matter whether you vote or not ;-))
Devdas Bhagat
I hope a system developed under FOSS will have sufficient checks and balances for providing freedom of speech and other constitutional rights to the citizens.
With regards,
On 14/09/06 18:31 +0000, Dinesh Shah wrote:
Hi!
On 9/14/06, Devdas Bhagat devdas@dvb.homelinux.org wrote:
On 15/09/06 20:14 +0530, Rony wrote:
<snip> > Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a > person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply > goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb
Those who would give up essential liberty ...
I think there is a great misconception between identity and privacy. Establishing an identity does not necessarily lead to lose of privacy or liberty.
Am all pervasive identity, on the other hand, does. Every time you need to identify yourself, you lose a little bit of privacy.
and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
And there are perfectly good reasons for anonymous speech. Particularly when you want to criticise the government. I see absolutely no reason to trust a government which goes about banning blogs terming them "anti-national".
The anonymous speech can not and will not be stopped. Having an identity does not mean that you can not have an anonymous or free speech.
Having an all pervasive identity backed by biometrics does imply just that. All that you need to do is correlate speech and activity and timestamps (and we are _good_ at that).
Citizen Information System sounds like it provides information TO citizens. Instead, it provides information ABOUT citizens. Now, from when do we start wearing the star of david^W^W^Wthe cresent^W^W... ? (I lose here).
The 1st step has to be ABOUT the citizen which can lead to better governance, security and services to TO the citizens.
Why? Why do you need to know 'who' I am in order to provide me with better service? All that you need to worry about is that my payments to you clear.
May I recommend Nineteen Eighty-Four? While you are at it, Brave New World, Farenheit 451, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, The rise and fall of the Third Reich are also good to read.
I would call it pure paranoia.
Just because you aren't paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. And history _does_ indicate that malicious people will gain power, regardless of whether you want them to or not. Oh, and remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Since electricity gives a shock and it can be fatal one must not generate or use electricity. :-)
Errr, no. You do have to take precautions when using electricity.
Same arguments are given for nuclear, genetic and other technologies .
And all of them do need safeguards. What safeguards do you propose against the misuse of a database like this one? Keep in mind that the threat is malicious people getting access to that information.
Modification of the data can render your identity pretty useless. Merely reading that data and correlating it across databases can cause serious havoc. Identity theft isn't a mere buzzword.
We must remember that technology per say is never evil. It is the technology in the wrong hands which leads to disaster.
And how do you stop the technology from falling into the wrong hands? Oh, another book: Database Nation, by Simon Garfinkel.
And I think you and many have great distrust in our government. But
Personally, I distrust all monopolies.
remember that this is the government elected by you and me. :-) (It does not matter whether you vote or not ;-))
Funny, I always understood the malice to be on the part of the unelected bureaucrats, and the stupidity and greed on the part of the elected politicians.
Devdas Bhagat
I hope a system developed under FOSS will have sufficient checks and balances for providing freedom of speech and other constitutional rights to the citizens.
The whole problem here is that the FOSS aspect of it is irrelevant. The threat is the centralised database which is necessary for this plan to work.
About the only way your proposal could work would be if the idea of privacy is completely destroyed. No one has any privacy, and the database is fully accessible to everyone all the time. The only private thing you would possess would be your thoughts.
Devdas Bhagat
On 9/14/06, Dinesh Shah dineshah@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
On 9/14/06, Devdas Bhagat devdas@dvb.homelinux.org wrote:
On 15/09/06 20:14 +0530, Rony wrote:
<snip> > Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a > person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply > goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb
Dinesh a humble request. Can you or someone summarize the discussion so far ? Points that have been noted , concerns that have been addressed, tasks that have been completetd ?
So that humans like me who find it diffficult to put all the pieces together can also figure out wats happening and try to value add :)
HRB
Those who would give up essential liberty ...
