Comment

RFID a threat? No, it's those ID cards, RF or not!

News came in last week that the awards for the Government's unpopular ID cards contract are growing closer - the shortlist is down to just eight suppliers, most of whom are the usual suspects.

But this week, the debate has livened up considerably. No-one has a greater admiration than I for the third party (the Lib-Dems) in British politics. True, the admiration is mainly for its pluck and persistence rather than its policies, it has to be said. Against all odds, it soldiers on in an electoral system that disadvantages it hugely. This of course allows it to take risks, something it's often been too reluctant to do.

But this week sees a putative leader of said party, which is currently without a leader, stating that he'd refuse to give the information required once ID cards become compulsory.

Many people oppose the ID cards scheme, and not just on the practical grounds that it cannot work because it's impossible for it to be secure enough while remaining accessible to thousands of public servants. They would argue that it's only a matter of time before personal and irrevocable biometric data ends up being stolen and that it's a huge invasion of privacy.

The Lib Dem candidate would appear to be among them, and has by his statement raised the issue in the national consciousness.

However, a unlike a journalist's words, a politician's words are cheap, so we'll wait and see what happens.

After all, whether or not it comes to compulsory donation of data is probably a moot point. By the time the scheme goes live, most people will have given enough information on their passport applications to construct an ID card. That excludes those who applied for a passport before last year's deadline but even they will be forced to supply fingerprints and so on within the next few years. That's when we'll see just how strongly people feel about the issue.

More brickbats headed in the direction of the scheme from a famous fraudster who pointed out that it takes just one weak link, such as a corrupt or incompetent official, to break the security of the scheme. Interestingly, the Home Office was hurt deeply enough by the allegations to respond, and insisted that the scheme will be secure.

What else would they say?

Meanwhile, Britain continues to drift into being the world's most surveilled society - which on the bright side is good business for digital video camera and networking equipment vendors.

There's always a bright side...