[HN Gopher] The paper passport's days are numbered
___________________________________________________________________
The paper passport's days are numbered
Author : ascorbic
Score : 154 points
Date : 2024-12-27 12:29 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wired.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wired.com)
| necovek wrote:
| Other than standardizing on equipment and root certificates, none
| of this is new technology.
|
| The challenge is how do you revoke a certificate which was used
| to issue millions of ID cards/passports once it leaks? Does
| everybody suddenly not have a "valid" ID proof?
|
| Or how do you scale non-digitized operations up on-demand once
| some of this fails?
|
| When it comes to privacy, government can even not keep any of the
| PII in a central place: it just needs to get it for signing and
| never needs to store it.
|
| Basically, you can have a device that wirelessly transmits
| government-signed data containing your facial data and other PII,
| and upon validation, that data would be used for facial
| recognition and ID verification.
|
| (Like JWT tokens for those familiar with them)
| sureIy wrote:
| What certificate are you talking about? The document is your
| face
| gruez wrote:
| "Your face" doesn't tell border officials anything important
| about you. For that, you need a travel document with relevant
| biographical information (eg. name, date of birth), along
| with a picture of your face so they know who to associate
| that information with. Finally, to ensure that you can't make
| a fake document that looks like a real document, there's a
| PKI system where all the information on the document is
| digitally signed by the country issuing the travel document.
| sureIy wrote:
| That's far down the line.
|
| The examples in the article just store the document data in
| national database. In both examples (Finland and Singapore)
| you register online before the trip and then still show up
| with _your passport._
|
| Singaporeans just show up with their face because their
| face is already linked to their government ID, stored
| locally. This can be done by any country _after pre-
| registering your regular passport._
|
| All of this is trivial to implement. There's still no
| mention of full digital validation.
| Muromec wrote:
| Well, the thing is -- after doing the whole ICAO PKI into
| the passport (which already happened) and keeping the
| trace in the local government database somebody realised
| there is no point to issue an expensive unforgable paper
| copy of it, since the digital artifact bundled with it
| (theoretically) provides stronger security. So instead of
| issuing ICAO PKI into the paassport, you can just have a
| dumb app generating a QR code with it or A4 paper
| extract.
| mhandley wrote:
| How does that work for identical twins?
| Muromec wrote:
| The same way as it does now. The face is checked against
| the identity claim, not against the global lookup, which
| can't reliably work anyway.
| timewizard wrote:
| So there's no non-repudiation making it no different than
| a paper document.
| Muromec wrote:
| Sorry I can't really parse the comment, but I do agree
| it's no different from a paper document, because why
| would it?
| BurningFrog wrote:
| It's hard to think of any scheme that fully works for that,
| unless you mandate distinctive body modification like
| tattoos or scars.
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| > how do you revoke a certificate which was used to issue
| millions of ID cards/passports once it leaks? Does everybody
| suddenly not have a "valid" ID proof?
|
| You need cutoff date and some kind of public trail log to
| prevent backdating new certificates. This can be done via
| short-lived secondary certs derived from a root one, logged
| publicly
| trilbyglens wrote:
| Sounds a lot like a blockchain
| gruez wrote:
| It really isn't, aside from using public key cryptography.
| There isn't even a concept of a "block" (ie. a linked list
| where each node is cryptographically linked to a prior
| node).
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| Blockchain can be the store of public data (dump public
| keys of intermediate certs into blockchain), but it's not
| necessary, public trail log is enough to call on backdated
| cert issuing
| Muromec wrote:
| That's pretty much how it works now, except they are not
| logged publicly.
| quotemstr wrote:
| > You need cutoff date and some kind of public trail log to
| prevent backdating new certificates.
|
| You might be able to do it without a public log by using an
| RFC 3161 (TSP) secure timestamp facility like the
| unfortunately named https://www.freetsa.org/. Basically, we
| want to trust identity attestations ("I am Bill Clinton and
| this is my face") made by a compromised CA between the time
| the CA certificate was created and an estimate (hopefully a
| conservative one) of the date of compromise. We want to
| distrust any certificates signed outside this time range.
|
| This way, in the event of a CA compromise, we don't have to
| revoke _everyone 's_ certificate after a CA compromise.
|
| I think we can implement this security model by having the CA
| ask the TSP server to countersign each certificate that the
| CA issues. The TSP would sign a hash of the whole CSR,
| including both identity ("I am Bill Clinton") and biometric
| (bill-clinton.jpg) information. Anyone can use the TSP's
| attestation to provide that the TSP server witnessed this
| combination of inputs at a specific time.
|
| Sure, if you've compromised the CA, you can issue a
| certificate saying "I am Bill Clinton", but to do so, you
| need to either use a genuine, up-to-date TSP attestation,
| giving away the game, or you need to use an old TSP
| attestation, forcing you to use _exactly_ the original inputs
| to the TSP. Using the exact inputs wouldn 't help you: you
| want to issue a certificate saying "I am Bill Clinton" with
| attacker.jpg as the face, not bill-clinton.jpg. The latter
| won't help you do anything: you don't look like Bill Clinton
| and you don't have his private key.
|
| An attacker would have to compromise _both_ the CA _and_ the
| TSP server to pull off a passport forgery. And you can make
| this process even harder by requiring multiple independent
| TSP servers to countersign certificates.
| layer8 wrote:
| > The challenge is how do you revoke a certificate which was
| used to issue millions of ID cards/passports once it leaks?
| Does everybody suddenly not have a "valid" ID proof?
|
| Revocations always come with a revocation date. Only passports
| issued after that date would be invalidated. The issuance dates
| could be proofed with cryptographic timestamps.
|
| There is a trade-off between false positives and false
| negatives when choosing the revocation date of the issuer
| certificate. With OCSP, you could also revoke all the
| individual IDs that are _not_ known-good (known to have been
| issued legitimately).
|
| Of course, a world-wide interoperable passport scheme is
| unlikely to be designed with such an elaborate verification
| system, and maintaining registries of all legitimate IDs comes
| with its own risks.
|
| In case of a massive breach, it's more likely that everyone
| will have to get a new passport and re-prove their identity for
| that using separate means.
| xvilka wrote:
| > In case of a massive breach, it's more likely that everyone
| will have to get a new passport and re-prove their identity
| for that using separate means.
|
| If you have a big family with the ownership of many assets -
| a car, house or an apartment, bank accounts, mortgage,
| various subsidies, and so on, the number of instances that
| you need to go to change your old passport data to a new one
| could quickly grow up to one hundred, depending on a country.
| The biggest problem with reissuing a passport is that its
| number and issuance date change, forcing you to jump through
| many hoops to continue life as before.
| jltsiren wrote:
| That sounds weird. Which country abuses passports like
| that?
|
| From my perspective, a passport is just an identity
| document. It's not a source of identity. When you get a new
| passport, your identity doesn't change, so you don't have
| to update your information anywhere. Immigration officials
| may be the main exception, if you live outside the country
| of your citizenship. Or maybe there is some hassle if you
| need to transfer a visa to the new passport.
| Joker_vD wrote:
| > It's not a source of identity.
|
| Lots of countries use ID's serial number as a sort of
| identity. Like, your bank would literally store "Mr. John
| Doe, G.I. ID 60-05 123-456-9012, D.o.B. 1985-07-29, etc."
| in your record, and when the next time you visit a branch
| and show them your new ID, it better have a "previously
| issued IDs" section on it with that old ID number there,
| so they would confirm that it's still you and update
| their record.
| layer8 wrote:
| The passport can retain the same ID. It's only its
| certification that changes. This is analogous to how a web
| server doesn't need to change its domain name when the TLS
| certificate has to be replaced.
|
| And presumably, you would still have to renew your passport
| every ten years or so anyway.
| seydor wrote:
| Well no, there is still no passport app in EU or the US. It's not
| dying, but it's going to
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| The US has had a self-service border crossing app for years. It
| is aimed at pleasure boaters and requires an in-person
| interview once a year to use.
| wenc wrote:
| There is a passport app that lets you clear US customs much
| more quickly: (no pre-approval needed, only US/Canada citizens
| are eligible at present)
|
| https://www.cbp.gov/travel/us-citizens/mobile-passport-contr...
|
| But you still need to carry the paper passport as backup.
| jdsnape wrote:
| just to note you can also use it as a non-US citizen if you
| are arriving on a Visa waiver programme (ESTA)
| rorylawless wrote:
| Additionally, Legal Permanent Residents of the US can use
| it too.
| shrx wrote:
| It says "Returning Visa Waiver Program Applicants". What
| does "returning" mean in this context?
| ksec wrote:
| I wonder if we can have both, the checking being done digitally.
| While still having an actual stamp on the paper passport. I know
| this sounds absurd but I dislike everything digital with no real,
| physical record I can keep.
| sureIy wrote:
| I don't mind my passport lasting longer due to fewer stamps.
| What I don't like is that more and more countries require pre-
| registration. They can add as many questions as they want and
| the form can be as crappy as it needs to be.
|
| Hopefully this will be fully automated at check in though. They
| already have all the info there, don't ask me twice. Send me an
| email if you won't accept me into your country. It can have its
| upsides.
