antongarou ([info]antongarou) wrote,
@ 2008-12-06 22:08:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
הפגנה!הפגנה!לאחשוב על מה, הפגנה!:)
אוקי, אז בעצם כן חשוב על מה:הפגנה ביום רביעי הקרוב, ארבע וחצי אחה"צ, בבגין פינת קפלן בת"א נגד חוק הזיהוי הביומטרי(אזהרה:PDF).אז למה החוק הזה רע בעצם?כל מיני סיבות:לדוגמא שאי אפשר לאפס נתונים ביומטריים, מה שאומר שאם מישהו מצליח לגנוב את טביעות אצבעותיכם(נניח מכוס בירה בפאב) ולשים אותן על תעודה "ביומטרית" עם תמונה שלו הוא יוכל לבצע עסקאות אלקטרוניות בשמכם לאפי פוקס יש פוסט ממש טוב בנושא, או שזה עלול לגרום לחרם של האיחוד האירופי עלינו כי זו חדירה חמורה לפרטיות האזרח, ע"פ פסיקת ביהמ"ש העליון שלהם, או פשוט כי יש שיטות הרבה יותר טובות להפוך תעודה לבטוחה(נניח להדפיס אותה במדיה שאי אפשר להשתמש בה בכל מדפסת ביתית סטנדרטית).אז נתראה שם?

(13 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]talash
2008-12-06 09:47 pm UTC (link)
I am not a fan of this law, but the articles you have linked to are full of sheer paranoia and utter bullshit. Yes, identity theft exists and yes, it will continue to exist even with the new biometric ids. But an argument like: "a 16 year old can take your fingerprint of a beer glass and use it" are bullshit. Yes, identity theft is possible. It happens, it's thriving. Have your non-biometric id stolen and bank accounts opened and credit card fraud done with that id and you'll be in a mess. I don't see how are you going to be in a bigger mess if you have your biometric id stolen. As for fingerprints: right now one can take someone else's fingerprints off a glass of drink and leave them at a crime scene. Only this is kinda difficult to do I would say. Not impossible, but difficult. I don't see a 16 year old teenager easily succeeding in this endeavor. Heck, I don't see anyone but a very professional criminal succeeding in this. But I guess the article has to get point for FUD for the "16-year-old-who-goes-on-to-rape-people-with-your-fingerprints" bit.

As for the European Union bit: I have no doubt they would consider this a violation of human rights. They are the European Union-- I wouldn't expect anything else from them. Human rights of Palestinians or biometric ids-- same logic. And I don't see how this is relevant or why I should care about them. Israel is a fucking sovereign nation and I don't see why should any lawmaking decision be based solely on the fact that things are done a certain way in the European Union or the States, even less on fear of being boycotted. And the fact that certain foreign nations have way too much influence in our internal affairs is very, very sad in my humble opinion.

On the other hand, in this case for example the police had had the fingerprints of the suspect for some two years before he was caught. And this is hardly the only case like that.

I am not saying I am for the law, but please, will you come up with some more convincing arguments against it and not just links to some articles containing bullshit, sheer paranoia and FUD.

thank you.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]antongarou
2008-12-07 06:43 am UTC (link)
Actually, the first post I linked to specifically didn't talk about criminal matters: he was referring to the possibility of people making electronic deals you won't be able to cancel because "he did it- here we have his fingerprint as proof", nowadays if my credit card is stolen I can simply get a new one, with new PIN, but if your fingerprint is considered an "electronic signature" then I have no recourse.As someone put it- would you become a client in a bank that will tell you that you get just the one PIN, but they promise to guard it really really well(see various British examples)?

The EU have been our major trade&research partners for a long time, and there is a major difference between the left edges of the political maps there saying we're war criminals and their supreme court saying our government is abridging the rights of our citizens.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]talash
2008-12-07 09:40 am UTC (link)
Obviously fingerprints should not be the only method of authentication for financial transactions. But that's not the issue with fingerprints or fingerprint database with method of authentication as such. There will be fraud and deals you're not able to cancel with or without fingerprint authentication, and somehow the argument that "with fingerprint authentication you will suffer more damage from fraud when it happens" seems like pure FUD to me.

