
Israeli government’s call for mandatory biometric ID system met with backlash - khuranagam
http://www.biometricupdate.com/201612/israeli-governments-call-for-mandatory-biometric-id-system-met-with-backlash
======
ohadron
Unfortunately, despite wide consensus within the academic and professional
communities, there's no real public backlash against the biometrics database.

It's hard to explain to a common Israeli why a database is dangerous. The
security argument is blinding, and it seems like we are going towards making
this huge mistake.

There's currently an effort to stop this and a crowd-funding campaign launched
this week aiming to finance a plea to the supreme court is so far successful
([https://www.headstart.co.il/project.aspx?id=19914](https://www.headstart.co.il/project.aspx?id=19914))

~~~
toyg
_> It's hard to explain to a common Israeli why a database is dangerous. _

If true, that's a huge educational failure. After all, Israel exists because
the Nazis were a bit too good at using paper-based databases, with "unique
biometric IDs" on people's arms. It's astonishing that Israeli citizens, of
all people, should have forgotten where this sort of approach inevitably
leads.

~~~
dogma1138
This is demagoguery, there are many reason why not to have a biometric
database and this isn't one of them.

The biometric db will not track ethnicity, Israel has already a national
identity registry and a mandatory national identity card law like many other
nations.

For the nonsensical scenario you propose it effectively has already everything
in place.

Israel also issues biometric passports and smart identity cards the difference
is that the biometric info is only stored on the smart card embedded in those
and it's also not stored in a raw form but as a set of fuzzy hashes which are
created from the biometric information collected from the card or passport
holder.

The controversy here is the proposal of a central db which will hold raw
biometric data.

Please bare in mind that Israel has also a national bone marrow databas which
covers about 80% of the population, as well as an opt-in by default organ
donor program if you take out a drivers license.

And anyone who went through military service also has their DNA and
fingerprints on file.

The DB here is basically a proposal to unify all of these, centralize them and
make it available to law enforcement which is in gross violation of the laws
that preceded it and also a pretty huge security liability.

~~~
toyg
But the question is: if all these databases are already in place, what is
_your_ objection to simply taking it one step further? Previous laws don't
matter - laws get changed all the time, that's the whole point of government.
A security liability? Maybe, but then all these databases already are.

So why, exactly, are you opposed to this? It's the logical extension of
everything else that preceded it.

You will likely find that the answer is a discomfort with a scenario like the
one I mentioned, which becomes a bit too trivial to achieve once this step is
made. (Note that this has nothing to do with ethnicity, btw.)

~~~
dogma1138
It's not my objections I don't live there, the issue is that while databases
exist each of them only serves a very specific role and the information stored
is limited.

Many people do not want a central database because it's going to end up being
a prime target for criminals and even nation states, and that the use of
previously collected information for law enforcement and potential future use
for private organizations (e.g. insurance providers) is a gross violation of
both privacy and common sense.

There is a good reason why for example the IDF biometric database is not
accessible to law enforcement or any other entity even within the IDF, as it's
sole purpose is for casualty identification anything else would be considered
a misuse of power especially considering that Israel has compulsory military
service.

The bonemarrow database does not contain any biometric information that can be
used for legal means, and the organ donor database doesn't contain it either.

The national registry contains your birth, nationality and family information
(parents, dependants and children) again no biometric information, and this
database has been leaked constantly over the years as it was made available to
certain private organizations and commercial software which contained copies
of that database was fairly quickly pirated.

The amount of information there was enough to create a shitstorm, it tended to
be out of data but it had your full name, your national identity number which
is unique and not reused and your last registered address.

And while the latter tended to be grossly outdated by the time it was leaked
as misfortune happens the people who are the most vulnerable to fraud; the
elderly and recent immigrants tended to have the most correct information as
they tended to be freshly registered and or less mobile.

And as mentioned before the biometric identity documents follow the globally
accepted standard where the information is stored and checked against the data
stored on the embedded smartcard rather than in a central database.

The new database is basically a unification of all of this where you'll end up
storing raw and unrestricted biometric info including fingerprints, retinal
scans and likely in the future DNA which will be accessible for direct queries
by any entity with access to it, this is something people do not want to
accept and I can hardly blame them for it.

I never understood the ideas that are prevalent in the US where effectively
making a database of people is nearly unconstitutional, where there are
effectively no mandatory national (federal) ID laws and where any ID law is
opposed being the first sign of fascism.

But there is a huge difference between storing information that we already
know now can be abused and we can't even imagine how a malicious entity could
abuse it in 5, 10 or 20 years.

And as the expiration date for biometrics is literally your lifetime, I would
personally air on the side of caution and say there since there is no need for
a central DB there is no need to create one especially since we haven't even
began to understand the risk profile that this information in the wrong hands
can project.

------
fnord123
I wonder if Aryeh Deri has picked up a directorship at DNA Bioscience. This is
what David Blunkett did in the UK while he was pressing hard for a biometric
identity card and national database for the UK.

Checking his wikipedia page, it seems there's no need to give him a
directorship. He'll accept cash:

""" After Deri was convicted of taking $155,000 in bribes while serving as
Interior Minister, and was given a three-year jail sentence in 2000. He was
replaced by Eli Yishai.[1][2] Due to good behavior, Deri was released from
Maasiyahu Prison in 2002 after serving 22 months.[3] """

~~~
ghostDancer
It's curious how politicians, all around the world, almost never fulfill their
sentences. At least that's how it looks.

~~~
dogma1138
Most prisoners in Israel and in many other countries don't serve the full
length of their sentences.

You end up serving 1/3rd to 1/2 of your sentence by default, "Good Behaviour"
usually means that you haven't started any riots or shanked a guard.

~~~
toyg
That's often because prisons everywhere are full to the brink. The increase in
criminalization of all sorts of common behaviours (from drugs to copyright
infringement) naturally leads to overcrowding, which in turns leads to
continuous amnesties and sentence discounts.

~~~
dogma1138
Not really, many countries have a early release after 1/4-1/2 of the time have
been served depending on the severity of the crime.

You also get vacation days from prison, free education and many other
"benefits", including being able to own small appliances (TV, radio,
microwave.. no not kidding) even in high security prisons.

You don't have to go as far as Norway to find prisons which are not like US
ones.

~~~
toyg
I know for a fact both UK and Italian prisons are overcrowded, with
legislation introduced explicitly to address this by shortening sentences. I
expect most EU systems are similarly positioned.