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| Boaters, especially in northern Michigan and northern
| Washington (where the various small islands can almost seem
| randomly distributed between Canada and US), can get an app
| on their phone (the "CBP ROAM" app) to handle their frequent
| border crossings. A user creates a "trip" on the phone at the
| beginning of the day and then presses a button every time
| they cross the border. If the US has a problem they do a
| video call through the app. It's been around for a few years.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| > can get an app on their phone
|
| ok, do you want that, or are you required to have that..
|
| Uniform servicemen already have made agreements about their
| data, locations, records, check-ins ad infinitum.. but
| citizens have not made those agreements.. So uniform
| services will just make those agreements mandatory.. there
| is no end to this.
|
| _especially_ irksome is piling on requirements for
| constant check-in among law abiding people who own property
| and pay taxes.. while somehow hundreds of thousands can
| walk around living in parks in the South ? I am not even
| extreme on this topic .. it just defies common sense and
| says Slippery Slope in giant letters
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| You have to fill out request forms, and have an
| interview, and if they like you they allow you to use the
| app.
|
| People want it because it lets them do what they want
| with less hassle and it makes many trips possible that
| are impossible if you have to cross the border at a
| manned border crossing.
|
| But of course, there is a slippery slope danger.
| avianlyric wrote:
| Sounds like you've got people moving backwards and
| forwards frequently between the U.S. and Canada. Both
| countries are going to want to track those boarder
| crossings, doing it in an app just makes it easier for
| everyone.
|
| Don't really see what a bunch of people wondering around
| parks all located in the same country has to do with
| boaters moving between a smorgasbord of islands belonging
| to two different countries, and thus randomly crossing
| the boarder back and forth multiple times in a single
| trip.
| lazyasciiart wrote:
| You are annoyed that border controls don't also affect
| what people can do thousands of miles away from the
| border? And you are _also_ afraid of a slippery slope
| where border controls become ever more strict and
| interfering? That is a very odd pair of thoughts.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| None of it is required, at least on the ocean in
| Washington.
|
| When you cross the border on the water, you aren't
| required to report until you go to land (if you never set
| foot in Canada, but only sail through territorial waters,
| there is no requirement to report), at which point you
| must go to a specified customs dock, and present your
| paperwork.
| toomuchtodo wrote:
| Love this idea, I too would love to have the stamping still
| available, perhaps at an automated kiosk you stick your
| passport in to receive your sentimental stamp.
| woleium wrote:
| or a global e-stamp service?
| JohannesH wrote:
| I Denmark we _can_ have digital drivers licenses, id cards,
| public transportation passes, online authentication etc.All of
| them have physical counteeparts. I dont think there are any
| plans to outphase any of the physical counteeparts for various
| good reasons such as people not having phones, accessibility,
| compatibility and so on.
|
| I imagine that the issues for making, deploying and integrating
| a digital-only passport on a global scale would be much harder.
| dataviz1000 wrote:
| I am bummed entering Malaysia and Mexico because they no longer
| stamp my passport as I pass through the electronic gates.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| France still does it with their e-gates for non EU citizens.
| Of course you could give them any passport to stamp and I
| think they would.
|
| Can't tell if the stamper has a plum job or if it's a
| punishment.
| Symbiote wrote:
| The EU will stop stamping passports some time next year,
| assuming the new system isn't further delayed.
| csomar wrote:
| Don't go through the electronic gates? Also if you ask the
| officer and give him a reason (travel memories or bs like
| that), they might do it.
| dkjaudyeqooe wrote:
| That is available now in the UK if you use the automatic gates.
| Soon in the EU stamps will be a thing of the past but you may
| be able to request one, if you can find a person to do it.
|
| The problem you'll have is that the stamps may not carry the
| force of law, so not much help in a pinch.
| anonymouscaller wrote:
| New technology in the airport is incredibly scary. I recently
| flew between the United States and Canada and it is mind boggling
| how trivial passports are already becoming. I began by looking
| into a camera on a kiosk, where as soon as my face was
| recognized, I walked up to the CBP officer and he verified my
| identify with a quick look at my passport and ticket. I don't see
| the passport lasting much longer, at last in the US, Canada, and
| Europe.
| eszed wrote:
| Singapore is even further ahead, with no human in the (regular)
| loop at all. I walked up to the first barrier, it scanned my
| face and opened. My name appeared on the screen inside,
| _before_ I inserted my passport. Then the system "thought"
| about it for a few seconds, and then the second barrier opened.
|
| I appreciated the complete lack of a passport line (going and
| coming), but got squicked out about the heuristics the system
| (might) run through before it let me through.
|
| That's where all of this is headed, though.
| gruez wrote:
| >but got squicked out about the heuristics the system (might)
| run through before it let me through.
|
| I think you're overestimating how sophisticated the system
| is. Most online check-in processes require you to input your
| passport details. In-person check-in probably results in the
| gate agent doing something similar. If the arrival airport
| has this information, it's pretty easy to look up the
| corresponding face on file (that you provided when you
| applied for a passport), and use that to generate a list of
| faces you need to match against. From there, it's only a
| matter of matching a given face to a face in that set.
| Moreover, given that arrivals are staggered, that set is
| going to be relatively small. A wide-body aircraft holds
| around 300 passengers. If 3 of them arrive at the same time,
| to the same passport control point, that's only around 1000
| faces to match against. That's far easier to do than trying
| to match against all faces in the entire country, for
| instance.
| eszed wrote:
| Sure, the _recognition_ step is fairly simplistic.
|
| It's not inconceivable, however, that the system connects
| to whatever other dossier(s) have been built against my
| identity. Even before we consider ML facial recognition by
| public cameras (probably not yet possible at scale?), the
| Singaporean SIM card I bought was connected to my passport,
| which gives them my location: both absolute and relative to
| anyone I might have spent time around.
|
| I mean, I was a normal tourist, and not doing anything
| shady whilst I was there, but... False positives exist, and
| I wouldn't have wanted to have been pulled out of the queue
| for questioning about something I couldn't possibly have
| explained.
|
| Singaporeans seem to have a different point of view about
| surveillance, however. Even the (fairly low-key) human
| rights activist I chatted with thought it was all great,
| and said something along the lines of "the cameras keep us
| safe". "Privacy" as we tend to think about it on this board
| may be a mainly Anglo-Saxon concern, for what that's worth.
| gruez wrote:
| >It's not inconceivable, however, that the system
| connects to whatever other dossier(s) have been built
| against my identity. Even before we consider ML facial
| recognition by public cameras (probably not yet possible
| at scale?), the Singaporean SIM card I bought was
| connected to my passport, which gives them my location:
| both absolute and relative to anyone I might have spent
| time around.
|
| Why do they need a dossier on you when the passenger
| manifest has your exact identity? Or are you talking
| about them tracking you in the country after you left
| customs? Given that passport control is already plastered
| with cameras, and you need to present an identity
| document containing your face to enter the country, I'm
| not sure why people feel extra creeped out by an
| automated passport control gate. If they wanted to track
| you they already have all they need.
| eszed wrote:
| I'm talking about them tracking me in the country after I
| left customs.
| matwood wrote:
| ATL has this in parts for domestic flights if you're eligible
| for 'Digital ID'. Passport control in the US is still for the
| most part way behind other countries.
| Symbiote wrote:
| Why is there an identity check for a domestic flight
| anyway?
| whimsicalism wrote:
| Most of the EU is no human in the loop as well if you are a
| Schengen-area citizen
| refurb wrote:
| Singapore has moved to _no passport_ entry for many
| countries. As in you don 't need to show your passport at
| all.
|
| https://www.ica.gov.sg/news-and-
| publications/newsroom/media-...
| macleginn wrote:
| When flying into Toronto last year, I filled in my rudimentary
| customs declaration on the machine and then was waved through
| right out. Not only did I not interact with a border officer, I
| did not pass any kind of e-gate either.
| Klonoar wrote:
| You can opt out of the facial recognition in many cases. I do.
| no_wizard wrote:
| Passports can die when they merge the passport with my drivers
| license, at least here in the US.
|
| It would be great if we had a universal ID program. Even better
| if that program also replaced Social Security numbers.
|
| Alas, it'll likely never happen in my life time.
| DaSHacka wrote:
| > Passports can die when they merge the passport with my
| drivers license, at least here in the US.
|
| They've been trying to do this, with "Real IDs"
|
| https://www.usa.gov/real-id
|
| Not exactly what you're asking for, but it's more akin to
| making Drivers licenses like passport cards
| jltsiren wrote:
| Passports can die when there is reliable internet everywhere in
| the world. Including remote wilderness areas you paid a lot of
| money to visit and disaster zones where basic infrastructure
| has failed.
| eszed wrote:
| How close are the various satellite systems to achieving
| this?
| lazide wrote:
| Not even close. Half the time you can't even get workable
| mobile internet at customs.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| Isn't that by design?
| lazide wrote:
| In a few spots - but not usually. Unless you count
| terrible design as intentional design.
| gruez wrote:
| Why do you need "reliable internet"? There's no reason why a
| digital id system requires internet access to function. If
| it's stored on your phone, all it needs to do is be able to
| transmit a pre-signed blob that contains your biographical
| details. The verifier doesn't need internet either. All
| that's needed to verify a given electronic passport is a list
| of root authorities for every country, which can easily be
| preloaded onto a device.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| > If it's stored on your phone
|
| What do you if your phone is stolen or broken?
| Muromec wrote:
| The same you do when your passport is stolen -- panic and
| reissue. If anything, reissuing a digital id on a new
| phone is less hassle, as long as you didn't lose every
| other physical id, the sim card and reissue codes for
| esim.
|
| All of that already works and wasn't even revoked for
| military-aged men for the usual reasons.
|
| Dealing with consulates and embassies is much more pain
| in the ass compared to redownloading the app and banging
| in a number of cold restore cases.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| Aren't you concerned about the rising dependency on that
| little spy in your pocket?
| Muromec wrote:
| Compared to spending half a day just to get to the
| embassy and hoping they woke up and choose not to be
| useless today? Or paying notary public and having
| apostile stump and then paying for DHL?
|
| No, no I don't, not for this reason at least. I can have
| my x509 issued without a phone as well and it works with
| an opening source library.
|
| I don't use any of that regularly, but the alternatives I
| experienced wrre much, much worse.
| Muromec wrote:
| Those however are not the places where you usually need to
| show a passport anyway.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| There are too many varied political interests against this.
|
| I have plenty of left-wing friends who refuse to get realids
| due to something about illegal immigrants and right-wing people
| hate it because they view it as central govt overreach.