As for EU-- again. We are not the EU. We are a sovereign nation. I don't see how the supreme court of the EU is relevant in our case. So what if they are trade&research partners? Do you see the EU boycotting China because of its laws that violate the human rights? Or, a better example. In Italy, which is part of the EU, there is no such thing as "anonymous internet surfing." In every internet cafe you have to produce your id. Do you see the EU saying anything about it?

My bottom line is: 1. The EU is the EU. 2. They are a bunch of hypocrites. 3. They have no business intervening in our internal matters 4. I don't see why should we conduct our internal matters based on what the EU or any other entity would say about it and 5. The article is FUD and the arguments brought here are FUD.

please provide some more convincing arguments for your case.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]adrianna_r
2008-12-07 05:03 pm UTC (link)
There's a very, very big difference between what should be and what is.

Israel should not manage its internal affairs according to what the EU thinks.

The EU should not treat Israel any differently than the other countries it comes in contact with.

But both do.

Reality == bitch.

We're dependent on our trade because Israel is a hell hole. I'll repeat this again - there's nothing here in terms of natural resources or a reasonably profitable production industry (we got oranges, fucking yay).

Israel imports raw materials, does stuff to them, and then exports the result. Hi-tech, diamond processing, weapons enhancement, bio-engineering R&D and tourism - these are Isreal's most profitable industries, and all of them are export industries, dependent on other countries. It's the only money we can make, so trade? open foreign relations? Mucho importanto.

Fact is, in today's politics what should be is a mote in the dreamers' eyes, while the cold, hard, reality is what the rest of us have to deal with.

As for the fingerprints thing - assuming that Israel will still have other forms of identification for people along with the bio-metric ones is very optimistic.

If several units in the IDF already adopted an exclusive bio-metric identification, so would many civilian institutions simply because Israeli internal policy is practically dictated by IDF experiences. That's where the Class A citizens come from after all /sarcasm.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]talash
2008-12-07 06:38 pm UTC (link)
Reality == bitch.

I could tell you were a programmer by this line even if I hadn't known this ;)

But I think that when one says "Reality==Bitch" he actually says "Reality=Bitch" too. And yes, my optimism is incurable ;)

I don't say politics shouldn't be based on reality, but I don't think "What the EU will think of this" should be a consideration in this case and many others. And I definitely don't think one should go to protest against it based on argumentation like "hey, what will the EU think about this." WTF?

As for the fingerprints: yes I'm sure there will be fingerprint fraud once this system is implemented. I am also sure that over time there will be less fingerprint fraud because security will get better. I am not sure the levels or severity of fingerprint fraud will be higher than levels of ordinary id-theft fraud which would have been without it. In fact the contrary might be the case.

But the articles that have been linked to from this entry are kinda trying to imply this. So, third time. Please show me some more convincing arguments against this case.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]adrianna_r
2008-12-07 08:32 pm UTC (link)
I don't say politics shouldn't be based on reality, but I don't think "What the EU will think of this" should be a consideration in this case and many others. And I definitely don't think one should go to protest against it based on argumentation like "hey, what will the EU think about this."

*shrug*

Don't go to the rally then :P

But the point I was trying to make is that if this law will indeed 'unleash the wrath' of the EU on us, then it kinda is worth fighting against. Because the way things are, that's not an idle threat, so it shouldn't be completely ignored just because it isn't fair.

As a hi-tech worker whose company is trying to reach out to the European market, what with the recent crisis in the U.S, I wouldn't want a stupid law to make my company lose money and therefore put my ability to pay the bills at risk.

And I don't really care about the fingerprint fraud.

I'm against this law both because of the above threat of repercussions, and because I think that being unable to perform any transaction without identifying yourself with the most hard-coded, impossible to remove characteristic of the human body is a one-way ticket to a Big Brother reality. It's tantamount to the government injecting me with a tracking device, in my book.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]talash
2008-12-07 09:02 pm UTC (link)
Let me be clear: I am not a fan of this law. But there's a difference between being "not a fan" based on gut feelings and having clear and convincing logical arguments against it. And what I see are speculations, paranoia and FUD-- anything BUT a logical argument. As for your privacy: you don't have much now and I don't see how is it going to change just because tracking is going to be fingerprint based. Your credit card purchases, for example, are tracked now and I don't see any difference between tracking they have now and tracking when they'll have fingerprint as method of authentication. In fact I don't see how any tracking should change because of authentication method change. Whether you login to some system with a username/password or pin or whether it will be with a fingerprint-- I don't see how the tracking itself is going to be affected.