I think there is a great misconception between identity and privacy. Establishing an identity does not necessarily lead to lose of privacy or liberty.
and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
And there are perfectly good reasons for anonymous speech. Particularly when you want to criticise the government. I see absolutely no reason to trust a government which goes about banning blogs terming them "anti-national".
The anonymous speech can not and will not be stopped. Having an identity does not mean that you can not have an anonymous or free speech.
Citizen Information System sounds like it provides information TO citizens. Instead, it provides information ABOUT citizens. Now, from when do we start wearing the star of david^W^W^Wthe cresent^W^W... ? (I lose here).
The 1st step has to be ABOUT the citizen which can lead to better governance, security and services to TO the citizens.
May I recommend Nineteen Eighty-Four? While you are at it, Brave New World, Farenheit 451, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, The rise and fall of the Third Reich are also good to read.
I would call it pure paranoia.
Since electricity gives a shock and it can be fatal one must not generate or use electricity. :-)
Same arguments are given for nuclear, genetic and other technologies .
We must remember that technology per say is never evil. It is the technology in the wrong hands which leads to disaster.
And I think you and many have great distrust in our government. But remember that this is the government elected by you and me. :-) (It does not matter whether you vote or not ;-))
Devdas Bhagat
I hope a system developed under FOSS will have sufficient checks and balances for providing freedom of speech and other constitutional rights to the citizens.
With regards,
--Dinesh Shah :-)
Dear Harsh and All,
Here is story so far.
On 9/14/06, Harsh Busa harsh.busa@gmail.com wrote:
Dinesh a humble request. Can you or someone summarize the discussion so far ? Points that have been noted , concerns that have been addressed, tasks that have been completetd ?
1st let me correct the nomenclature of the system. The existing name has lead to some misunderstanding.
We will call this system "Citizen Identification/Information System". This name should make clear that this System is for the purpose of Identifying a citizen and providing information ABOUT a citizen of country, so as to make sure that the person so identified can prove his/her bonafied citizenship of this country.
So far we have two distinct opinion emerging from this discussion.
1. Those who are for this system has given following reasons for having the system.
A. Increased internal security of the state and citizens B. To enable the e-governance C. Remove the hassles of multiple identity D.
2. Those who are against this system has given following reasons for not thing such system.
A. Fear of Police/Big Brother state B. Identity Theft C. Lose of privacy, liberty and freedom. D.
So far following items are suggested to be collect for establishing the Identity
1. Date and Place of Birth 2. Name of the Mother/Father/Guardian 3. Birth Mark(s) 4. Finger Prints 5. Photo 6. DNA Sample 7. Retina/Iris pattern
We have also discussed existing identification methods used and their limitation
1. Passport + Proper Validation - Time Consuming - Costly - Not Scalable - Duplication/Forgery Possible - Not universal
2. Voters ID + ??? - Not universal - Inaccurate - Duplication/Forgery Possibly
3. Ration Card + Fairly common - Inaccurate - Duplication/Forgery Possible - Already much maligned
4. Driving License
5. Birth Certificate
6. PAN Card
7. Domicile Certificate
8. Caste Certificate
So far we have not reached the conclusion what data should be made available publicly. However, there is complete agreement that following details should not be made available without proper authorisation.
1. Financial Records 2. Health/Medical Records 3. Relationship Records?
I will put the above info on the Wiki made available by Kenneth (http://nrcfosshelpline.in/code/wiki/ProjectIdeas). I would request every one to add missing info in the above list.
So that humans like me who find it diffficult to put all the pieces together can also figure out wats happening and try to value add :)
I hope that I have not missed any major points discussed so far. Please feel free to bring any missing points to our notice. Henceforth, I will keep updating the Wiki as we discuss this further.
HRB
With regards,
On 15/09/06 18:17 +0000, Dinesh Shah wrote: <snip>
- Those who are for this system has given following reasons for
having the system.
A. Increased internal security of the state and citizens
Bogus. Going down the slippery slope to a police state does not increase security.
B. To enable the e-governance
egov works fine even without a single identity. You need one per department.