| bausgwi678 wrote:
| It would be a nice start if the EU could stop inking passports on
| the way in and out as well as computer recording it all. Such a
| waste of time and ink
| latexr wrote:
| > if the EU could stop inking passports on the way in and out
|
| I'm not sure what you're referring to. Where are you traveling
| from? I never had my EU passport inked when traveling to the UK
| or US. Within the Schengen Area I never needed a passport.
| sokoloff wrote:
| I'm a US citizen and get stamped on the way in and out of
| Schengen area every time. I think they do the same for UK
| post-Brexit.
| switch007 wrote:
| They need to track time in the Schengen zone for non-EU
| citizens, which is what the stamps are mostly for AIUI.
|
| Common in/out the Schengen with my UK passport post Brexit -
| got lots of stamps. Though it varies by country
| RyJones wrote:
| Every round trip from the USA to Ukraine gets six stamps
| for me. I'm going to have to renew about five years early
| on this passport. I'll get the fat passport next time.
| ascorbic wrote:
| My UK passport has been stamped on every EU entry I've made
| since Brexit, except Ireland.
| rswail wrote:
| Like every other non-EU citizen when entering/exiting the
| Schengen area.
|
| As an AU passport holder it's been like that for at least
| 30 years.
| Muromec wrote:
| Well, the parliament blessed this idea in 2017, so any time in
| 2025, the entry exit system will be operational. Public sector
| timelines are like that.
| tonfa wrote:
| EES is rolling out next year: https://home-
| affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen-borders-...
| mrbadguy wrote:
| This is an odd complaint. It's not a waste of anything to
| update a record on an official document. Indeed, it's more
| frustrating when they don't because now I can't see my full
| travel history by looking at my passport. Yes that exists
| somewhere in a DB but I don't have access to that.
| mr_toad wrote:
| Those pages are some of the most expensive square centimetres
| of paper in the world.
| foundart wrote:
| I wonder how paperless passports would work for folks with
| multiple passports.
| sureIy wrote:
| The title is hyperbolic. You still do need a passport and
| there's no such thing as a digital passport. You need to
| register your document at some point, so that one is what you
| will use. Using a different passport would mean logging in and
| changing your data; your user will be unchanged.
| foundart wrote:
| The article is speculating about the future based on current
| trends, so of course there is not yet a digital passport.
|
| The current experiments seem to be fractured across
| governments and I would be very surprised to see a
| centralized system (as your response seems to imply) come
| into play until well after various governments introduce
| their own digital systems.
| Muromec wrote:
| It's not even future, it's rolled out in Ukraine to millions
| of people and it uses silly face id over the camera to
| authenticate you for remote things. You can't cross borders
| with it, as it requires amending the treaties, but otherwise
| it's a thing.
| sureIy wrote:
| > You can't cross borders with it,
|
| Ok so it's not a passport. What is being described by the
| article are just national identities based on physical
| cards. Estonia has been doing that for a very long time as
| well.
| matwood wrote:
| Also, I had to leave my passport at a consulate to get a visa
| added. How would that work? It seems the coordination alone
| would make something like moving to full digital take a long
| time to happen.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| I've done the online process to get a visa before (India and
| Australia), you just upload pictures of your passport and
| they code a visa to your passport number.
|
| Without a paper passport I'm not sure how that would work.
| They could code it to another piece of identity I guess (like
| your ID card), but there would still be something unless
| biometrics become advanced enough.
| matwood wrote:
| I assumed that's how it should work and was surprised they
| needed my passport. It was sent back with an entirely new
| picture page. When I've crossed borders they don't seem to
| know I even have a visa unless I tell them /shrug.
| Havoc wrote:
| Same as current ones - each gov does their own thing & are
| largely mutually blind aside from info their
| spooks/police/taxman may share. Chances of this being widely
| coordinated are slim.
|
| Everyone is quite keen on maintaining sovereignty on matters
| like this aside from tightly integrated blocs like EU
| throw748499 wrote:
| Ukraine cancelled consular services for all men abroad. It is not
| possible to renew passport without risking freedom.
|
| I think many men will keep their paper passports with 10 year
| expiration date. And renew it every year "just in case".
| lifestyleguru wrote:
| The outcome of ubiquitous digitalization will vary depending on
| number of orifices in your crotch. Number of orifices will be
| verified by medical commission when you reach adulthood. In
| case of Ukrainian men this ruling likely impacts only those non
| affluent, their rich kids seem to have a good time in EU and
| around the world.
| Muromec wrote:
| That's the usual thing. You either cross the border before
| turning 18, or you have fathered three kids (surprisingly,
| they don't have to be from the same woman) or you have a
| special exception for special reasons and promise to be back.
| Muromec wrote:
| Last time I checked, the story was something like -- you need
| to log into the system, make you personal details up to date so
| they can summon you for the best job in the world, but they
| don't actually summon anyone from abroad yet for obvious
| reasons.
| mcfedr wrote:
| Risking freedom? You mean doing your part for freedom for all
| jmclnx wrote:
| Only if :
|
| 1. I get a Free Smart Phone for use for this
|
| 2. The service is Free
|
| Passport books have a 1 time fee and for 10 years in the country
| I live in. I expect the same for Phone use.
| smitty1e wrote:
| We can label the service 'Free', for "17 layers of indirection
| in paying for it" values of 'Free'.
|
| Not much above emotional attachment is free here under the sun.
| lazide wrote:
| In my experience, emotional attachment is often the most
| expensive thing there is.
| lifestyleguru wrote:
| Believe me you don't want free smartphone from the government.
| I'm astonished how easily people accepted to load everything
| onto their private smartphones. This happened so fast, within
| one decade.
| pessimizer wrote:
| A free smartphone _only_ for this. I don 't want it on my
| phone.
| undersuit wrote:
| I like my RSA fob, they changed the app name one day and I
| wasted time working with the IT department.
| steelframe wrote:
| Yup. You can always keep it powered off and in a Faraday
| sleeve until it's time to use it at the border. It should
| be possible to distribute a device that's smaller and
| lighter than a passport, and I'd be all for it, so long as
| it's at least as reliable and/or if there's a fallback
| process when it isn't.
| quacker wrote:
| In the US, it currently costs $165 in total for a passport book
| (new or renewal).[1]
|
| That's more than enough for a cheap android phone.
|
| 1. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/how-
| app...
| fredski42 wrote:
| I remember a sci-fi short story from a long time ago where
| everything that defined you as a person was digitized and
| available in your smartphone. The story was about a person
| loosing his smartphone and coming into all kinds of admin horror
| to regain his identity but eventually ended up broke sleeping
| under the bridge..
| oniony wrote:
| Sounds like a marginally more modern Brazil.
| namaria wrote:
| You don't end up under a bridge in Brazil for losing your
| phone.
|
| You end up there by being born in the wrong family or part of
| town.
| jorgesborges wrote:
| This is how I feel leaving the house without my phone.
| dmwilcox wrote:
| I feel like this was my last week. Welcome to the UK as an
| American tech worker. You use a custom Android ROM, too bad,
| you can't setup your visa. Want to book something on Ryan Air
| too bad, "computer says no" (really I should never do this
| again for many reasons).
|
| The level of expectation that your phone is a set of handcuffs
| that you do not own is high. If you own your device and not
| vice versa, things just don't work in this world. And honestly
| why would I want a computer that I didn't control anyway?
| notpushkin wrote:
| Oh yeah, that really sucks. I've had a bunch of apps deem my
| non-rooted, bootloader relocked phone too insecure for them
| to operate. Nothing critical for me, fortunately (though I do
| miss Google Pay).
| rsync wrote:
| I sympathize but a much, much simpler way to negotiate all of
| this is a dedicated phone for "official" ID activities.
|
| In some ways it is the opposite of a "burner" phone - sort of
| a quarantined device that only interacts with your real,
| official, legal identity.
| int_19h wrote:
| It's probably not that, but there's a sci-fi novel "The Age of
| the Pussyfoot" by Frederik Pohl, in which one of the key
| technologies is a device that everybody carries on their belt
| that is described thus:
|
| > The remote-access computer transponder called the "joymaker"
| is your most valuable single possession in your new life. If
| you can imagine a combination of telephone, credit card, alarm
| clock, pocket bar, reference library, and full-time secretary,
| you will have sketched some of the functions provided by your
| joymaker.
|
| The protagonist eventually finds out from personal experience
| that people who do _not_ have those things (e.g. because they
| can 't afford them) are basically social outcasts, not the
| least because they can't hold most jobs, or even look for one.
| But even beyond that, not having the device means that you
| aren't being tracked means that you can e.g. be murdered
| without much of a consequence. And so people who can't afford
| the real thing still shell out money for a _mockup_ of a
| joymaker to carry on the belt, just so they aren 't obvious
| targets.
|
| The most interesting thing about that novel is that it was
| published in 1969, long before cellphones or "the cloud" were a
| thing. A rare case of a sci-fi author taking a contemporary hot
| bleeding edge tech (remote time-sharing terminals for
| mainframes) and correctly extrapolating it into the future.
| Pohl even gave a broadly correct timeframe when he talked about
| the novel:
|
| > I do not really think it will be that long. Not five
| centuries. Perhaps not even five decades.
| shrx wrote:
| Related: Philip K. Dick's Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said is
| a great novel on this topic.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_My_Tears,_the_Policeman_S...
| pjmlp wrote:
| Every time I try such machines, I end up talking to a police
| officer, instead of being recognised.
|
| Additionally, passports don't need to be charged.
| jauntywundrkind wrote:
| Google working to build web standards to let companies demand &
| verify state issued credentials too. This feels like such a scary
| scary step for the internet, letting companies demand strong
| verification.
|
| Normally a huge fan of a bigger web platform, but will control,
| coral, and track users and that's a #rfc8890 violation of very
| high degree.