The arguments they have for their case are much stronger and more logical. Pliner's murderer would have been caught two years ago if we had smart ids with fingerprints. There are other unsolved cases where they have fingerprints but don't know the criminal. Is "fear of big brother reality" really on the same scale? Especially considering the fact that we are already living in a Big Brother reality. That your credit card is tracked, your phone is tracked, your internet might be tracked and what not.

Again-- I am not a fan of the law. But I haven't heard a clear, convincing and logical argument against it yet.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]adrianna_r
2008-12-07 09:26 pm UTC (link)
Well, consider this - I have 4 credit cards.

One of them is on my SO at all times, because it's the one that I rarely use, and I want to know that even if I forget my wallet somewhere, or it gets stolen, that one of my cards will still be available to me.

I wouldn't be able to have that flexibility with fingerprint identification - my SO will have his own fingerprint-encoded card, and I will have mine, and we won't be able to give them to each other for any reason.

Similarly, I won't be able to have him, or my mom, go to the post office or my bank with my ID card and an affidavit saying they can decide stuff in my name for that day. They'd need my finger, and I can't regrow my fingers if I cut them off.

Seeing as my office hours don't permit me to go to these places myself without getting yelled at for being late to work, that's a serious meddling in my personal schedule that's enforced upon me by that law.

In addition - my credit card transactions may be tracked, but I myself am not. I can always withdraw an unreasonable amount of cash from my account and stop using my credit card. That's not illegal, and if I need to hide from the mob or whatever, that's a useful resort to have.

But I can never stop using my fingerprint, so essentially, from those who would want to fine me, I can never hide. I'm not so optimistic as to believe that there will never come a time where I won't have to hide from something.

This is good if the guys you're tracking are criminals, right? But Israel is so corrupt that it's the criminals who usually have access to the tracking systems. Who would they track then?

Those are my arguments - you can say they're paranoid or whatever, but I learned from my father that the line "the fact that you're paranoid doens't mean they're not out to get you" is very, very true. My current last name is not the one I was born with, let me tell you that.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]talash
2008-12-07 09:52 pm UTC (link)
almost convincing. but i will argue for the opposite case some more.

concerning the credit cards: yup, you won't be able to give it to your so or vice versa. truth is: you're not supposed to give it to your so even now. yes, no one really follows that and yes, i do that too, but it's in the contract between you and the credit card company. could be an argument for the law for the credit card company.

as for the post office: 1. I don't see why you shouldn't be able to make an affidavit even with the biometric ids. and 2. that the post office hours in this country suck is a separate issue.

And finding anyone in Israel given his identity is not too hard even now and even without fingerprint id. So I still don't see much difference.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]adrianna_r
2008-12-07 03:40 am UTC (link)
I'll consider going, but...

It doesn't surprise me at all that Israel is thinking about doing something like this. This country has been a 'hidden' fascist country for a long while now, and this is just another small shift toward actually coming out of the closet about it.

Bio-metric identification == Pin-point human tracking system.

You only have -one- finger print after all.

(Reply to this)


[info]shany_topper
2008-12-07 09:36 am UTC (link)
I would of been alot more excited about this law if it was new.
Israel is more and more of a fasicst country lately, and fighting against one law at a time will do nothing about it. The sad thing is that no political party dares talking about this process as a whole.

Sad Indeed

P.S. Isn't Biometric Identification conflicts directly with the concept of Secret Ballot? I mean, if by just scanning the note they can find out who voted for who... should pepole start going to vote with gloves?

(Reply to this)


[info]adrianna_r
2008-12-07 08:59 pm UTC (link)
http://www.atzuma.co.il/petition/mahadeva/1/1000/

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]antongarou
2008-12-07 09:46 pm UTC (link)
thanks, already signed.Not that I thin it will do much, unless they manage to get to the 1M target.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(13 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…