In reviewing MSNBC’s Privacy Lost, we continue with part four of the segment. This segment discusses the Real ID Act and the effect it will have when it goes into effect. At the time of the article it was scheduled to go into effect in 2008, but now has been pushed back to 2011. The article also present something I found very interesting, an interactive chart with high-tech methods for identification and some of the privacy risks associated with each.

The Real ID Act sets up a national ID system by having modern high-tech standards for driver’s licenses and ID cards. The government feels this is the best way to identity people, whether it is at U.S. borders or at the DMV. In addition to the standard information found on an ID card (name, gender, address, birth date, and digital photo), physical security features will be used and will also vary by state. These will be used to prevent fraud and have the ability to be accessed by “machine-readable technology,” which includes RFID chips and other such technology. With the Real ID Act, states are required to verify identities. These records must then stay on file for 10 years with open access to any other state searching for information. In a nutshell, as much information as humanly possible will be retained by your ID and anyone that is able to buy, sell, or hack the information can know way too much about you.

The article continues to discuss other ID management initiatives and the privacy risks associated with them. Some of these include high-tech passports and the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, which increased ID requirements when travelling from the U.S. to other countries in the region. All these measures can be used to increase the government’s ability to track us. And to add more fuel to the fire, all these methods will be giving out some sort of signal…which any hacker can intercept and potentially use to gain information.

The third page of the article discusses hackers and even some security experts who have been able to work their magic, so to speak, and turn Real ID into a better method of obtaining personal information. Advocates of Real ID played this off as a “media stunt.” The article finished up by discussing how technology is dynamic, not static so the issues they are trying to thwart are ones from the past.

Tweet This Post

With today’s continuation of MSNBC’s Privacy Lost, the focus is on the vast difference in privacy rights and laws between the United States and the European Union.

A few examples of the difference in European privacy laws vs U.S. privacy laws include:

• Personal information can’t be collected without permission, and the person has a chance to review their information to make sure it is accurate and up to date
• Companies that process data must be registered with the government
• Employee e-mails cannot be read by employers
• Personal information cannot be shared across borders or companies without permission
• Salespeople at stores can’t ask for a shopper’s phone number

Europeans tend to trust their government more, even though many of these limitations do not apply to them. According to the article, the Netherlands is 130 times more likely to use wiretapping than the U.S. The major different is that the E.U. places many privacy restrictions on the “evil” corporations, while the U.S. lacks trust in their government.

The article continues to point out the significance that privacy laws (well actually the lack of privacy laws in this case) played during the Holocaust when church records were used to persecute Jews. Some theories exist that date the privacy issues back even further in history. The article then continues to point out some recent examples of how the differences in privacy laws became major issues. Europeans choose to use the government, which is there to protect them, when wrongdoings occur…Americans, on the other hand, use the private sector to resolve issues.

The article displays a very useful chart to show the differences between the U.S. and E.U. in various issues including: right to privacy, government snooping, and consumer data collection. From what I see, Americans tend to view privacy as a personal matter that they have a right to defend on their own terms. In contrast, Europeans seem to see privacy as a matter of government and will use that avenue as opposed to actively pursuing ways to protect their privacy. Americans make privacy happen, while Europeans expect it to be there.

While I won’t say that one trumps the other, both the U.S. and the E.U. make valid points to their cause. My reoccuring thought while reading this article was how do two vastly different systems work so well, respectively? Speaking from a U.S. point of view, while many privacy issues exist, I know I can still be protected. It is a difficult subject to approach. Ultimately, both systems are working in their respective ways.

Tweet This Post