|
| Digital Credentials API:
| https://developer.chrome.com/blog/digital-credentials-api-or...
| underseacables wrote:
| I was so sad I did not get a stamp in my passport when I visited
| Australia. Everything is electronic
| bigfatkitten wrote:
| I do two or three return trips between Australia and the US
| every year. My four year old passport has no stamps at all.
| Klonoar wrote:
| You can ask a security officer after the immigrations desk to
| stamp it. It's entirely dependent on the officer and whether
| the stamp is at the desk that day, but my wife and I recently
| both got our passports stamped this way.
|
| No guarantee, etc - but theoretically still possible as of
| 2024.
| vouaobrasil wrote:
| I hate this idea. I hate having to depend on my phone. I rarely
| use it and often let it run out of charge. They can pry my
| passport from my cold dead hands.
| silisili wrote:
| I think the article is poorly titled, as it doesn't mean the
| end of paper passports. I can't see that happening in my
| lifetime - we still have checks and credit cards despite most
| young people just tapping their phone around.
|
| I'm all for digitalizing documents as an option, but not if it
| means losing physical copies. So far the government has been on
| the side of not discarding them - we still get paper social
| security cards.
| Muromec wrote:
| The reason hard copies of most documents will exist for a
| long time -- building federated digital systems is a huge
| pain in the ass.
|
| Sure, you can have a digital passport for purposes of
| authenticating yourself, which is operated by your national
| government. Will this government allow the same level of
| access to the embassy of North Korea or some other
| geopolitical adversary or just to a random sim card issuing
| shop in a mall oh the other side of the globe? Maybe they
| will in the same way corona certificates were implemented.
| Now will every single place that legitimately needs to have a
| copy of your id on file be bothered to interface with this
| system and all slightly incompatible versions of it provided
| by _other_ governments? Probably not.
|
| And passports are kinda sorta simple to begin with.
| steelframe wrote:
| > we still have checks and credit cards despite most young
| people just tapping their phone around
|
| Unfortunately we're losing cash. There is one of those modern
| "chic" mixed-business-and-apartments developments not far
| from my house. Shortly after they completed construction my
| 12-year-old daughter visited the ice cream store there with
| her friends, but she couldn't pay for her ice cream when she
| got to the register because they didn't accept cash. They
| ended up just giving her the ice cream.
|
| Most of the restaurants there have a "no cash" policy posted
| in their windows and at the till. No skin off my back.
| They're overpriced for what they are anyway, so I'm happy to
| give my business to other local restaurants _not_ in the
| fancy mixed-use development.
| rswail wrote:
| The US has checks. Most other nations have mostly (or
| completely) phased them out for more than 2 decades.
|
| Credit cards are just chip carriers now. Mag stripe is being
| phased out. So either you use the chip connection or use
| contactless. The cards issued by my bank (Australia) aren't
| embossed and the mag stripes will probably disappear once the
| banking 3rd world (US + some of Asia) catches up with the
| rest of the world.
|
| Oh and contactless is literally the same protocol as the
| contact connections, so "just tapping their phone around" is
| _exactly_ the same (to the terminal) as "just tapping their
| card around" or "just inserting their card to read".
|
| Government ID _could_ be done in a privacy enhanced way that
| only provides the requestor attestation of the required
| information and _nothing_ else.
|
| eg * "Is this person that just provided an encrypted and
| unreadable blob from their ID card over 18?" "Yes".
|
| * "Is the person that just provided an encrypted and
| unreadable blob called John Doe?" "Yes".
|
| The government _already_ has all of your identification from
| birth to death.
|
| By (mostly) definition, your identification _is_ what your
| local government says it is.
| zabzonk wrote:
| Well, not in the UK. Here you need a passport to partake in any
| significant financial activity - I had to get one to sell my
| flat, and you need one to open a bank account. Neither of these
| were needed 20 or so years ago. It's basically introducing ID
| cards by the backdoor, when the majority of the UK has always
| been against them (but civil servants and politicians love them).
| And all under the nebulous reason of "preventing money
| laundering".
|
| I have to say though that the guy I spoke to at the Passport
| Office (a civil servant!) was very nice, and they did git it to
| me quickly. Never used it again 4 years later, though.
| pwdisswordfishz wrote:
| Well, of course. They didn't bring back blue covers only to get
| rid of the document completely.
| mrshadowgoose wrote:
| Completely ignorant here. What happens to individuals that are
| ineligible for passport issuance? Are they just extra-screwed?
| zabzonk wrote:
| Pretty much. But they may have other IDs like driving
| licences. And they are introducing electronic visas for
| immigrants.
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| Do you need a passport, or do you need some form of government
| ID?
|
| Presumably the 15% of UK residents who have no passport are
| still able to identify themselves somehow...
| Havoc wrote:
| All three of my last UK jobs all wanted to see passports on
| day one for everyone (Brits and foreign) to verify work
| status so in more formalized part of economy everyone has one
| ianburrell wrote:
| Instead of replacing passports with apps, in between would
| support passport cards. Better to allow using national ID cards
| as passports. The digital data could be saved on card but with
| physical photo and info as backup. It also works for people
| without smartphone.
|
| The US has passport cards but they only work for land and sea
| from Canada, Mexico, and Caribbean countries.
| Koshkin wrote:
| Makes perfect sense...
| loloquwowndueo wrote:
| Recent Canadian passports are basically a plastic card glued to
| the first page of a paper passport. For backwards compatibility
| it seems - it's obvious the plastic card contains the chip and
| everything that matters.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| it's the same in the US
| placardloop wrote:
| Chips have been present in passports, even the all-paper
| ones, since the 1990s, with all the same information. They're
| called "Biometric Passports". The plastic card in newer
| passports is for durability and making them more difficult to
| forge.
|
| But the chip doesn't contain "everything that matters". The
| chips have biometric info (hence the name) like legal name,
| sex, nationality, photos, and sometimes fingerprints. But the
| bulk of a passport book is made up of tens of pages where
| stamps, stickers, and even entire visa documents can be
| stapled/attached. None of these are present in the chip.
| WeylandYutani wrote:
| Some people fly to places like Afghanistan which do not
| have all these fancy computers I suppose.
| abeppu wrote:
| > The chips have biometric info (hence the name) like legal
| name, sex, nationality, photos, and sometimes fingerprints
|
| ... legal names and nationalities aren't "biometric info"
| though. Is it fair to say that the chip contains the
| content of the travel document at the time it was issued
| (doesn't the chip also include the passport number,
| issue/expiration dates, etc) but not the stamps/visas that
| are added after the passport is issued ? I think everyone
| gets that the chip isn't updated when you get stamped into
| or out of a country.
| placardloop wrote:
| > Is it fair to say that the chip contains the content of
| the travel document at the time it was issued
|
| Yes to expiration date and number (although afaik it does
| vary because each country may include or exclude certain
| information), but in general no, because even if you have
| a visa issued to you at the time of a passport being
| issued (like at the time of a passport renewal), the chip
| will not have that information. The chip information is
| basically just proving who you are, but doesn't have any
| info on where you are permitted to go (other than
| permissions implied by your characteristics like
| nationality). That information is stored elsewhere, like
| in the passport pages or a country's internal immigration
| records.
| rswail wrote:
| The chip has at least the same information that is printed
| in machine readable format on the photo page.
|
| It has all the same fields in one or two lines with "<"
| field separators.
|
| I've had the chip read, I've also seen the passport being
| scanned to read those lines.
|
| A passport has two components, one is identification of the
| holder, the other is the travel (entry/exit stamps) history
| and potentially the conditions of entry (visas etc).
| jltsiren wrote:
| National ID cards are widely used for international travel in
| Europe. You just need to standardize them, so that every
| checkpoint doesn't have to support 200 weird national
| standards.
| notpushkin wrote:
| I think the digital portion is pretty standard nowadays (same
| as biometric passports, plus any national addons like
| e-signing on top of that). And physical features are
| customizable, but that's atrue for passports as well.
| twelve40 wrote:
| you're talking about humans, a civilization that cannot fully
| win the decades-long fight for one portable charging format,
| and proposing all governments get on the same page about
| their passports?
| rswail wrote:
| The machine readable printed parts are covered by an
| international standard ISO/IEC 7501-1 [1].
|
| So despite your cynicism, all governments literally are on
| the same page about passports.
|
| What do people think organizations like ISO, ITU, ICAO etc
| _do_ other than exactly this sort of standardization
| process of human activities that are common across national
| boundaries?
|
| [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine-readable_passport
| twelve40 wrote:
| i don't even know if it would work for majority of Mexico tbh.
| Around covid time, especially in non-Cancun airports, they
| would basically refuse to let me leave the country if the
| stupid physical entry stamp was not perfectly readable. Explain
| to them the digital revolution.
| csomar wrote:
| This is basically what biometric passports are. They can fit in
| a national ID card. However, for backward compatibility, the
| papers are also provided.
| jchw wrote:
| Well I hope the numbers we're counting down from are pretty high
| then, because my interest in using my phone or face as a digital
| ID is non-existent. Can't we at _least_ do smart cards? What if I
| don 't _want_ to travel with a phone? And let me guess: my
| options are some Android phone or an iPhone, and there 's no need
| to worry about any potential new entrants to the smartphone
| market for the foreseeable future. We needed more barriers to
| entry for that market, it was getting awfully competitive!
|
| Yeah, sounds good. Again, I hope those days are numbered higher
| than mine.
| mr_toad wrote:
| Governments passively support a Windows desktop monopoly, why
| would they care about a cellphone duopoly?
| jchw wrote:
| My question: how about we just don't do this? Can we all
| agree the "governments depending on ActiveX controls for
| important things" thing was a terrible idea and just not?
| Smart cards would work fine, and there's even standards for
| it!
|
| The answer: nope, it's almost certainly time for round 2.
