By Tom Espiner, 10 November 2008 08:08
NEWS
Home Secretary Jacqui Smith has insisted biometrics taken from people in high-street businesses will be secure.
While anti-ID campaigners have said it will be almost impossible to lock fingerprints to biographical details in a secure manner if those biometrics are taken in a high-street business, Smith said on Thursday that the process would be secure.
"It is clearly important, and part of the work we are doing and the plans we have in place, to ensure the secure, controlled transfer of any biometrics," Smith told silicon.com sister publication ZDNet UK. "I believe it is technically possible to do that. I don't see the challenge is greater because more people are accredited to do it."
Smith added that accredited businesses would have a strong competitive reason to ensure that the biometric transfers they perform are secure, as failure to do so would have an impact on their reputation. However, so far the Home Office has given no precise information as to how fingerprints would be linked to biographical data, or any details about how the National Identity Scheme would be implemented.
High-street enrolment-centre service providers would be accredited by the Identity and Passport Service, said Smith, who added that "enrolment should be able to take place in the post office and shopping centre".
Smith criticised both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats for saying they would scrap the scheme.
"I can't answer whether the Tories would cancel the ID scheme," she said. "[If they do] they will have to answer how they will fill the black hole not only left by ID cards but biometric passports. They would have to answer why they have taken away security and convenience from the British people."
Conservative shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve told silicon.com sister publication ZDNet UK in an emailed statement that his party would discontinue the scheme, a move he said would benefit security.
"We would scrap this expensive white elephant and use the savings to do things that would actually improve our security," Grieve said. "The home secretary should stop kidding herself, admit this project is dead and devote her energies to carrying out her primary responsibility, which is ensuring the safety of the citizens of this country."
Anti-ID card campaigner Phil Booth said that far from increasing security, ID cards would be a risk.
"They are not introducing security and convenience, they are doing exactly the opposite," Booth told silicon.com sister publication ZDNet UK. "Enrolment in the high street will introduce security holes a mile wide. People will link biometric details to false biographical details, while the system will be plagued by systems errors."
The campaigner added that biometric passports, drivers' licences and other forms of identification would not be affected if ID cards were scrapped.
"This has nothing to do with passports, driving licences, or anything else," Booth said. "Get rid of the ID cards scheme and all the issues go away. There will be no 'black hole' left anywhere."
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. Karen Challinor
ID cards and the NIR are not necessary
only a very few people need the level of secure identification that the ID card in conjunction with the NIR can offer and these are catered for already
for the rest of us it's either a scheme that allows cradle to grave monitoring and control of the expenses and movements of the general population or it's a stealth tax that gives us a form of identification no better than any we already have as the majority of checks will be visual or it's a scheme to help the police clear their backlog of unsolved crimes by creating an AFIS style database of the entire countries fingerprints and there are still no published statistics on false positive/negative matching rates
if a person decides they need a form of identification, because they have none and they keep getting stopped in bars because they look too young for example, then there are perfectly acceptable forms of ID available to them
a provisional driving license for example has a photo ID, a sample signature, the date of birth of the holder and the police can use it to verify your address, there is no actual requirement that you use it for driving lessons or indeed that you take a driving test
further it costs around the same amount as the ID card is supposed to and it needs renewing every few years just like the ID card
if you are too young to have one then you are too young to be in a situation where you would need an ID card as well
it also has the added benefit of not requiring everyone else in the country to pay to give up their civil liberties
2. Richard Davies
"They would have to answer why they have taken away security and convenience from the British people."
Jacqui Smith must be absolutely off her rocker to say something like this! Security and Convenience...is she having a laugh!!! Its the ID Card scheme thats a security risk and an inconvenience!
I just looked her up and now I realise the truth...she definately isn't qualified to talk about ID card schemes and so we should just ignore her!!!
3. Radical Meldrew
Jaqui Smith, as usual, is out on a limb in Cuckoo-land. There is only one way to verify the data and that's to control the quality of input. A few dodgy cards will be enough cast a massive shadow of doubt over the integrity of the whole scheme. Either its done properly or, preferably, not at all.
4. Karen Challinor
sorry richard we can't ignore her, we have to oppose her and let her know she is wrong and why she is wrong at every opportunity or we will wake up one day and find this scheme firmly in place and it will be too late to do anything about it
apparently people keep coming up to her and asking why we can't have this scheme now, personally I'd love to "come up to" Ms Smith and debate this issue with her unfortunately people like you and I can't get within 10 feet, so I suspect the only voices she hears are other politicians and she only sees opposition from the other parties in the house, which doesn't count
it won't combat terrorism, it won't combat crime, it won't control immigration, it won't do anything at all unless everyone enrols and carries the card at all times, which implies a certain lack of choice, and even then it won't do anything that benefits the electorate
unfortunately she has the typical politicians reaction to a reasoned argument which opposes her point of view which is to dismiss your arguments and say "no I do not agree", "no, you are not in possession of all the facts" or "no I do not share your concerns" repeatedly, until you go away
we cannot afford to go away and we cannot afford to ignore her
5. Karen Challinor
and on a slight tangent to this issue there is the threat of legally enforcable DA notices (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-seek-to-censor-the-media-1006607.html) being used to censor the media from reporting issues that have national security implications
which is pretty much everything the government does, so bye bye reporting on ID card issues in Silicon.Com for one
further a small amount of function creep could extend these powers to bloggers, posters in forums, comments on Silicon.com, people sending email to multiple recipients or even the people standing on soapboxes at the corner of hyde park
look at what happened with RIPA and local councils and tell me this can't happen
these could be the last days we have any semblance of free speech in this country
when added to the ID Card/NIR this paints an extremely grim picture of the very near future for the UK
6. Jane Dunne
From her comments here and elsewhere, it seems clear that Ms Smith is some or all of: badly briefed, ignorant, in denial about the reality of the situation, stubborn. Some people may think that any of these conditions makes her unsuitable for office, for no-one with knowledge, understanding or common sense could say the things she does about this matter.
Evidently, she is not to be persuaded - perhaps because accepting that others may be right or have justifiable concerns is, in her eyes, a sign of weakness? - and so we must just seek to ensure that she and her like are not in a position of government at the first opportunity we have available to us.
It will be our vote . . .