The hidden data in your driver's license

As I was surfing the various news sites I ran across this CNN article.

Quote:

---

(CNN) -- It seems not too long ago that the highest tech device that a bouncer may have had was a flashlight to check out a driver's license. But these days, more and more bars and night clubs, convenience stores and liquor stores are using high-tech ID scanners in order to look at the information that's actually embedded in many driver's licenses.

---

I don't necessarily have a problem with people being able to read the magnetic strip on the back of my driver's license, but I do have a problem with the potential ability to store that information.

The other half is, in the name of the War on Terrorism, to "nationalize" all driver's licenses. They would still be issued by the various states, but all your information would be centralized in Washington, much like now, when you're stopped, the police can check via State or NCIC for wants or warrants. Rather than try the national ID card tactic again, this would be simpler.

If it comes to pass, and there's some debate on that, it would simplify things in that if you live say in California and are stopped in Ohio, the Feds would know exactly when and where you are. It's simply a modification of NCIC and another way for them to track our movements.

Or, maybe I'm becoming more paranoid as I age.

I have also been in pubs that put your drivers license in a machine which takes a photo of your ID, which can be used in conjunction with surveillance tapes to identify troublemakers. Would you like your licence details stored in a bars computer system? You could probably assume that their security is somewhat sub-standard.

Also, think of how many people you show your licence to. Hotel/Bar Staff, Liqour Store Staff, Bank Staff, Police....And this about what information is available on your licence. Licence Number, Name, Address, DOB, Signature.

I have been told that this is enough information required to perform credit checks on people over the Internet.

Should people reserve the right to refuse to have such details like DOB, Address etc on their drivers licence? Simply have a photo and a licence number (colour coded to your age bracket or something similiar) and have authorities (police) confirm peoples identity from a secured central database?

Any thoughts?

****************************
Should people reserve the right to refuse to have such details like DOB, Address etc on their drivers licence? Simply have a photo and a licence number (colour coded to your age bracket or something similiar) and have authorities (police) confirm peoples identity from a secured central database?
****************************

That's a really good thought. They could even issue two versions. 1 a license to drive to be used by law inforcement and another (for a small additional fee) to be used for a public ID and not containing any private info. Using strong encryption it could link you to your actual dl to keep people from writing bad checks and such.

if a card reader can be configured NOT to read info, as stated in the article, that means it has the ability to read all the data stored should someone reconfigure it. Someone will reconfigure it


Chuck56 its not paranoia to not want a system in place that, god forbid, the wrong people ever can too power, could totally control us. We have the right to bear arms for the same reason.

Sorry to drive is not a right but privalage and with it goes responsability. Matter of fact the credit cards I have carry more info and instant access to my account because even a credit card can be treated as a debit card. Matter of fact even your check hand written is clearled in a moment. I've even paid cash and asked my phone number so the place I bought from customer service people could call me and ask how I like the store. Yea right thing is you cannot even do a bank or cash transaction now days and not have anyone know. Subtile things like can I get your phone number, see the drivers license, swipe the credit or debit card and others make tons of mone off the transaction. Reality of a wired world and info off-line is sold in mass. Think about the spam the spammer bought it from a ligit source you gave it to, like MSN, Yahoo, Excite etc....they all opted you into the sales. Free for them and a profit how much will it cost you?

is a right or a privilege. It's a privilege here in New Mexico and in every State with which I'm familiar. It's a question of privacy, of being able to move freely without the Government of the United States tracking your every move.

Right now, if you leave whatever State you live in, Massachusetts I think, and travel to California, nobody knows but you and your credit card company. If you are stopped, the police in the State in which you're stopped will know and NCIC if a records check is done. Nobody else. If the centralized system they're discussing comes to pass, that info will be kept. Why is Palemoon traveling so far from home? Is there any reason for us to be suspicious that he lives in Massachusetts and is stopped in Utah in September? Should we look into his background a bit more? Let's flag his name and keep tabs on him.

That's what it's all about and I can guarantee you that, except possibly during the toursit season when everybody is moving, that is how it'll play out.

It's very much like was mentioned concerning the Right to Bear Arms. Here, in New Mexico, buying a gun isn't much more difficult than buying a package of cigarettes. It's understood that it's a right. Government, other than the damned instant check system, doesn't interfere at any level. Bearing arms isn't a privilege, it's a right. Traveling and free movement is not a privilege allowed by government, it's the right of a free human being, and it isn't government's business to know where you are, when you leave, or why you're where you are as you roam.

At the video store I go to, they use your license as your video card, and just run the scanner over your barcode, which they programmed into the computer at the store to read to correlate with my rental information.

If that's as far as it goes, such as that video store, I really don't have a problem with it. I don't feel they're invading my privacy by using the barcode to link up my video rental information, they're going to take the same information using a card with another barcode on it anyway, it's a little less hassle with one card.

Now, if the card was storing information other than what was on the card itself, and not just a validity identifier (such as, a second check for a bouncer/liquor vender to see if the card was a fake), then I would feel it as a breach of privacy. Honestly, just looking at the photography supplied in the article, it seems like whatever is encoded in the card is identical to what shows on the card, and would be used as a second validity identifier...which is definitely not invading anything, as it's clearly printed on the front of your card.

Hi folks; just wanted to point you to a prior discussion on this subject:
http://www.antionline.com/showthread...rivers+license
Might get you a little closer to what's actually coming down the pike......... :D

are operating under the same mindset. I have no problem with having the information that's on the front of my driver's license encoded in some strip on the back. I wouldn't have much objection if they wanted to include traffic history onto the code.

The proposed, if it's still under consideration, nationalization of the driver's license is where I start to object. As I said, it would still be issued by your home state, would still look like your current license, but all information encoded would be transmitted to Washington. Essentially, it would become a national identification card, containing whatever history Uncle decides he wants. This is where I draw the line.

I don't always carry my driver's license. If I decide to walk the couple of miles to the store, which I often do, I'll sometimes shove a few bucks in my pocket and go. Will the license suddenly become required carry? Sorry, it all smacks to much of Soviet Russia and many European countries where, when stopped by the police, the first words are,

"Papers?"

And you'd better have them.

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by Chuck56
It's very much like was mentioned concerning the Right to Bear Arms. Here, in New Mexico, buying a gun isn't much more difficult than buying a package of cigarettes. It's understood that it's a right. Government, other than the damned instant check system, doesn't interfere at any level. Bearing arms isn't a privilege, it's a right.

---

The scary thing is you're arguing that someone who isn't responsible enough to drive a car has the "right" to own a weapon designed to kill people (handguns). And just how far does that right extend? Are children granted the right to freedom of expression? If so, why do they not have the right to bear arms? Why CAN'T they carry a handgun? Why CAN'T a teacher be packing a few pistols in case some kid comes in with a shotgun or handgun and wants to shoot up his friends?

I will never understand why it is a "right" for anyone -- even those who are irresponsible and careless -- to carry around a weapon for no other purpose than to take someone's life. Talk about screwed up ideas...

I had written an entire page worth of stuff here, but given the events of a year ago, I'll end my rant here.