| Plus some forced facial recognition for good measure.
|
| Like I said, I hope the number on those days starts pretty
| high.
| woodruffw wrote:
| I've been in a handful of places where no meaningful digital
| proof of identity/legal entry could possibly be produced:
| deserts, small towns with no cell service, etc. It's hard to
| imagine the expectation of a physical passport with a physical
| stamp in it going away anytime soon in these places.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| direct to cellular via satellite is reducing all deadzones to
| zero, barring some mountains at angle
|
| just playing devil's advocate with the way I see it heading
| dghlsakjg wrote:
| There are still significant portions of the world where
| having electricity, internet, and running water all working
| at the same time is not as common as you would hope.
|
| Expecting always on satellite connections in a lot of these
| places is asking for a lot.
| staunton wrote:
| > Expecting always on satellite connections in a lot of
| these places is asking for a lot.
|
| It might be easier than having reliable power grids or
| running water supply. Assuming at least some of the
| satellite-internet projects work out (Starlink, Amazon's
| thing, Chinese thing, European thing, ...) all you need
| might be a fairly affordable (comparing to infrastructure
| for running water) hardware that can run on demand using
| batteries.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| the needed infrastructure can be just at the passport
| checkpoints
|
| AST Spacemobile and Starlink's user experience will just
| require mobile phones. No adapters or base station. they'll
| find a way to power them, or extend signal from them. for
| the passport holder, that will just be client side and no
| connectivity necessary.
| torstenvl wrote:
| No. It isn't "just at the passport checkpoints." It's
| everywhere. Passports are the only form of ID most people
| have abroad that are recognized by foreign governments
| and establishments.
|
| Good luck to the French dude trying to drink in the U.S.
| without a passport, or getting stopped by the police in
| Lodz and not having any valid identification on you.
| f33d5173 wrote:
| Any government id eg drivers license will work for that.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| This is very much false in much of the world. Especially
| if you have foreign paperwork, it's very likely a
| passport will be required by any kind of official asking
| for any other paperwork from you.
| Kwpolska wrote:
| 15 years ago, a Polish driver named "Prawo Jazdy" was
| causing a real nuisance to the Irish police, seemingly
| all over the country. Turns out they couldn't parse the
| document and they were looking for a man named "Driver's
| Licence". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ire
| land/7899171....
|
| Nowadays, the licenses in the EU are standardized, but at
| the same time, they are completely unreadable if you
| don't know the standard, since data fields are numbered,
| but not usually described in English.
| monksy wrote:
| Nope that'll get you threatened to have the police called
| on you at the Walmart in Burlington NC. (Austrian federal
| ID trying to buy alcohol)
| woodruffw wrote:
| I've been in some _very_ steep mountain valleys :-)
|
| But as others have noted: assuming satellite cellular access
| is also a big leap. I once had someone check my papers by
| taking my passport, writing a copy of the entry visa number
| on it (itself hand-written), and then finding me hours later
| after they were able to find a landline to call the border
| service with.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| it seems like the exact same would be possible with an app
| woodruffw wrote:
| You're going to use an app over a landline?
| whimsicalism wrote:
| if my app has a code, presumably they're equally able to
| verify it over a landline
| woodruffw wrote:
| Sure, assuming the phone isn't dead. I've also been in
| disaster-stricken places where that wasn't a certainty.
| lxgr wrote:
| Even in a world with ubiquitous connectivity, this introduced
| a single point of failure. At least some offline capabilities
| are essential for something as crucial as travel documents.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| i don't see how a physical passport with a physical stamp is
| any more meaningful than an offline smartphone with a passport
| app, either way the receiver needs some connection if they want
| to do any real verification
| woodruffw wrote:
| It's meaningful to a bored police officer in a less-than-
| democratic country who has nothing better to do than make my
| life annoying.
|
| I'm not denying that it's security theater or claiming that
| it's _more_ meaningful; I 'm saying solely that there are
| physical expectations that are going to be very hard to shake
| once you go off the beaten path.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| I took 'could possibly' + reference to cell service to mean
| that there is some sort of technical/infrastructural
| limitation. If your point is that the world is big and any
| effort to do this would take a long, long time to fully
| penetrate beyond a few highly developed Western countries,
| then I definitely agree.
| woodruffw wrote:
| Yep, that was the sole point.
| FreePalestine1 wrote:
| I think things generally start off as experiments in first
| world countries then trickle down eventually to third world
| countries. That's just the reality. 20 years ago not
| everything could be digitized because internet/smartphone
| access isn't widespread, but now more or less every single
| person on the planet has some sort of internet access.
| Things change eventually, they gotta start somewhere.
| fragmede wrote:
| More like 68% of people, which seems pretty far from
| "more or less every single person on the planet".
|
| https://www.statista.com/statistics/273018/number-of-
| interne...
| umeshunni wrote:
| But is probably very close to every single adult on the
| planet.
| rswail wrote:
| I assume that you are excluding the US banking system
| from that "trickle down" effect.
| anticensor wrote:
| US banking is behind many developed countries due to
| security model mismatch.
| technothrasher wrote:
| > It's meaningful to a bored police officer in a less-than-
| democratic country who has nothing better to do than make
| my life annoying.
|
| I've found that money is more meaningful than anything else
| to those bored officers. Either they don't actually care
| that much about your documents, or if they do, they're
| simply looking for a bribe. At least that's been my
| experience at out of the way border crossings in southern
| Africa.
|
| The most ridiculous experience I had was crossing into
| Zimbabwe with my 11 year old son. The officer wanted to see
| his birth certificate, which was still in the car that had
| already been driven across the border. So I had to leave
| the building, walk across the border, which nobody batted
| an eye at, get the document, walk back across the border,
| re-enter the building, and then present the document to the
| officer who didn't even look at it before letting me
| proceed to leave the building and walk across the border
| once again.
| tonyarkles wrote:
| I'm curious about your experience with this. A friend did
| a big tour through Africa about 15 years ago and when he
| got home he commented that you had to be careful to
| right-size your bribe: if your bribe was missing it not
| big enough, you'd get hassled about paperwork or maybe
| have to pay a "fine" or "document processing fee" to make
| up for it; if your bribe was too big, though, then you
| and the people you were travelling with would be subject
| to intense scrutiny. From what I recall about $5 USD was
| about right and $20 USD could result in the contents of
| your suitcase getting dumped in the dirt and very
| thoroughly rummaged through.
| hilux wrote:
| Currently, a physical passport is globally accepted as its
| own "verification." That's the point.
| boredatoms wrote:
| That factor is so important that the US intentionally
| restricted the usability of the US passport card to keep
| that status quo
| rswail wrote:
| Physical passports, in the same way as physical currency,
| have numerous mechanisms for reducing the ability to forge
| the documents.
|
| So these documents can be checked locally without any form of
| communications to some central authority (which doesn't exist
| across national boundaries).
|
| They have visible anti forgery like UV printed symbols and
| information, underprinted background text and patterns, etc
| etc.
|
| So they are more "meaningful" than an offline smartphone with
| a passport app in that they do not require anything other
| than the officer's ability to see, feel and read the
| documents.
| quacker wrote:
| If being forgery-resistant is the argument for paper docs,
| a passport that identifies me using strong cryptography is
| just as forgery-resistant (likely more so). And we could do
| a cryptographic verification without a persistent internet
| connection. (Or can't we?)
| ddingus wrote:
| Paper does not have downtime. Tech does.
| placardloop wrote:
| Yea, lots of comments in here advocating for full digital or
| "just use passport cards" are coming from a narrow perspective
| of only having to use passports in established travel routes
| like major international airports or developed countries. Most
| of these suggestions just simply wouldn't work in the majority
| of the land border crossings I've experienced in places like
| Laos, Cambodia, rural China, Thailand, Peru, Bolivia, etc.
| sojournerc wrote:
| Or... Canada! I've biked from Montana into Alberta and the
| border crossing was in the middle of forest in the middle of
| nowhere. Definitely no reception or wifi there.
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| Put a star link there, problem solved. That works pretty
| much anywhere in the world.
| sojournerc wrote:
| But there currently isn't a problem with physical
| passports. They work!
|
| Why introduce new problems? I was bike touring and wasn't
| carrying a phone. Isn't that allowed?
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| They work, sure. It just involves queueing, lots of
| manual checks, endless amounts of misery at airports,
| etc. But it works. But I would label it as a problem.
|
| I like being able to skip all of that. That works too.
| It's not that hard.
| sojournerc wrote:
| I wouldn't qualify standing in a line as endless
| misery...
|
| Regardless, I have global entry so I do appreciate the
| desire to skip a line, but I don't follow how 100%
| digitization solves the need for checkpoints completely.
| It just seems like techno utopianism to me.
| ocular-rockular wrote:
| This is such a brain dead solution to a problem that
| shouldn't exist. Why push for digitization?