Devdas Bhagat
On Friday 15 September 2006 23:47, Dinesh Shah wrote:
Dear Harsh and All,
Here is story so far.
On 9/14/06, Harsh Busa harsh.busa@gmail.com wrote:
Dinesh a humble request. Can you or someone summarize the discussion so far ? Points that have been noted , concerns that have been addressed, tasks that have been completetd ?
1st let me correct the nomenclature of the system. The existing name has lead to some misunderstanding.
We will call this system "Citizen Identification/Information System". This name should make clear that this System is for the purpose of Identifying a citizen and providing information ABOUT a citizen of country, so as to make sure that the person so identified can prove his/her bonafied citizenship of this country.
So far we have two distinct opinion emerging from this discussion.
- Those who are for this system has given following reasons for
having the system.
A. Increased internal security of the state and citizens B. To enable the e-governance C. Remove the hassles of multiple identity D.
- Those who are against this system has given following reasons
for not thing such system.
A. Fear of Police/Big Brother state B. Identity Theft C. Lose of privacy, liberty and freedom. D.
D. Misuse by vested commersial interests E. Skeweing of services like insurance, admissions, medical, travel etc.
So far following items are suggested to be collect for establishing the Identity
- Date and Place of Birth
- Name of the Mother/Father/Guardian
- Birth Mark(s)
- Finger Prints
Please remove. It is trivial to spoof.
On Friday 15 September 2006 00:01, Dinesh Shah wrote:
Hi!
On 9/14/06, Devdas Bhagat devdas@dvb.homelinux.org wrote:
I think there is a great misconception between identity and privacy. Establishing an identity does not necessarily lead to lose of privacy or liberty.
I does in very insidious ways. Particularly if the constitution does not gurantee that irrespective of anything. Nice caveats like national security -which means crooked money lending politico shot by half starved farmer.
and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
And there are perfectly good reasons for anonymous speech. Particularly when you want to criticise the government. I see absolutely no reason to trust a government which goes about banning blogs terming them "anti-national".
The anonymous speech can not and will not be stopped. Having an identity does not mean that you can not have an anonymous or free speech.
That is in fact the prime concern. When governments or society for that matter decides on some arbitary rukes of behaviour - women must wear burkha which is a small shift away from women should dress decently which is a small shift away from all citizens should dress decently and zounds so nice and pious - identity becomes a dangerous weapon.
Citizen Information System sounds like it provides information TO citizens. Instead, it provides information ABOUT citizens. Now, from when do we start wearing the star of david^W^W^Wthe cresent^W^W... ? (I lose here).
We are talking of identity rather than CISS. CISS has got nothing to do with identity.
May I recommend Nineteen Eighty-Four? While you are at it, Brave New World, Farenheit 451, Animal Farm, Lord of the Flies, The rise and fall of the Third Reich are also good to read.
I would call it pure paranoia.
You cant. Its already happened - Guantanamo, secret prisons in Poland, Afghanistan and who knows where else. Built and run by those who obtained power thru a (almost) legitimate democratic process.
Since electricity gives a shock and it can be fatal one must not generate or use electricity. :-)
Same arguments are given for nuclear, genetic and other technologies .
We must remember that technology per say is never evil. It is the technology in the wrong hands which leads to disaster.
And I think you and many have great distrust in our government. But remember that this is the government elected by you and me. :-) (It does not matter whether you vote or not ;-))
Devdas Bhagat
I hope a system developed under FOSS will have sufficient checks and balances for providing freedom of speech and other constitutional rights to the citizens.
FOSS can ensure that the tech flaws are visible and therefore correctable. Like thevoting machine fiasco in the USA http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ts-paper.pdf
FOSS cannot change the malicious nature of systems.
On 15/09/06 10:58 +0530, jtd wrote: <snip>
FOSS can ensure that the tech flaws are visible and therefore correctable. Like thevoting machine fiasco in the USA http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ts-paper.pdf
Could you show me how any random person can verify the code running on an electronic voting machine? Code on disk need not be the same as what was verified. Code which is in memory need not be the same as on disk.
'Reflections on trusting trust' is a good paper to read. How do you find that back door?
Devdas Bhagat
On Friday 15 September 2006 11:15, Devdas Bhagat wrote:
On 15/09/06 10:58 +0530, jtd wrote:
<snip>
FOSS can ensure that the tech flaws are visible and therefore correctable. Like thevoting machine fiasco in the USA http://itpolicy.princeton.edu/voting/ts-paper.pdf
Could you show me how any random person can verify the code running on an electronic voting machine?
Absolutely. So u need signed binaries of stuff running on the machine and signed source and toolchain of the same. And a completely open architecture. And a system for veryfying all of that by those in doubt. The foss system will only ensure that the tech is not flawed as opposed to rest of the things that are required to make evoting reasonably fool proof.
Err.. i think we are both referring to identical system flaws.
Code on disk need not be the same as what was verified. Code which is in memory need not be the same as on disk.
'Reflections on trusting trust' is a good paper to read. How do you find that back door?
In the case of voting machines you almost cant, even if the arch was totally open. Verification might actually render the vote invalid.
Dinesh Shah wrote:
I hope a system developed under FOSS will have sufficient checks and balances for providing freedom of speech and other constitutional rights to the citizens.
The CIS is just a centralised grouping of scattered records that actually exist today, like driver's license, passport etc. In no way should it contain a citizen's report card. This would would be a violation of liberty and throw open the system to political vendetta or blackmail.
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ Now you can scan emails quickly with a reading pane. Get the new Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
Sometime on Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 08:14:31PM +0530, Rony said:
The id system should be strictly id based not history based. A person I know had once mentioned that after it was compulsory for army jawans to wear their name on their uniform, their behavior was more civilised. Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
Rony, i believe you were the one who preached about individual privacy, and didnt want to be captured on camera in GLUG meets? Think about the consequences when it will be easy for taporis to easily identify women for example?
Anurag
Anurag wrote:
Sometime on Fri, Sep 15, 2006 at 08:14:31PM +0530, Rony said:
The id system should be strictly id based not history based. A person I know had once mentioned that after it was compulsory for army jawans to wear their name on their uniform, their behavior was more civilised. Thats the purpose of this CIS system. It will not help us detect a person's intentions but it will ensure that no faceless person simply goes about conning people or walks into a public place, plants a bomb and walks away or will keep changing ids after every crime. Knowledge of a person's id acts as a natural control over behavior.
Rony, i believe you were the one who preached about individual privacy, and didnt want to be captured on camera in GLUG meets? Think about the consequences when it will be easy for taporis to easily identify women for example?
Good question. Whenever I attend a GLUG meet (at least in HBSCE) my identity is registered at the security gate in its register. That is a security requirement so that a nameless person simply does not create a security hazard. Beyond that it is my individual privacy to not have my pic published on a website that contains the meet report.
I didn't understand the tapori part. Lets be clear on what exactly is the CIS. It is simply a centralised id card with extra biometric addons so that crooks cannot pull a fast one. We already have existing low level id cards that are used to identify ourselves at security gates. We give a copy of our passport to the mobile dealer, bank, etc...
Regards,
Rony.
___________________________________________________________ Inbox full of spam? Get leading spam protection and 1GB storage with All New Yahoo! Mail. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
Sometime on Sat, Sep 16, 2006 at 09:50:14PM +0530, Rony said:
I didn't understand the tapori part. Lets be clear on what exactly is the CIS. It is simply a centralised id card with extra biometric addons so that crooks cannot pull a fast one. We already have existing low level id cards that are used to identify ourselves at security gates. We give a copy of our passport to the mobile dealer, bank, etc...
Sorry, i gave a bad example. But there would be many takers for single ID system i am sure. Nobody would want to be identified as easily as that.
Anurag
-
Anurag -
Devdas Bhagat -
Dinesh Shah -
Harsh Busa -
jtd -
krishnakant Mane -
Rony -
Vivek Rai