Tag: digital id

Senate Passes Kids’ “Safety” Bills Despite Privacy, Digital ID, and Censorship Concerns

Two bills combined – the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) and the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0) – have passed in the US Senate in a 91-3 vote, and will now be considered by the House.

Criticism of the bills focuses mainly on the likelihood that, if and when they become law, they will help expand online digital ID verification, as well as around issues like censorship (removal and blocking of content).

Related: The 2024 Digital ID and Online Age Verification Agenda

The effort to make KOSA and COPA 2.0 happen was spearheaded by a parent group that was pushing lawmakers and tech companies’ executives to move in this direction, and their main demand was to enact new rules that would prevent cyberbullying and other harms.

And now the main sponsors, senators Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, and Republican Marsha Blackburn are trying to dispel these concerns, suggesting these are not “speech bills” and do not (directly) impose age verification.

Further defending the bills, they say that the legislation does not mandate that internet platforms start collecting even more user data, and reject the notion it is invasive of people’s privacy.

But the problem is that although technically true, this interpretation of the bills’ impact is ultimately incorrect, as some of their provisions do encourage censorship, facilitate the introduction of digital ID for age verification, and leave the door open for mass collection of online users’ data – under specific circumstances – and end ending anonymity online.

The bills are hailed by supporters as “landmark” legislation that is the first to focus on protecting children on the internet in the last 20 years, with some lawmakers in the Senate, like majority leader, Democrat Chuck Schumer, describing the result of the vote as “a momentous day.”

Keep reading

Biden-Harris Task Force Urges Online Age Verification Digital ID Tool Development

The online digital ID age verification creep in the US continues from a number of directions, through “recommendations” and “studies” – essentially, the government is nudging the industry to move in the direction of implementing digital ID age verification tools.

At this point, it is happening via various initiatives and legislation, still, without being formally mandated.

One instance is a recommendation coming from the Biden-Harris Administration’s Kids Online Health and Safety Task Force, which is telling online service providers they should “develop and inform parents about age verification tools built into the app or available at the device level.”

The task force is led by the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS (its Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration, SAMHSA,) in what is referred to in official statements as “close partnership” with the Department of Commerce.

Keep reading

Senate Passes Kids’ “Safety” Bills Despite Privacy, Digital ID, and Censorship Concerns

Two bills combined – the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) and the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0) – have passed in the US Senate in a 91-3 vote, and will now be considered by the House.

Criticism of the bills focuses mainly on the likelihood that, if and when they become law, they will help expand online digital ID verification, as well as around issues like censorship (removal and blocking of content).

The effort to make KOSA and COPA 2.0 happen was spearheaded by a parent group that was pushing lawmakers and tech companies’ executives to move in this direction, and their main demand was to enact new rules that would prevent cyberbullying and other harms.

And now the main sponsors, senators Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat, and Republican Marsha Blackburn are trying to dispel these concerns, suggesting these are not “speech bills” and do not (directly) impose age verification.

Further defending the bills, they say that the legislation does not mandate that internet platforms start collecting even more user data, and reject the notion it is invasive of people’s privacy.

But the problem is that although technically true, this interpretation of the bills’ impact is ultimately incorrect, as some of their provisions do encourage censorship, facilitate the introduction of digital ID for age verification, and leave the door open for mass collection of online users’ data – under specific circumstances – and end ending anonymity online.

Keep reading

New UK Government Signals Potential Backtrack on Plans to Drop Digital ID

It’s been mere days since former UK Labour PM Tony Blair, a globalization extraordinaire, and a (digital) ID cards enthusiast remarked that it might take “a little persuading” for his country’s new government to get with that particular program.

And it seems the new Labour government really only needed a little persuasion – after “rejecting” Blair’s call to implement digital ID cards on July 7, by July 10 there were statements by an influential party figure calling that path “inevitable.”

However, that figure – former Home Secretary David Blunkett – is not a member of the just-formed cabinet, and was with his statements challenging current Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who opposed the idea.

But, Blunkett – who served in Blair’s government – said that “the government would have to streamline (growing digital records) into a single ID.”

Fast forward one week, and it seems Cooper’s cabinet colleague, Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology Peter Kyle, is starting to reverse course.

Somewhere in the meanwhile, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds first said the government would be “looking at all sources of advice” – only to quickly backtrack and say there were no ID card plans.

All this leaves observers puzzled as to what the government’s actual stance on this important issue is.

Keep reading

Navy Veteran Declared Non-Citizen, Loses License After Real ID Application

A Navy veteran went in to get a Tennessee Real ID driver’s license and ended up having the state take his American citizenship away, The Western Journal reports.

David O’Connor went to the Driver Service Center in McMinn County last month to renew his license and obtain a Real ID. Real IDs were created by Congress in 2005 after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. One must provide documents to prove U.S. citizenship to qualify for a Real ID. 

According to the state’s website, “Official Birth Certificate issued by a U.S. state, jurisdiction or territory (Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, Swain’s Island, Guam),” “U.S. Government-issued Certified Birth Certificate,” “U.S. Certificate of Birth Abroad (DS-1350 or FS-545)” or “Valid, unexpired U.S. Passport” are all acceptable documents.

“They told me I shouldn’t have had the license in the first place ’cause I couldn’t prove that I was a citizen,” the 77-year-old told WTVF in an interview.

Keep reading

Australia’s Chief Censor To Force Online Digital ID Within Six Months

It’s really a no-brainer both for politicians and those crafting the wording and perception of their policies.