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| Because it works, quite well actually. It isn't that hard
| or expensive. And it's convenient. Why push for the old
| stuff? There's absolutely nothing fun about having to
| queue for some TSA prick for two hours after a
| transatlantic flight who hates his pointless, miserable
| life (and rightfully so). All that stuff can be automated
| these days.
| sojournerc wrote:
| TSA does not do border control, and in fact border
| control is usually relatively fast compared to being re-
| screened through security (TSA).
|
| Edit: It's convenient if you are a digital native, but
| elderly folks, among others, will not find it easier than
| a physical passport. The push to require everyone to have
| a digital device to participate in society is troubling
| to me.
| ocular-rockular wrote:
| I guess if that's how you feel about it, more power to
| you. The day I get away from almost all tech will be a
| good day. Also I get that TSA sucks but I don't think
| they deserve the vitriol you're throwing.
| placardloop wrote:
| This is the narrow perspective I was referring to. There
| are border crossings in the world where there is no
| reliable electricity, and laptops/smartphones are a rare
| luxury. Starlink is not a solution to these problems.
| mkl wrote:
| https://archive.ph/pKO54
| indulona wrote:
| good luck with that ( tth [?]? rR)
| GrabbinD33ze69 wrote:
| Yea, no thanks.
|
| if this really does somehow become the only option, I'd imagine
| the best you could do is just carry a cheap android phone for
| this sole purpose.
| ryandrake wrote:
| If the government is going to mandate that you carry a phone in
| order to travel, they should provide the phone with the
| passport. I don't know how any of these "smartphone only"
| official document schemes are expected to work for people who
| don't carry smartphones.
| fragmede wrote:
| There was a lesser known Obamaphone program where the
| government did exactly that. it's not a bad idea.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| There are significant downsides to the digitalization of travel
| documents. The biggest one I can think of is ownership - the UK
| is moving to an entirely digital visa system and bringing in an
| ESTA style system called ETA for visa free countries.
| Unfortunately this means that residency cards for noncitizens are
| being phased out. This means that when the Home Office messes up
| and accidentally deletes your immigration status, or you are at
| an airport with no internet access, you have no evidence
| whatsoever of what status you hold. It also means you will no
| longer be in possession of any records that might be useful years
| in the future when the current database containing immigration
| records will likely have been replaced. It's much easier to keep
| a piece of paper around for 30+ years than it is to make sure a
| digital record doesn't rot in that time.
|
| I feel strongly that any future digital travel credentials that
| are offered by governments should be able to operate entirely
| offline, and provide records that can be retained by the data
| subject. That means that revocation is harder, but IMO that's a
| tradeoff that is worth making to avoid another Windrush scandal.
|
| This has already become a pain when dealing with countries that
| don't stamp passports, because when you need to apply for
| something that asks for your travel history over the past 10
| years, you might not have any records anymore.
| zahlman wrote:
| For me, this is a human rights issue. Article 13 of
| https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...
| is not contingent upon ownership of a smartphone.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| I do agree that conceptually the government shouldn't force
| you to buy things from private companies to exercise your
| rights.
|
| However, you already have to buy a passport (often for a lot
| of money) in most countries, so pragmatically, I don't know
| that it's a hugely different thing to ask. However, there's a
| big difference for children, the elderly, and people with
| disabilities.
|
| Immigration tends to stretch human rights though. It costs
| >10k gbp in visa fees for a British citizen to return to the
| UK with a non-UK spouse from arrival to settlement. You also
| need to be earning a fair bit of money, and not have the
| British partner as a stay at home spouse. I would say that
| frustrates article 8 ECHR, but the government disagrees.
|
| There are countless examples of similar issues re
| international travel and immigration. Smartphone ownership is
| simply one of many.
| shakna wrote:
| If you are convicted of hacking in Australia, you may be
| subject to a lifetime order that prevents you from owning a
| smartphone. However, once your parole is done, you do have
| freedom of travel.
|
| Ownership of a device simply is not a guarantee you can
| rest on - even before you get to those who may not be able
| to use them.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| I completely agree. There are a variety of reasons why a
| person might be digitally excluded.
|
| Governments need to make sure that people can access the
| services that they're entitled to through a wide variety
| of channels, including physically visiting an office if
| necessary.
|
| Though I will say, at a practical level, you will find
| that it's increasingly difficult for people with criminal
| records to travel internationally (due to entry
| requirements).
| sudoshred wrote:
| Entitled is a strong word, eligible is maybe more
| precise.
| jolmg wrote:
| "They're entitled to" or "Have a right to" seem more
| precise than "eligible". At least in my country, I think
| everyone (citizens) has the right to a passport. It's not
| something you need to be chosen for as "eligible" would
| imply.
| HeatrayEnjoyer wrote:
| Entitled is more accurate.
| zahlman wrote:
| >However, you already have to buy a passport (often for a
| lot of money) in most countries
|
| From the government, paying what is more an administration
| fee than the actual cost of the good, yes.
|
| This is about principles, not economics.
| c-cube wrote:
| A paper passport can be valid for 10 years (maybe more, I'm
| not sure). It can be stashed in a safe. It can be left
| alone for several years and be picked up just before
| leaving for the airport.
|
| A smartphone will not satisfy any of these properties.
| zamadatix wrote:
| The UDHR is more a list of (short descriptions of) ideals
| than exact wording of the law to get there or when other
| things take priority.
|
| The 2 sentences making up that article don't really live up
| to that level of useful detail.
| rkagerer wrote:
| Especially when these days it's near impossible to truly own
| your own smartphone.
| steelframe wrote:
| I've simply been buying Pixel phones and using the
| GrapheneOS web installation tool. It holds your hand
| through unlocking the bootloader and flashing the new image
| on, and it always works without a hitch. Super-easy and
| reliable. I suppose you still don't "own" the radio
| firmware, but at least you can have a perfectly functional
| Google-free Android phone that way.
|
| I suppose the real trouble comes from needing to install
| software from the Google Play store in order to travel. If
| you feel you need to do that you can create a new Google
| account just for that installation of the Google Play from
| the phone itself and then never give it any of your
| personal information such as a payment method. GrapheneOS
| claims to do a pretty good job of sandboxing Google Play
| components.
|
| Regardless I agree with others here who think it should
| always be possible to travel without any electronics on
| your person.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| I use GrapheneOS, and wouldn't have it any other way, but
| its prolonged existence depends on Google not making any
| asshole moves in their next Pixels, and on the (highly
| appreciated) efforts of a few dedicated individuals.
|
| And like Linux on the desktop: it offers a better
| experience for everyone who either has the knowledge to
| step off the beaten path, or has someone who supports
| them. But that is just a few percent of people. The rest
| gets what market forces dictate.
| rkagerer wrote:
| Chris Woope nicely summarizes the main anti-user features
| I'd like to surgically remove from GrapheneOS:
|
| https://github.com/chriswoope/resign-android-
| image?tab=readm...
|
| I just wish there were a supported and easier way of
| achieving this. Would love any suggestions.
| steelframe wrote:
| I fully agree one should own their own keys. I suppose in
| the case of my phone I feel I can't let perfect be the
| enemy of good.
| wkat4242 wrote:
| And when you do really own it, you will probably be blocked
| from using the ID app just like most banking apps won't
| work on custom firmware.
| hilux wrote:
| > That means that revocation is harder, but IMO that's a
| tradeoff that is worth making to avoid another Windrush
| scandal.
|
| I don't think the UK (Or US, other other European) government
| are too torn up about the possibility of another Windrush
| scandal.
|
| But I generally agree with you. A physical passport offers a
| degree of psychological and real "security" that the promise of
| some cloud-hosted credential absolutely does not.
|
| As a minor aside, I (US citizen) was once able to able to enter
| the US (at Toronto Pearson airport) despite having left my
| passport in some hotel. I just told the stern American guy "Yo
| soy American." Apparently they have ways of telling.
| frutiger wrote:
| > I feel strongly that any future digital travel credentials
| that are offered by governments should be able to operate
| entirely offline
|
| How offline is the current system today, where officers
| swipe/scan our paper passports into a machine?
| noodlesUK wrote:
| With the current system, the passport chip can be validated
| offline if you have the CAs cached. If your computer is
| completely dead, you can look at the documents under a UV
| light and verify authenticity the old fashioned way. You
| could definitely design something that was verifiable offline
| using phones, but you'd be harder pressed to have it
| verifiable _without_ any tech whatsoever.
| ksec wrote:
| Exactly this when I said in another comment I want both.
| The old physical protection of UV light and verify
| authenticity the old fashioned way. It doesn't even need a
| stamp but a physical thing that prove my identity I can
| own. Not another number in the system.
|
| This is the same thing I am against a cashless society
| where the society no longer accept physical cash. And in
| 2012, and later 2014 when Apple Pay was introduced all the
| way to 2017, 99% of HN were in support of getting rid of
| physical cash.
| ddingus wrote:
| Paper has no downtime.
|
| In times of disaster, the people welding paper along with
| the people who can trade on their street cred, familiar
| friends, family, will get stuff, do necessary business.
|
| Everyone else will be essentially panhandling.
|
| Mind you, not a damn thing wrong with panhandling. That
| is not a crime.
|
| My point is to avoid having to do that where possible and
| practical.
| ivanbalepin wrote:
| but that is not my problem
|
| my passport has been through a washing machine accidentally
| and i can still present it in the remotest of countries no
| matter the internet or whatever, and it works
|
| in the US, yes they are switching to face recognition and
| often they barely even look at the passport anymore. I enjoy
| the convenience of that, but i don't wish to share this data
| with all the countries in the world, nor to be on the hook
| for having a connected device everywhere in the world for
| basic movements.
| tsimionescu wrote:
| You may not wish to share it, but it's a simple choice:if
| those countries want that data, you'll either share it or
| be refused entry. Passports are only a small part of that,
| regardless of what data is stored on them. The US for
| example requires you to provide fingerprints and submit to
| a face scan, that then get permananetly stored (for non-
| citizens). They also require you to submit to a phone and
| laptop search if the TSA agent believes it's necessary. You
| are of course free to refuse all of this, and go back to
| the country you were coming from.
|
| So having digital vs physical passports opens no new
| avenues of private data sharing with regimes you might not
| trust: they already have a right to demand any kind of data
| they want about you.
| rkagerer wrote:
| Transparency is another important one.
|
| One reason I dislike such digital ID schemes because I can't
| actually tell what information (or metadata) is being forked
| over. Even if it does purport to show me, I'm just supposed to
| trust what it says?
|
| No thank you. A piece of paper provides a common format that's
| easy for both me and the official inspecting it to understand.
| pxeboot wrote:
| Passports have had NFC chips with the potential to store
| additional data for at least the past 10 years.
| bruce511 wrote:
| Not to mention the Passport Number which links the passport
| to databases of other information.
