REAL ID Backlash

Mar 1, 2008 12:00 PM, By Sandra Kay Miller

Transitioning driver’s licenses into smart cards raises privacy concerns, but creates opportunities for a new functionality.

           

In an effort to get the ball rolling, the federal government set a compliance date of May 11, 2008. States must agree to comply with and begin instituting REAL ID by this deadline or be subject to consequences, which will result in their non-REAL ID compliant state-issued drivers licenses and ID cards not being accepted as valid forms of identification for boarding an airplane or entering a federal property, such as a courthouse, military base or nuclear facility.

To date, five states (Montana, South Carolina, Maine, New Hampshire and Oklahoma) have responded with a resounding “no,” going so far as to enact legislation barring the state from participating in REAL ID. Sixteen states have not committed to REAL ID or requested an extension to meet the deadlines of the first phase of REAL ID. The remainder of states have agreed, although many have requested and been granted extensions and openly question whether or not they will adopt REAL ID as their deadline approaches.

Brandewie explains that states that adopt REAL ID can also use the technology to deliver state-based services to the public. He would like to see citizens using smart cards in their everyday life for access to things such as taxes, social services and, ultimately, to be able to vote from home using secure credentials. “That kind of access to government records using secure identity would be something that would be a boon to the citizens as well as for government.”

Vanderhoof agrees, “Individual states don't have to limit their REAL ID-compliant driver's licenses to the federal minimum standards. They can meet the requirements of REAL ID and, at the same time, add smart card technology to further improve the security and privacy of licenses and be able to take advantage of the cost-savings derived from having a trusted secure ID credential. The credential can be used for the delivery of state government services — things like permits, administration of welfare and health assistance, car registration and first responder credentials. These could all be rolled into a state ID card that also serves as a driver's license.”

Despite the fear-mongering and speculation, the REAL ID Act is not meant to create a unified national identity card. Individual states will maintain control over their individual driver's license and ID issuance. Personal information will not be warehoused in a federal database or accessed by the federal government.

The reality is that today, the current licensing and personal identification systems are regularly exploited. Vanderhoof believes that the addition of smart card technology would greatly aid in a more secure means of personal identification through state-issued licenses and identity cards.

“If smart card technology was deployed in driver's licenses, identity cards for border access and other programs like Medicaid, we'd dramatically reduce the amount of fraud that takes place with people using someone else's ID or someone altering or modifying an ID to look legitimate when it's not,” he says.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2008 Penton Media Inc.

SUBSCRIBE

Select an Issue April 1, 2008 March 1, 2008 February 1, 2008 January 1, 2008 December 1, 2007 November 1, 2007 October 1, 2007 September 1, 2007 August 1, 2007 July 1, 2007 June 1, 2007 IP Security Supplement May 1, 2007 April 1, 2007 March 1, 2007 February 1, 2007 January 1, 2007 School Security December 1, 2006 November 1, 2006 October 1, 2006 September 1, 2006 August 1, 2006 July 1, 2006 June 1, 2006 May 1, 2006 April 1, 2006 March 1, 2006 February 1, 2006 January 1, 2006 December 1, 2005 November 1, 2005 October 1, 2005 September 1, 2005 August 1, 2005 July 1, 2005 June 1, 2005 May 1, 2005 April 1, 2005 March 1, 2005 February 1, 2005 January 1, 2005 December 1, 2004 November 1, 2004 October 1, 2004 September 1, 2004 August 1, 2004 July 1, 2004 July 1, 2004 June 1, 2004 May 1, 2004 April 1, 2004 March 1, 2004 February 1, 2004 January 1, 2004 December 1, 2003 November 1, 2003 October 1, 2003 September 1, 2003 August 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 June 1, 2003 May 1, 2003 April 1, 2003 March 1, 2003 February 1, 2003 January 1, 2003 December 1, 2002 November 1, 2002 October 1, 2002 September 1, 2002 August 1, 2002 July 1, 2002 June 1, 2002 May 1, 2002 April 1, 2002 March 1, 2002 February 1, 2002 January 1, 2002 December 1, 2001 November 1, 2001 October 1, 2001 September 1, 2001 August 1, 2001 July 1, 2001 June 1, 2001 May 1, 2001 April 1, 2001 March 1, 2001 February 1, 2001 January 1, 2001 December 1, 2000 November 1, 2000 October 1, 2000 September 1, 2000 August 1, 2000 July 1, 2000 June 1, 2000 May 1, 2000 April 1, 2000 March 1, 2000 February 1, 2000 January 1, 2000 December 1, 1999 November 1, 1999 October 1, 1999 September 1, 1999 August 1, 1999 July 1, 1999 June 1, 1999 May 1, 1999 April 1, 1999 March 1, 1999 February 1, 1999 January 1, 1999 December 1, 1998 November 1, 1998 October 1, 1998 September 1, 1998 August 1, 1998 July 1, 1998 June 1, 1998 May 1, 1998 April 1, 1998 March 1, 1998 February 1, 1998 January 1, 1998 December 1, 1997 November 1, 1997 October 1, 1997 September 1, 1997 August 1, 1997 July 1, 1997 June 1, 1997 May 1, 1997 April 1, 1997 March 1, 1997 February 1, 1997 January 1, 1997

This month in Access Control

• Opening Up About Door Closers
• An Enterprise Approach
• The Framework For Open Systems
• On A Higher Plane
• More from April's issue