George Orwell may have been a little bit early with his predictions in the novel 1984, but Microsoft, Google, and PayPal are joining forces with Parity, Equifax, Novell, and Oracle (among others) in creating the Information Card Foundation (ICF).
According to the New York Times, the group is planning on setting their own open standards (sorry, Data Portability) in producing what they are calling an i-card. The i-card will serve as a virtual online identification card that gives users a secure digital identity overseen by a third party for use online. They hope that the proposed information profile will keep data secure by allowing sites access only to specific login data and would also reduce the dependence on passwords, thereby thrawrting phishing scams. The proposed model references a virtual wallet that would store the data, including government verified information, and provide it for sites which need legal confirmation.
The group is joining with existing standards organizations including Identity Commons, OpenID, Project Liberty, and the W3C, and will also use Microsoft CardSpace and OASIS standards. The ICF FAQ includes proposed uses such as verifying age for users buying alcohol online without revealing specific birth dates. The plan is to roll out the system for desktop use before the addition of mobile use as well.
No details are included in the FAQ with regard to how users will log into their "wallet," but one-click access to sending site credentials is one of the features proposed, as well as storing financial data that the ICF claims will lead to better conversion rates and integrating existing online profiles.
Of course, the ICF is going to have to win the approval of both users and site owners in order for the program to work. Odds are that potential users will debate issues of biometrics, privacy, and national ID tie-ins as well as the initiative moves forward.
More news, commentary, and predictions from The Industry Standard:
Comments
Reject the whole notion of id-card by these companies and ICF. It's unnecessary. It's the recipe for mentally-deranged control freaks to control your life 100%, not the excuse to make your life easier and secured.
Forget about 'em, people.
Rob, I agree it seems awfully Big-Brother-esque. I've seen arguments that we are confusing privacy with something entirely different, and that being online means there's no expectation of privacy, but I see no need to make it easy for them to track everything about me.
Let me guess: The user is able to use a biometric, implanted radio frequency identification chip to connect with this digital passport. Then it will be connected with the government passport service (Real ID) and similar systems worldwide, as well as credit cards. It will also connect with all the databases the government and it's private contractors keep of you (most government functions will be privatized anyway).
Then the governments will be sold officially to the granddaughter of Mussolini who will rule as an evil queen even more hideous than a certain chimp.
Prophet, I think they get us all with RFID capability in the plugs we'll be getting in our heads and cut out all those middlemen. Credits will be tied to it as well.
For every time that technology like this makes something easier, there may be a case of error, in which case a person can be disenfranchised from their own identity. They may be separated from their rights, their hard earned money... The benefits hardly outweigh the risks. I would rather take the time to enter my password if I want access to something.
Everytime I read or hear about this stuff like Real ID act which will take ALL of our information includeing Biometrics. Then it goes into a database to be shared with all government agencies includeing individuals inside those agencies such as DMV, Police, etc. This database will also be shaerd with Mexico and Canada through the SPP. Since this database will be shared with all agencies FBI included which they have whats called Server in the sky which is a similar database thats already being shared between UK (EU, 27 countries!!!) Australia, and a few other countries. Everyone who reads this needs to email all of them and tell them NO!!!!!!!!!!!!. This is rediculous. Im so tired of CORPS, and Gov trying to find out everything we are doing and control it, tax it, profit from it.
But James, if you email them, you are just making it easier to find you. ;) I think William Gibson's version of reality is slowly coming true, and there will, within a few generations, be those who live on the grid and those who live off.
This is just what I was afraid of, people seeing the words "information card" and assuming that this technology would have all the same privacy infringing implications as national identity cards. Does the article or any of the specifications say that there will be a central authority for issuing or monitoring the use of these cards? No. On the contrary, my understanding is that the standards will allow you to run your own implementation of the cards which are completely interoperable with any government- or corporate- backed scheme, without having to disclose any information to those bodies unwillingly. The technology will probably allow you to get a government or private entity to provide a digital attestation to a certain property of the card holder (such as age, legal name, club membership), but without that entity being the card issuer and without you having to disclose any other information on the card to them. Moreover, unlike other popular standards like OpenID, the technology should allow the creation of multiple, unlinked identities, automatically from the same card, including completely anonymous identities, without running the risk of being data-mined or behaviour-profiled from aggregated information.
In short, please remain vigilant to stop dangerous ID card schemes from being implemented, but also please research the information card technology before condemning it.
Tin, at the point at which any large corporation has any method of chaining together multiple unlinked identities, that's way more information than I want them to have. Then let Microsoft, et. al. compare notes with the government and they have that handy little video I linked in another article at the ACLU site all come to life. They can track me online as it is. I don't need to make it easy for them.
Post new comment