|
| Like the information on my visa application, or the
| fingerprints collected at that time, or my travel history,
| hotel stays, and so on.
|
| Data does not have your be "in the passport" to follow me
| around.
| ascorbic wrote:
| What do you think happens when passport control scans your
| passport? The fact that the identifier is a paper document vs
| a digital token will make zero difference to the data that
| they track. It's linked to innumerable national and
| international databases which they will be tracking. Your
| privacy is basically zero when you cross borders.
| mcfedr wrote:
| The difference is when computer says no, you can show that
| computer is wrong
| henearkr wrote:
| No, because the fake passeport detection is done by
| checking the database anyway.
|
| Honestly I don't see any other way. Else it becomes a
| paradise for forgery.
| Zanni wrote:
| I have a (USA) digital driver's license that I've presented
| to TSA via my iPhone a couple of times. It's _explicit_
| exactly what information is being shared. You tap (as if to
| pay), the information being requested displays on the screen,
| and you double-click to acknowledge and send.
|
| Note: USA "paper" passports have included an RFID chip since
| 2007.
| Xen9 wrote:
| Most comment here are not related to the problem, which is your
| interest & my interest & interest of 98% of HN others at least
| conflicting with the interest of those who control how humans
| vote. We know how things ought to be if everyone wanted them to
| be good for most humans. None of this discussion will however
| convince anyone to work more altruistically in reality.
|
| Those who control the public opinion know that there's some
| opposition who confuses the problems with the conflict. They
| laugh since no one who thinks legislation like in the link
| would be generally bad can do anything. The ignorant will vote
| what the Orwellianishly-named "smartphone" will command them.
|
| In the next five years, it's likely the option to stab the
| kings will be for the first time removed, since robotic
| militias will mean no insurance CEO can simply be shot. This
| means there will be zero limits to what cruelty they'll do you,
| since no matter how torturous it gets you'll be unable to even
| violently resist this. You'll have no democratic mouth, but you
| must scream. Completes cyberpunkization well.
|
| ---
|
| Aside: US drones + US satellites that enable global
| connectivity of drones was a rather obvious consequence of
| Starlink ~4 years ago. If they really want some person, they
| now can search most of Earth in few hours with the drones +
| computer vision, and soon with land robots, all connected
| through Starlink (starshield to use the euphemism). The irony
| is how this at the same time solves the connectivity problem.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| Who are "those who control the public opinion"?
| Xen9 wrote:
| In case I did, I would make sure I don't get pinpointed to,
| but in the US perhaps look at CFR / state department
| veterans & advertising corporations' stockholders & Google.
|
| In Europe traditional news sources there got economically
| slaughtered & replaced by few big online 1995-2005. This
| qas a consequence 1970s & 1980s academic networks working
| closely with US on web, and US then doing what it did with
| Google.
|
| If you can influence what ends up in the social media feed
| of those deciding about university curriculums and/or most
| politicians, that's quite powerful also.
|
| In Russia & China, there seems to be less hidden, less
| culture of valuing "free media."
|
| ---
|
| That public opinion "matters" but gets shaped is very
| plausible if you consider that most of history it didn't
| matter unless the public got very angry.
|
| Century of Self describes the process before Zuboff.
|
| One might argue that control of public opinion was
| originally more psychoanalytic idea, and then became more
| Skinnerian with computers.
| eastbound wrote:
| Chief-level people in newspapers.
| petre wrote:
| Biometric databases will be hacked and leaked, criminals will
| perform cosmetic surgery to assume new identities.
|
| > US drones + US satellites that enable global connectivity
| of drones was a rather obvious consequence of Starlink ~4
| years ago.
|
| One would probaby be safe from the US in Serbia, Transnistria
| and other non-US friendly places for a while, given enough
| bribe money. The US won't sneak drones into sovereign
| airspace without another state's approval even if they're
| looking for high level targets such as Osama bin Laden, Al
| Baghdadi, Qassem Soleimani. We are not talking about failed
| states or states in civil war like Syria, Libya or atates
| under US assistance like Iraq here.
| pixelesque wrote:
| As a Brit with NZ permanent residency, there hasn't been
| residency stickers in passports for NZ residency for years now,
| so the only thing I have is a number and a PDF I can print
| out...
| OJFord wrote:
| > the UK is moving to an entirely digital visa system and
| bringing in an ESTA style system called ETA for visa free
| countries.
|
| Canada, at least, already uses an ETA system called exactly
| that (or I guess TAE in French), so that probably had greater
| influence than the US ESTA.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| Yes, and so do NZ and Australia. I actually think the biggest
| influencer is probably EITAS, which is the same thing for the
| Schengen area (yet to come into force).
|
| It's a part of a wider trend going forward. I will say the
| UK/EU systems are fairly unique in that they aren't excluding
| each other. Canadians don't need ESTAs nor do Americans need
| Canadian ETAs
| acheong08 wrote:
| I for one am really worried about the UK Digital Visa system.
| There are just so many ways it can break down
|
| Airport WiFi - people can easily run deauth with aircrack-ng.
| Email server might be down Phone out of battery Etc
| makeitdouble wrote:
| Those are all valid concerns.
|
| Then, the digital passport's ship has already sailed for better
| or for worse, and all these questions are solved in other ways.
|
| > when the Home Office messes up and accidentally deletes your
| immigration status
|
| You're toast either way, because it will be checked at the
| airport. You'll have to deal with the immigration officer and
| have them do something, because you won't go very far with just
| a paper that will be checked against the backend. In my
| experience it has already been the case for a while now.
|
| You still better have the reference paper that will help
| identify your visa procedure, dates etc. But it's already just
| a key to the info in the DB.
|
| > you will no longer be in possession of any records
|
| Print out the papers and keep track of the important pieces.
| It's the same for everything else in your life, including tax
| documents, birth certificates etc.
|
| Even in the olden days, the papers you had only had value
| against the agency's record that could prove their validity. If
| you had to prove residency in some specific period, having a
| stamp on your passport would mean very little if the agency
| denied having any records of it. So it's exactly the same
| weight as if you printed out a certificate while the DB blew
| out and no data about it are left.
|
| PS: I think in previous time people were also so much more
| lenient. It wasn't much a question of physical papers or not,
| and more on how much few people cared if your info was valid or
| not. I had an error in my name in many official documents, and
| while people noticed it, a simple "they typed it wrong"
| explanation was enough in 99% situations.
| noodlesUK wrote:
| If you have records of your own and pointers to other
| organizations contemporaneous records, you may have an
| opportunity to appeal if your DB record is lost.
|
| The home office rather notoriously destroyed/never kept its
| own records of arrivals of commonwealth citizens, which was
| one of the steps leading to the Windrush scandal.
|
| Many older records only exist in paper form, and often the
| receipts are good enough. This is especially true when you're
| dealing with 3rd party governments. A foreign government is
| going to put a lot more stock (rightly or wrongly) on a birth
| certificate that is printed on fancy paper covered in
| security features than it is to a printout of an email.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| I second both points. You absolutely need to keep your own
| papers and records and it's fully expected as well.
|
| Also yes fancy paper is more valued than junky ones when
| nothing else remains, but random printouts are also
| provided everyday, and they're fine with it. At the crux of
| it, the foreign gov usually doesn't actually care that much
| about your birth certificate: they want due diligence at
| most, even if they'll have a more strict public facing
| facade. It's cross referenced only when it really matters
| (e.g. you're trying to get citizenship or a background
| check for security clearance ?)
| crabbone wrote:
| > Even in the olden days, the papers you had only had value
| against the agency's record that could prove their validity.
|
| That's not true. For example, Jews (or people who wouldn't be
| always considered Jews, but those who would still fall under
| the Law of Return) have to produce some kind of document
| which states that their ancestor was Jewish. Often these
| documents were issued by authorities that no longer exist.
| And it was up to immigration authorities to decide whether
| they trust such a paper or not. Basically, anything coming
| from Western Ukraine prior to Soviet occupation would be
| issued by such authorities, same with Baltics.
|
| Unrelated to above: a lot of databases are only required to
| store their records for so long. For instance, the
| transcripts from most colleges can be produced within 10 or
| so years after graduation. Then it's like they've never
| existed. So, if for whatever reason you need to show your
| grades later, you better have a paper version.
| cyanydeez wrote:
| Tech bros need something to sell. Sew current maga vs musk
| AnarchismIsCool wrote:
| What if we just didn't do borders instead? Seems like it worked
| fine for the EU.
| syndicatedjelly wrote:
| The EU has borders
| AnarchismIsCool wrote:
| Im aware but I apologize, we're in a thread about passports
| and I forgot I was on pendant news.
| ascorbic wrote:
| ^pedant
| syndicatedjelly wrote:
| Correct answer
| Havoc wrote:
| They already did this with the EU settled scheme in UK.
|
| It's a little disconcerting because you're literally one
| ,,computer says no" incident away from not being able to return
| to your own bed.
|
| Literally zero paperwork was issued to fall back on so you're
| entirely dependent on a DB server somewhere
|
| Probably going to get a UK passport too just to manage risk.
| (Already qualify)
| noodlesUK wrote:
| Yeah and they're now rolling that out to everyone, not just EU
| citizens. This sucks the most for visa nationals because their
| passport isn't good enough to get into the country. They _need_
| the server to be alive and their documents linked to even make
| it to the border, let alone to cross it.
|
| Travel to the UK is going to be really chaotic from 1st Jan
| when all BRPs expire, and 8th Jan when US citizens and other
| non-EU nationals require ETAs.
| Havoc wrote:
| Ah good point. Hadn't occurred to me that I could still get
| in as tourist so to speak
| csomar wrote:
| Quite a juicy target if you want to disrupt a whole nation.
| Putin taking notes.
| chupasaurus wrote:
| > Putin taking notes.
|
| Russian visas are machine-readable since 1997 to ease the DB
| request.
| conartist6 wrote:
| Oh ** I hope not.
|
| If so I'm going to be the one asshole who presents the document
| on my laptop just because I don't believe that people have the
| right to invite themselves onto my phone.
| OutOfHere wrote:
| But they can invite themselves to your laptop?