Namely – if you want genuinely complex and controversial initiatives (such as those related to mass surveillance and privacy infringements) fast-tracked both in legislatures and the media/public, just frame them as geared toward “child safety.”

Job done. Not many will even attempt to stand up to this, even if arguments in favor are patently disingenuous.

One gets the sense this is what Australia’s “chief censor” – eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant – is there to do – and she seems to understand her assignment well. Whether she succeeds, though, is a whole different question.

For right now, Grant is not letting up on trying to attack online security and privacy via demands for swift implementation of age verification schemes by online platforms.

Grant is now setting a six-month deadline and threatening mandatory codes unless these platforms play along.

It might bear repeating, and louder, “for the people in the back”: The only way to truly verify anyone’s age online is for adults with a government-issued ID to present a copy of it to the platforms ruling the internet – ruled by governments.

This effectively destroys online anonymity, and in many countries and under many regimes, people’s (physical) safety.

Keep reading

Despite Backlash, X Continues Digital ID Verification with New Partner Stripe

X, a prominent social media platform, has seemingly phased out its association with the Israeli identity verification firm AU10TIX, shifting instead to American company Stripe to manage its identity verification services.

The move followed reports that AU10TIX had suffered a data leak.

This transition comes amidst concerns raised by some of X’s users regarding the safety of their personal data, particularly their photo IDs.

The call for X to disengage from AU10TIX also gained momentum after specific users highlighted the risk of intelligence sharing.

But rather than dropping the controversial digital ID system entirely, X has simply switched companies.

Starting to introduce digital IDs for social media use can severely inhibit free speech by stripping away the protective layer of anonymity and pseudonymity.

This change could deter users from expressing controversial or minority viewpoints for fear of personal or professional repercussions, particularly under oppressive regimes or in sensitive situations.

Such a policy would also heighten surveillance risks, as linking social media profiles to real-world identities makes it easier for both governmental and non-governmental actors to monitor individuals. The ability of controversial or targeted vulnerable groups to safely organize and communicate could be significantly compromised, leading to a decrease in diverse voices and activism online.

Keep reading

Big Tech Coalition Partners With WEF, Pushes “Global Digital Safety” Standards

Big Tech coalition Digital Trust & Safety Partnership (DTSP), the UK’s regulator OFCOM, and the World Economic Forum (WEF) have come together to produce a report.

The three entities, each in their own way, are known for advocating for or carrying out speech restrictions and policies that can result in undermining privacy and security.

DTSP says it is there to “address harmful content” and makes sure online age verification (“age assurance”) is enforced, while OFCOM states its mission to be establishing “online safety.”

Now they have co-authored a WEF (WEF Global Coalition for Digital Safety) report – a white paper – that puts forward the idea of closer cooperation with law enforcement in order to more effectively “measure” what they consider to be online digital safety and reduce what they identify to be risks.

The importance of this is explained by the need to properly allocate funds and ensure compliance with regulations. Yet again, “balancing” this with privacy and transparency concerns is mentioned several times in the report almost as a throwaway platitude.

The report also proposes co-opting (even more) research institutions for the sake of monitoring data – as the document puts it, a “wide range of data sources.”

More proposals made in the paper would grant other entities access to this data, and there is a drive to develop and implement “targeted interventions.”

Keep reading

Surgeon General Murthy Advocates for Digital ID to Combat Online “Misinformation” and Protect Youth

These days, as the saying goes – you can’t swing a cat without hitting a “paper of record” giving prominent op-ed space to some current US administration official – and this is happening very close to the presidential election.

This time, the New York Times and US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy got together, with Murthy’s own slant on what opponents might see as another push to muzzle social media ahead of the November vote, under any pretext.

A pretext is, as per Murthy: new legislation that would “shield young people from online harassment, abuse and exploitation,” and there’s disinformation and such, of course.

Coming from Murthy, this is inevitably branded as “health disinformation.” But the way digital rights group EFF sees it – requiring “a surgeon general’s warning label on social media platforms, stating that social media is associated with significant mental health harms for adolescents” – is just unconstitutional.

Whenever minors are mentioned in this context, the obvious question is – how do platforms know somebody’s a minor? And that’s where the privacy and security nightmare known as age verification, or “assurance” comes in.

Critics think this is no more than a thinly veiled campaign to unmask internet users under what the authorities believe is the platitude that cannot be argued against – “thinking of the children.”

Yet in reality, while it can harm children, the overall target is everybody else. Basically – in a just and open internet, every adult who might think using this digital town square, and expressing an opinion, would not have to come with them producing a government-issued photo ID.

Keep reading

Indiana and Mississippi Are Sued Over Online Age Verification Digital ID Laws

A group associated with big (and smaller) tech companies has filed a lawsuit claiming First Amendment violations against the state of Mississippi.

This comes after long years of these companies scoffing at First Amendment speech protections, as they censored their users’ speech and/or deplatformed them.

We obtained a copy of the lawsuit for you here.

It might seem hypocritical, but at the same time, even a broken clock is right twice a day. In this case, it is the industry group NetChoice that has launched the legal battle (NetChoice v. Fitch), at the center of which is state bill HB 1126 which requires age verification to be implemented on social networks.

NetChoice correctly observes that forcing people (for the sake of providing parental consent) to essentially unmask themselves through age verification (“age assurance”) exposes sensitive personal data, undermines their constitutional rights, and poses a threat to the online security of all internet users.

The filing against Mississippi also asserts that it is up to parents – rather than what NetChoice calls “Big Government” – to, in different ways, assure that their children are using sites and online services in an age-appropriate manner.

Keep reading