Federal Government moving ahead with Internet ID Plan

[woo me with science]

Protest this now! This Internet ID is not just being discussed hypothetically anymore. They are going forward with it, quietly, and by the time they have a system in place, it will be too late to protest. See my link at the bottom of this post for an article from yesterday documenting the call for pilot programs to be implemented over several years.

Our government is making this decision FOR us, as though they were our leaders and not our representatives. We must stop this before it is a done deal.

http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/nist-releases-nstic-pilots-solicitation/2012-02-01


NIST releases NSTIC pilots solicitation
February 1, 2012 — 11:45pm ET
By David Perera


Federal efforts to build an online identity ecosystem moved forward Feb. 1 with a National Institute of Standards and Technology call for proposals for five to eight pilot projects lasting up to 2 years.

NIST manages a program known as the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, which seeks to create a new web-based authentication methodology. NSTIC envisions the creation of two types of intermediaries that together would verify the identity and eligibility of an Internet user wishing to conduct a secure transaction, such as accessing sensitive information. Identity providers would provide a credential, such as a downloadable certificate, verifying that a person is who he says he is, while attribute providers would store characteristic information about that individual--things such as age.

In a federal funding opportunity (.pdf), NIST says it has money enough to make pilot project cooperative agreement awards worth between $1.25 million and $2 million annually. Among the barriers that have prevented robust identity management solutions from taking root so far that NIST says the pilot projects will explore options to overcome is a lack of common standards for privacy protection and data re-use.

NIST also wants pilot projects to address matters such as interoperability standards, liability in case of identity system failure and usability.

....

Commercial and non-profit organizations, as well as state and local governments are eligible to submit proposals, the funding opportunity says. NIST plans to hold a proposer's conference on Feb. 15; proposals are due on March 7.



See also:
Why Obama's Internet ID Solution is a Really, Really Bad Idea
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002257541

[arcane1]

1. Does this apply only to a "user wishing to conduct a secure transaction"

Or is it something that they plan to require for everyone at all times (such as logging in to email, or DU)?

I admit, today is the first time I've heard of this.

[woo me with science]

4. It ostensibly starts out that way, but if you read the position paper

you will see that the goal is to make this system ubiquitous through multiple-layered government-private partnerships. Although they stress that participation at the outset will be voluntary, they are very clear that they plan to put financial structures into place so that private systems will choose to use it, with the goal of its growing to encompass virtually everybody. They are very clear and even emphatic in the paper that without its steady and massive growth as a universal system, it will not be useful. They even talk about international implementation.

It sounds like both a way for private corporations (those that will verify identities and be part of the layers of this system) to profit from our internet use and a way for the government to increase surveillance and control.

It has been described as a driver's license for the internet.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

5. How would this differ from what

Paypal and other money-transfer sites have been doing for years?

Users who have submitted checking account numbers get a special "validated" status that reassures other users who send payments to them.

Don't you think the internet needs widespread validation mechanisms to entice more consumers to conduct more and higher-value transactions online?
Or should frauds and scams be allowd to continue to grow?

IMO people should be able to choose to use the internet both for anonymous information exchange (such as blog posts) and for very secure high-value financial transactions.

[woo me with science]

6. Absolutely not.

Of course it is different. Massively so, because we are talking about a single, government-controlled entry point to transactions online and, likely, eventually to access to the internet itself. Did you read the articles to see what they are proposing?

This issue is not just about data theft, although even that argument falls flat here. People use the internet for high-value transactions *already.* It is highly doubtful that having a single, government-controlled access point for information on Americans' internet transactions across databases will make us more secure from data theft. In fact, just the opposite is likely to be true, which is one reason the tech community is already up in arms about it.

And even if it *did* make our financial transactions more secure, that benefit would still not outweigh the serious threats to our privacy and liberty that this plan portends. No, we do not need a massive new government system that lays the infrastructure to supervise, regulate, track, and control our individual access to the internet. The spin that all of this would be for our protection is just about as convincing as the ongoing attempts to justify the tracking of Americans' internet use by citing concerns about "child porn." (http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002197126).

Anyone who throws in support for this without question, or believes that this is first and foremost about protecting us, has not been paying attention lately. In this age of SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, militarization of police departments, and identification of those who protest and those who seek anonymity on the internet as potential terrorists, we need to take this very seriously.

Call and write to oppose this now. Wait, and it will be a done deal.



______________________


Get the money out of our government. Occupy now, because they are putting structures into place to make it impossible to occupy later.



.

[woo me with science]

8. Kick. nt

[T S Justly]

2. It's the progressive thing to do ...

Otherwise. K&R

[woo me with science]

7. Yeah, just like indefinite detention,

bank settlements, and drone attacks!

This should not be a partisan issue... How often have we needed to say that lately?

[woo me with science]

3. Kick. nt

[sudopod]

9. Kick nt

[Uncle Joe]

10. It sounds like the nose of the camel is being shoved under the tent.

What's the real need for this?

Thanks for the thread, woo me with science.

[Kaleko]

11. Your link doesn't work for me.

It says: "Unable to connect to database server"... etc. blah, blah...

Maybe it's just me and my location?

Anyway, thanks for the heads-up. It's curious that I haven't found any urgent petitions to contact Congresspeople in my email concerning this latest assault.

Weird.

[woo me with science]

12. That's strange.

I just checked both links, and they work for me.

The silence on this is extremely disturbing, IMO. I hadn't heard a word about these pilot projects until I saw it in this tech site. The major media is completely ignoring this, even though it appears to be a go from the government's point of view, and progressing quickly.

The assaults are coming fast and furious. SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, and now this. We don't dare close our eyes for a moment.

[Kaleko]

13. Normally my email would be flooded

with all sorts of urgent petition requests. Just signed one today for Avaaz's latest call to stop ACTA in Europe. They're getting close to 2 million signatures now. But I don't read mainstream media or watch TV news, so I trust people like you to tell me what they're up to.

Thanks for everything you do, woo.

[woo me with science]

14. I know what you mean.

My mailbox is flooded with them, too. I think someone stands to make a lot of money on this new plan.

Thanks to you, too.

[woo me with science]

15. Kick. nt