bluemonday Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Simply because we don't see commercial organisations losing data like Government Departments in the UK do I was on the Viila Marina e mail subscribers and got all those e mail addresses when they sent them by mistake - mentioned on here at the time. Incidentally, I've had unwanted junk mail from 2 local organisations as a result. A couple of weeks ago, I recieved on my private, personal e mail a load of legal stuff as attachments regarding a high profile recent local matter. I reported it by phone to the sender and deleted. The sender had no idea how I'd ended up on the mailing list for those documents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Found the HSBC reference here - £3 million fine. Problem of course is that the Public Service can fine others but in effect can' fine itself without the tapayers having to fund it - unless of course they had to pay it from within their budgets by reducing their programmes in areas such as entertainment/travel subsidies/advertising and/or reduced staffing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombay Bad Boy Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Illegal immigrant stows away on Border Agency bus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Illegal immigrant stows away on Border Agency bus Keys to the city, honourary degree and a british passport for that lad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bombay Bad Boy Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Nothing to fear etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted August 6, 2009 Author Share Posted August 6, 2009 I know this is from the dreaded Daily Mail but they do seem to have done their homework: New ID cards are supposed to be 'unforgeable' - but it took our expert 12 minutes to clone one, and programme it with false data Truly stunning - and the evidence is being completely ignored by the Home Office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I know this is from the dreaded Daily Mail but they do seem to have done their homework:New ID cards are supposed to be 'unforgeable' - but it took our expert 12 minutes to clone one, and programme it with false data Truly stunning - and the evidence is being completely ignored by the Home Office. Not really surprising, but hardly trivial. How easy is it to clone current identity methods such as driving license by comparison? A lot more trivial, requiring virtually no special knowledge. It does reinforce what I've been saying all along, that what we need is more joined up identity data storage rather than the 'federal' model we have now. If the cards are simply a link to the individual, and the data related to that is stored centrally, it doesn't matter if the contents of the card are altered, as they wont match the central store. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted August 6, 2009 Author Share Posted August 6, 2009 I refuse to give consent to my data being stored centrally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted August 6, 2009 Share Posted August 6, 2009 I know this is from the dreaded Daily Mail but they do seem to have done their homework:New ID cards are supposed to be 'unforgeable' - but it took our expert 12 minutes to clone one, and programme it with false data Truly stunning - and the evidence is being completely ignored by the Home Office. Not really surprising, but hardly trivial. How easy is it to clone current identity methods such as driving license by comparison? A lot more trivial, requiring virtually no special knowledge. It does reinforce what I've been saying all along, that what we need is more joined up identity data storage rather than the 'federal' model we have now. If the cards are simply a link to the individual, and the data related to that is stored centrally, it doesn't matter if the contents of the card are altered, as they wont match the central store. I see the merit in that, in preventing identity fraud, if it really is the case that it will make it far more difficult. But there is still the issue of the state centrally holding this information. That is the problem I have with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mollag Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 Perhaps a cheaper method which would really make the job of being a policeman easier, [always high on my list of priorities] is for us all to wear armbands. Why we could have different colours and symbols to indicate religion, sexuality, whether we have a criminal record, what club we belong to. Backed up with a no armband or wrong arm offence it would mean the bobbies could monitor us from the comfort of their cars. What upright citizen with nothing to hide could fail to agree to this simple method? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nosferatu Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 Perhaps a cheaper method which would really make the job of being a policeman easier, [always high on my list of priorities] is for us all to wear armbands.Why we could have different colours and symbols to indicate religion, sexuality, whether we have a criminal record, what club we belong to. Backed up with a no armband or wrong arm offence it would mean the bobbies could monitor us from the comfort of their cars. What upright citizen with nothing to hide could fail to agree to this simple method? Why not re-locate certain groups to their own little areas while we're at it . . It'll be even easier to spot your groups if they're all in the same place . I'm sure that has been tried somewhere before though , didn't go down too well . Best scrap that plan . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I see the merit in that, in preventing identity fraud, if it really is the case that it will make it far more difficult. But there is still the issue of the state centrally holding this information. That is the problem I have with this. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluemonday Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 Trust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manshimajin Posted August 9, 2009 Share Posted August 9, 2009 I see the merit in that, in preventing identity fraud, if it really is the case that it will make it far more difficult. But there is still the issue of the state centrally holding this information. That is the problem I have with this. Why? IMO the track record of the 'state' in managing data - will it improve? The issue to me is not central 'holding' of data. But central holding of data actually means the selective decentralised use of data. How will this be controlled and who will do the 'selection'? The UK Public Service has not got a great track record in its ability to manage data confidentially. As we know the UK now has councils using anti-terror legislation to check whether people are living in school catchments, putting rubbish out properly, dog pooh etc... No objection to bye-laws officers doing their job - but anti terror legislation seems a bit OTT to achieve this end. I use this as an example of how one set of laws is progressively used to do other things because it is 'convenient'. Why wouldn't the same happen with 'central data'? The management of data is only as good as the people doing the managing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted August 9, 2009 Author Share Posted August 9, 2009 Why we could have different colours and symbols to indicate religion, sexuality, whether we have a criminal record, what club we belong to. Backed up with a no armband or wrong arm offence it would mean the bobbies could monitor us from the comfort of their cars. This terrifying idea was used in Nazi Germany with the Jews: Holocaust Badges Reinhard Heydrich recommended that the Jews be forced to wear badges following the Kristallnacht pogrom in November 1938. The German government first introduced mandatory badges in Poland in November 1939. Jews who failed to wear them risked death. On July 26, 1941, the Judenrat (Jewish Community Council) of Bialystok announced that "the authorities have warned that severe punishment — up to, and including death by shooting — is in store for Jews who do not wear the yellow badge on back and front." The German government's policy of forcing Jews to wear badges, and then confining all who wore them to ghettos, was a tactic aimed at isolating the Jews from the rest of the population. It enabled the German government to identify, concentrate, deprive, starve, and ultimately murder the Jews of Europe under its control. In 1942, Helmut Knochen, the German government's chief of the Security Service and the Security Police for occupied France and Belgium, stated that the yellow badge was "another step on the road to the Final Solution." I have always been opposed to ID Cards. One of my main concerns is that such schemes migrate into forms of state racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.