Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 809 posts

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#771

Post by Nursie »

dbetteridge wrote: post #673
Nursie wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean I guess this new thing is going to be free? I also don't live in the UK any more, still a brit and not yet Australian, but I have had to adjust to it being necessary to carry your license here when driving. It means I can't really leave home without my wallet, which is odd. We're getting electronic licenses before long though, hopefully.

Australia is state by state based too, some states have more reasonable rules of "present it on request" Others like nsw are carry always

AFAICT here in WA it’s “you should carry but it’s not an offence if you don’t and you can sort it out later a bit like the UK”.

But I’m not 100% sure so I’m making sure I’m carrying just in case.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#772

Post by Nursie »

globular-toast wrote: post #377
Nursie wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a big backlash and they eventually caved in and cancelled the scheme when the government changed. I lived in South London at the time and sent a letter to my MP to protest about the creation of a database state and increased surveillance, fundamentally changing the nature of the relationship between the citizen and the state. About two months later I got a form response that started "Don't worry, it's not j…

The MPs never read anything. You got sent back one of a few pre-written replies by a secretary. I was stupid enough to reply to one of those replies once and never got anything back.

Yeah that’s the conclusion I came to as well. It’s really saddening when it’s shoved in your face like that.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#773

Post by robotresearcher »

aikinai wrote: post #675
robotresearcher wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mandatory ID cards are a cultural no-no in the UK. They were required during WW2, then discontinued in peacetime. People burned them in the street. You are not required to show ID to a police officer. Even when driving you don’t need to show a license on the spot, though if stopped for cause you have to present it at a police station within three days. At least those were the rules when I was a young driver there. Th…

Multiple citizenships are absolutely allowed in the US.

You are right, I was wrong.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#774

Post by martin82 »

aftergibson wrote: post #189

A secure, optional digital ID could be useful. But not in today’s UK. Why? Because the state has already shown it can’t be trusted with our data. - Snoopers’ Charter (Investigatory Powers Act 2016): ISPs must keep a year’s worth of records of which websites you visit. More than 40 agencies—from MI5 to the Welsh Ambulance Service—can request it. MI5 has already broken the rules and kept data it shouldn’t have. - Encry…

It doesn't work in any country, ever.

NO government can be trusted with data and with too much power (which go hand in hand). This has always been the case and will always be the case.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#775

Post by dbetteridge »

Nursie wrote: post #771
dbetteridge wrote: post #673

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Australia is state by state based too, some states have more reasonable rules of "present it on request" Others like nsw are carry always

AFAICT here in WA it’s “you should carry but it’s not an offence if you don’t and you can sort it out later a bit like the UK”. But I’m not 100% sure so I’m making sure I’m carrying just in case.

That's exactly what it is in WA :)

Source: I live there

Have also driven there for 15+ years and never been asked for my license.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#776

Post by surgical_fire »

flir wrote: post #732
surgical_fire wrote: post #723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Convenience and security are not opposite to one another, they are orthogonal. Inconvenient means to prove your identity may be terribly insecure, and still be inconvenient.

Ok. Well I gave a couple of examples of what I'm getting at. So how can a convenient way to establish a digital identity also be secure? To run with the see-saw analogy, what element would of that process would make the process both more convenient and more secure? (make the see-saw rise at both ends).

My point of them being orthogonal is that both ends of the seesaw can come down together. The logical conclusion is that they can come up together. In other words, it is not a seesaw.

Counter example - the usage of a password manager so that you have strong passwords on every service. It is extremely convenient (I don't have to remember passwords anymore, just the one for the password manager). It is also inherently more secure, as I can now use a different strong password for every service.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#777

Post by tomatocracy »

tempay wrote: post #657
crazygringo wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The government cannot stop this credential from being used except by physically confiscating it or by waiting (years) for it to expire This is not true. Government agencies generally look up your ID as necessary to check if it's still valid. Stopped for speeding? The cop is going to look up your driver's license. Leaving the country? They're running your passport number. Starting a job? They're checking the status…

Even for renting a car these days you need a verification code that you can request from the DVLA using your national insurance number.

The physical card is sufficient to prove you have permission to drive. This code is for them to check how many points you have on your licence and what for. There used to be a paper counterpart to the card which showed this which they withdrew a few years ago.

In reality I've never been asked for the code when renting cars (outside the UK), the physical card seems to generally be sufficient for the hire companies.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#778

Post by a5c11 »

crazygringo wrote: post #648
EasyMark wrote: post #565

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're talking about government spyware. Why not install a little bit extra into that digital ID app

But as long as the phone is unrooted the all can't spy on anything. Your phone restricts it. If you root your phone and install apps, your apps can do anything and spy all they want. So the comment still makes zero sense.

Unless you have a physical switch, you can't trust that a toggle button will actually disable or enable a feature. It wouldn't be the first time UK government tried to push some sort of backdoor. It isn't particularly difficult (from the OS's manufacturer perspective) to tell the user: "sure bro, this gov app doesn't access your location or mic xD".

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#779

Post by jnxx »

aftergibson wrote: post #189

A secure, optional digital ID could be useful. But not in today’s UK. Why? Because the state has already shown it can’t be trusted with our data. - Snoopers’ Charter (Investigatory Powers Act 2016): ISPs must keep a year’s worth of records of which websites you visit. More than 40 agencies—from MI5 to the Welsh Ambulance Service—can request it. MI5 has already broken the rules and kept data it shouldn’t have. - Encry…

There is another technical reason:

A digital ID requires essentially a digital signature running on a secure device (for example, a smart card).

Thus it implements public key cryptocraphy. Which makes confidentiality and integrity of computing two inseparable sides of the same medal.

You simply cannot break confidentiality of communication without practically breaking integrity of digital signatures at the same time. (Otherwise, a user, for example could generate a fresh random public key, sign it with their digital id, and send it to any communications partner).

Breaking this in turn means that the government can sign on behalf of you, without your knowledge.

Human communication is based on symbols and whatever the means are to transport these symbols, cannot work without trust.

Re: Britain to introduce compulsory digital ID for workers

#780

Post by jnxx »

qazwsxedchac wrote: post #459
aftergibson wrote: post #189

A secure, optional digital ID could be useful. But not in today’s UK. Why? Because the state has already shown it can’t be trusted with our data. - Snoopers’ Charter (Investigatory Powers Act 2016): ISPs must keep a year’s worth of records of which websites you visit. More than 40 agencies—from MI5 to the Welsh Ambulance Service—can request it. MI5 has already broken the rules and kept data it shouldn’t have. - Encry…

The ID cards as realized in many other countries are comparatively benign, because they are a physical credential in the possession of the person concerned. The government cannot stop this credential from being used except by physically confiscating it or by waiting (years) for it to expire. Distributed storage in action. The UK's proposal makes the "digital ID" a pointer to an entry in a centralized database. This d…

> The UK's proposal makes the "digital ID" a pointer to an entry in a centralized database.

Very similar to the "EU settlement scheme" which would gave EU citizens which had work and settled in the UK pre-Brexit after a very lengthy and non-deterministic application process the right to stay without any paper document to prove that they actually got that right. Just a database entry on a government computer. Too bad if an extreme right-wing goverment came to power and something happened to that database.

Post reply on HN