Questions? Call 800-624-6242
|
|
|
|
|
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online
readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML.
Please use the page image
as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.
Page 46
4
Concluding Remarks
Given the complexity of a nationwide
identity system, its potential impacts, and the broad scope of the
issues it raises, the committee believes that much more analysis is
needed. Such analysis cannot proceed, however, without a clear
articulation of the system's goals and requirements. The
committee believes that if a nationwide identity system is to be
created, the goals of such a system must be clearly and publicly
identified and deliberated upon, with input sought from all
stakeholders (including private citizens). Given the economic
costs, the significant design and implementation challenges, and
the risks to security and privacy posed by a poorly thought-out
system, prior public review 1
is essential.
Thus the committee believes that proponents of a nationwide
identity system should be required to present a very compelling
case addressing these issues and that they should solicit input
from a broad range of stakeholder communities. 2 The committee's own discussion
of a nation
|
|
|
|
|
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 46
4
Concluding Remarks
G
iven the complexity of a nationwide identity system, its potential
impacts, and the broad scope of the issues it raises, the committee
believes that much more analysis is needed. Such analysis cannot
proceed, however, without a clear articulation of the system’s goals and
requirements. The committee believes that if a nationwide identity system
is to be created, the goals of such a system must be clearly and publicly
identified and deliberated upon, with input sought from all stakeholders
(including private citizens). Given the economic costs, the significant
design and implementation challenges, and the risks to security and
privacy posed by a poorly thought-out system, prior public review1 is
essential.
Thus the committee believes that proponents of a nationwide identity
system should be required to present a very compelling case addressing
these issues and that they should solicit input from a broad range of
stakeholder communities.2 The committee’s own discussion of a nation-
1For an example of how this might work, consider the public-review cycle for the Ad-
vanced Encryption Standard (AES); see , managed
by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
2Other stakeholder groups have already commented on the idea of a national identity
card, albeit within varying contexts. For example, in 1995 the Cato Institute presented an
extensive policy analysis of the notion of a nationwide worker registry within the context of
a larger immigration debate (see ). The
American Civil Liberties Union offered similar opposition (see ); around the same time, Privacy International prepared a report de-
scribing the use and implications of national ID cards from an international perspective (see
).
46
OCR for page 47
47
CONCLUDING REMARKS
wide identity system, although brief and modest in scope, raised numer-
ous complex questions. It is clear that an evaluation of the potential costs,
presumed benefits, and potential drawbacks of any proposed system is
necessary in order to fully appreciate its trade-offs.
Care must be taken to completely explore the ramifications of any
nationwide identity system not only because of the significant policy con-
cerns and technological challenges but also because after-the-fact costs—
the result of revoking, correcting, or redesigning after broad deploy-
ment—would be enormous. Moreover, analysts must give serious
consideration to the idea that—given the broad range of potential uses,
security requirements, and privacy needs that might be contemplated—
no single nationwide identity system is likely to meet the varied demands
of all potential users. Undoubtedly many more issues exist that are not
even touched upon here.
Given the wide range of technological and logistical challenges, the
likely direct and indirect costs, the serious potential for infringing on the
rights and freedoms of ordinary citizens, and the gravity of the policy
issues raised, any proposed nationwide identity system requires strict
scrutiny and significant deliberation well in advance of design and de-
ployment.
OCR for page 48
OCR for page 49
Appendixes
OCR for page 50
