Chip technology seems to have spread on the entire globe as the people’s identification standard.
In Europe, the chip system should be adopted by 2008 in Germany, France and the UK. Yet, electronic ID card formats largely differ from one country to another.
-Germany plans to stock an electronic signature but also digital prints and a face’s picture of the card’s holder. Nevertheless the data are planned to stay exclusively for administrative purposes.
-In the UK, where a more advanced debate on the issue has occurred, ID cards will stock the date of birth, name, address, iris’ scanner and also digital and facial prints. The data will be available on a national ID cards’ database linked to electronic passports systems.
Following a similar process, Spain and Estonia also want to allow the utilisation of biometric data by private organisations .
-In France, the access of biometric data will be regulated by an independent organisation. Contrary to the US chips, which are readable up to 9 meters away, chips in France will be only readable up to a few centimetres to ensure confidentiality.
A similar chip system has also been adopted in China, though the government has opted for the centralisation of the entire citizens’ information in a single database.
The harmonisation of the systems appears to be more than ever necessary between the different states. The risks and threats such systems could represent to the privacy of individuals are another issue…
Updated regularly by our team of writers, the New Media Awards blog covers all things related to the convergence of politics and new media.
Subscribe to the NMA 2006 weblog's RSS feed
Why should harmonisation between states be ‘necessary’? One can see how it might be convenient - for states. For citizens it offers the prospect of being under a global net. Beyond exploiting modern encryption techniques to authenticate documents on the spot in standardised ways - which is of value to travellers - we ought to resist any potential for broad data sharing about citizens among governments.
Variety and decentralisation of identity is protective of the individual against the power of the state, because it gives us somewhere to hide. Why do you think China centralises its system? Why do you think the Home Office wants to do the same in the UK?
It’s about ensuring that the state is the source of all identity, and with it gains in power over the citizen.
Post a comment: