U.S. Passports to Receive Electronic Identification Chips (WashingtonPost)
Slashdot linked to this article about the new chips in US passports, which I don’t exactly understand (I haven’t been keeping up on this) and don’t yet have a strong opinion about it one way or another as far as having one in MY passport is concerned. But this section of the article has me very very confused:
In issuing the new rules, the department is matching a requirement it is imposing on visitors from several other countries. Foreigners from countries who do not need visas to enter the United States also must have the chips by next October. Such countries will be responsible for providing their citizens with passports that comply with U.S. entry requirements.
What does this mean? What countries does this refer to? What if THEIR governments decide that having these chips are a breach of their citizens privacy rights? Aren’t we imposing on other countries personal security laws and policies by imposing our legislation on other countries?
Does this mean Canadians (for example) can’t cross the border? Does this mean that alien workers or illegal immigrants will have yet ANOTHER thing they can be busted for if they’re caught trying to make money for themselves/their familiy? Not to mention human trafficking victims…
Also, this basically requires that foreign countries should spend money developing and implimenting something that perhaps they can’t afford. is this being imposed on poorer countries where technologies are not at the same level as ours are?
Basically i want to know more about this part of the legislation. If this was only going to apply to American passports, then I might not have a problem… or at least, not this problem.
Anyway, back to studying.
procyon112 | 29-Oct-05 at 4:02 pm | Permalink
Well, as far as price, RFID is about as cheap as paper, so that’s not a big issue for developing countries, not to mention that it says that only countries that do not need visas to enter the US will require them, and I don’t think that there are any developing countries on that list.
As for breach of privacy, this could be a traveling document used only to enter the US, containing a difficult to forge RFID chip that contains only the information already on the passport in printed form, so really, since it is a single purpose document with no additional information requirements, it is simply an anti-forgery mechanism with no privacy concerns. The privacy concerns come from a country requiring people to carry the identification with them at all times so that anyone walking by knows who you are, etc. In the case of border crossing, you WANT to know who is crossing so privacy (as far as simple identification) is not a concern.
drdougfir | 29-Oct-05 at 4:46 pm | Permalink
my friends over in europe were talking about this over the summer and how they all were having to get new passports so they could come to america.
in my oppinion, its a really bad idea. now american and european (the ones who dont need visas are almost all in europe) passport holders will be walking around the world with the equivilant of HUGE FLASHING RED LIGHTS on their backs saying KILL ME KILL ME I’M A RICH WESTERNER!!!!!
i’m very suprised that the diplo types are letting themselves be the guineapigs on this one. probably after a string of killings or kidnappings the program will be pulled.
i’ll be investing in a small aluminum foil packet to put my passport in. good thing my current one is good through 2014.
xjaymanx | 29-Oct-05 at 5:01 pm | Permalink
yeah, i think i’m in the same boat… not feeling strongly either way… but a few thoughts popped into my head… maybe irrelevant, but oh well…
(1) unless born in the US, becoming an american citizen isn’t a right, but a privilege that should be earned (like earning my friendship/trust enough to get a key or security code into my own home)…
(2) it’s not like i carry my passport around me anyway; my driver’s license and credit cards carry as much info about me already…
… and that’s about it; no other thoughts… LOL, i guess there are other more-immediate responsibilities on my plate ;)))
autarchex | 29-Oct-05 at 11:10 pm | Permalink
I think it is a terrible idea. They say those things can only be picked up within a two meter or so radius in most reports… but that’s just the range designed into commercial scanners. You could build a scanner that pumps out more signal power and receives fainter signals back, and boost your range. I’m not a big fan of having an electronic device on my person that advertises my identity and also, if the receiver is built correctly, my position. One, that gives police easy tracking power, which I am uncomfortable with. Two, that gives folk that hate anyone from a particular country, say, AMERICA, your location and confirmation of your nationality at a distance. Kidnappings and/or snipings made easy.
Three, I dislike mediums that store information that I cannot see and access myself. Credit cards bug me enough. This would really unnerve me. The government can tell me that my name, nationality, birthdate, etc. are all that is on the chip, and I’d have to take it on faith that they aren’t encoding all manner of other data on there.
This popped up on slashdot several months ago. Immediately after seeing it I found on ebay a guy selling RF-proof privacy sleeves in which to store one’s passport. Personally, I don’t think it should be my responsibility to go out and aluminum-foil-wrap my passport rather than the government’s responsibility not to put the chips there at all.
But that’s just my take on it. I would rather “live in constant fear of terrorist attack” than give up anonymous travel… even though we’ve been fairly well stripped of that already.
As for reciprocity, all I know is that after America started to twiddle with entry requirements a couple years ago, Brazil enacted a rule that specifically singles out American passport bearers for extra searches and hassles, just to say “fuck you.” I wonder if that’s still in effect.
Note of interest - if you get a passport now, you won’t be affected by this bullshit for ten years. Not sure if you can renew a passport early? I don’t have one yet, and I’m considering getting one before they start to enforce this.
republiqua | 30-Oct-05 at 2:00 am | Permalink
Citizens of the Netherlands are now required to have a special electronic barcode in their passport which stores personal information that is scanned into American security computers upon arrival at customs check points within the States. Oh, and a fingerprint scan as well. The US is the only country I know of that imposes this and obtaining these wretched little invasions of privacy is not as easy as exchanging your old passport, but going through the entire process of applying for a new one (and paying for it) all over again.
The Dutch are fucking livid and most people I know are refusing to do it, saying that they wouldn’t dream of visiting a country where they’re treated like criminals before they even step off the plane.
A good example: I went back to Hawaii for the first time since moving here in the summer of 2004 with my ex (who is Dutch). I had filled out the accomodation information section of his entry card for him and, without thinking, written my mother’s P.O. Box address instead of her physical one. After we separated at the entry desks, they grilled him for a solid 10 minutes about why he hadn’t filled in a physical address, then two security guards escorted him to this little interrogation room, not caring that we had a connecting flight to catch 35 minutes later or that I had no idea how to find him to clear up the mess. Luckily, I just happened to walk by and ran over to see what the hell was going on. They treated us both terribly, and it took every last tinge of self control I had not to say anything about us and make the situation much worse.
If it weren’t the fact that my mother still lives in Hawaii, I would never go back either. It’s absolutely not worth it to me.