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| Easier to run a VM and a FOSS OS on your laptop.
| Maxious wrote:
| Reminder that it is a condition of crossing many western
| country borders that you can be asked to hand over devices to
| be cellebrite'd. Refusal? YMMV
|
| > Address the massive amount of data from passenger digital
| devices
|
| > Collect all relevant data from every available data source
| uncovered at the border
|
| https://cellebrite.com/en/border-security/
| WeylandYutani wrote:
| In my country everyone has to be able to ID themselves when asked
| so I have to carry my passport around. If they can put it on my
| phone that would be nice.
|
| On the other hand if my phone is gone I am prety much dead no
| money no papers just another john doe...
| StanislavPetrov wrote:
| "Digital only" is a truly terrible idea for passports, currency
| and everything else. Even if everything worked perfectly (it
| never does) and all the databases were completely secure (they
| aren't), what happens when there is a power outage? What happens
| when the network goes down? What happens when you drop your phone
| in the toilet? In a perfect world nobody in a position of power
| would be remotely stupid enough to suggest going all digital for
| anything critically important, yet here we are.
| steelframe wrote:
| > What happens when the network goes down?
|
| When I was traveling in London in 2018 I was barely able to pay
| for the groceries I needed in order to eat that night because I
| was checking out just as the global VISA outage started
| happening.
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2018/jun/01/visa-outa...
|
| The machine took a long time to process my payment, but after a
| couple of attempts it managed to go through. As I left the
| store I noticed a long line forming for the self-checkout
| registers, and nobody else was able to get their payments to go
| through. There was apparently no option to fall back to cash at
| that store.
|
| Whenever I travel now one of the bits of research I do now is
| to make sure I have a plan for getting basic necessities like
| food and shelter should an electronic payment system outage
| like that happen again.
| rkagerer wrote:
| https://archive.ph/pKO54
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| Pasports should be cards. Visas should also be cards. The
| booklets and stickers should be done away with.
| steelframe wrote:
| I have a card passport that I can use when crossing the
| Canadian-US border by land. In fact just my driver's license is
| technically all I need.
|
| The problem was when I caught COVID while on a trip to
| Vancouver. I was getting very sick and needed to get back home
| ASAP, but since I took the train I couldn't drive. All the car
| rental companies in the area were completely booked out. I
| thought, "Great, I guess I'll just go to the airport and catch
| a flight," except since I had crossed by land on the way in I
| didn't have the document I needed to fly out.
|
| Fortunately I was able to find a bus early the next morning,
| but it was looking pretty sketchy for a few hours until I could
| figure out how to get back home. After that experience I'll
| never travel out of the country again without my actual
| passport.
| csomar wrote:
| Everyone here is freaking out but here are a few things from my
| experience:
|
| 1. There is very little to no chance that _all_ the governments
| in the world are going to cooperate to create a centralized
| database about their citizens. Most countries don 't want to do
| it and I don't see China or the US doing it anytime soon.
|
| 2. The biometric passport is _not_ a paper passport already. The
| same way the SIM chip disappeared, your "passport" can disappear
| too.
|
| 3. The non-biometric passport will remain valid for at least
| 20-30 more years. I am talking about these _very_ old passport
| that only a few handful of countries still issue including the
| USA (for particular situations). This backward compatibility will
| mean that the paper passports (even non-biometric!) will remain
| supported for a very long time.
| macleginn wrote:
| Some countries can still only issue non-biometric passports in
| their consulates, so expats who can't stay in their "main"
| country for a long time are stuck with those.
| csomar wrote:
| Lots of edge cases. (ie: US citizens who have never been to
| the US)
| palmfacehn wrote:
| > There is very little to no chance that all the governments in
| the world are going to cooperate to create a centralized
| database about their citizens
|
| Agree that a 100% rollout is unlikely. However the UN, WEF and
| associated groups have been seeking global Digital ID for
| awhile now. Apparently it will help them protect us all from
| Climate Change.
|
| https://www.undp.org/blog/why-legal-identity-crucial-tacklin...
| mitch-crn wrote:
| You will be numbered as well.
|
| Revelation 13:17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that
| had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his
| name.
| palmfacehn wrote:
| In response, I've stopped traveling to surveillance states or
| high (in)security states. I'm unwilling to participate in a
| society where I am expected to produce ID when walking down the
| street or can be accused of vague pseudo-crimes like being,
| "suspicious looking".
|
| I know my boycott won't mean much to those who are willing to put
| their entire lives onto their personal tracking devices. Maybe it
| even seems unreasonable to those who are accustomed to complying
| with testicular exams at the airport. That's totally fine. I'm
| not here to convince them of my principles. We all have different
| values.
|
| The point is I can leave the house without a device or ID and
| live a perfectly normal life.
| steelframe wrote:
| Since I run GrapheneOS on a Google-less Pixel phone, I can't
| install airline apps. So what I typically do is use my web
| browser to check in for my flight and get a PDF of my boarding
| pass, then I take a screenshot of the QR code.
|
| The last time I did that the TSA scanner was able to read the QR
| code just fine, but the tablet app that the flight attendant was
| using at the gate couldn't read it for some reason. After about
| 10 seconds of fidgeting with the tablet they asked me what my
| name and seat number was. I told them, and after checking the
| list they let me through onto the plane. It looked like they
| tapped around in the app to override the QR code scan or
| something.
|
| Fast-forward 20 minutes, and we don't push back from the gate
| when it's time to depart. After another 5 minutes of delay they
| got on the PA system and said something about the passenger count
| being off and that the airline's headquarters wouldn't authorize
| departure until they figured that out. At one point about half an
| hour into this a flight attendant walked over to my seat and
| leaned over to adjust the air flow thingy, which I thought was a
| super weird and random thing to do. In all it took nearly an hour
| of everyone sitting on the plane at the gate before they figured
| it out and authorized departure.
|
| I actually have no idea where the breakdown was, because this
| happened at the gate when I flew earlier and it wasn't at all a
| problem. I presume the flight attendant scanning QR codes at the
| gate didn't hit the right buttons on their tablet that time. If
| we're going to rely on peoples' completely random personal
| devices to track authorization to travel, our systems need to be
| a lot better than this. Exceptions to whatever they think should
| be the "typical" flow should be straightforward and streamlined.
|
| In the meantime since they've gotten rid of kiosks in my local
| airport I guess I'll be going to the front desk every time and
| ask for printed boarding passes.
| quenix wrote:
| What do you suggest the whole leaning over and adjusting the
| air flow thing was about?
| ukuina wrote:
| Validation of the passenger manifest.
| snowwrestler wrote:
| There are a lot of suppositions loosely glued together here.
| The count being off happens sometimes and may not have had
| anything to do with you. I've had it happen several times when
| traveling.
|
| Flight attendants need to adjust airflow when the plane will be
| sitting on the tarmac longer than expected. On older aircraft
| those little nozzles are the only way they can control cabin
| temp while on the ground. They keep an eye on cabin temp
| readout and adjust nozzles to change it. Again, I've had
| attendants reach in and adjust (usually open) nozzles when
| we're stuck on the ground.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| I've repeatedly wished for a mechanism integrated into a phone
| that allows displaying one or more documents (e.g. QR codes,
| tickets, some other form of document to be displayed) while
| having the phone otherwise locked (in lockdown mode, so a
| password is required to unlock it). That would make it much safer
| to display a QR code on your phone without the net effect of
| having your phone unlocked when going through security.
|
| Until then, I'll continue to print such things out on paper.
| Freak_NL wrote:
| Why until then? Print in any case. It is an excellent way to
| have all of your important travel documents separate from your
| smartphone. Use you smartphone as the backup, not the other way
| around.
| tmjwid wrote:
| My Eink phone can do this (Hisense model), but the sacrifice of
| using one might be too big just for an on-demand QR code.
| criddell wrote:
| If you put your boarding passes into the Wallet app, you can
| access them from the lock screen of an iPhone.
| JoshTriplett wrote:
| This _seems_ to have been the case on older Android (the
| "Quick Access Wallet" setting introduced in Android 12), but
| if that still exists on current Android 15 I haven't found
| it.
| seu wrote:
| The title is slightly misleading, as the article seems to focus
| on flying between certain countries. Good luck expecting to cross
| 90% of the worlds borders without a paper passport, where these
| technologies will never appear.
|
| The author seems to lack the capacity (or experience!) to imagine
| other ways of moving around the world that are not flying.
| whatevaa wrote:
| What happens if I loose my phone while travelling? Stolen,
| smashed, broken, exploded like Samsung?
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| Or if your battery runs out. Or if it has a bug. Or if it runs
| a non approved OS. Or if it's too old. Or if it's being running
| an update.
| Klonoar wrote:
| I'm annoyed that I had to scroll this far to find "battery
| runs out" as an issue. I travel frequently and have had this
| happen a number of times.
|
| Paper passports shouldn't go away. The USA should, though,
| stop issuing 50 page passports by default. Way too many pages
| for how less frequent passport stamps have become for the
| average traveler.
| quacker wrote:
| How is this any different a concern than losing your physical
| passport while traveling?
| highcountess wrote:
| It's funny how all the dystopian predictions of supposed
| "conspiracy theorists" (a term graciously coined by the ever
| helpful CIA, a bastion of freedom for all) seem to always come to
| fruition.
|
| It basically is a prison planet already, the remaining aspects of
| the humanity of it are just being automated out slowly but
| surely. The worst tyrannical dictatorships in history could not
| have even dreamt of the current state of things in their wildest
| dreams, and we are all racing at breakneck speed towards a hell
| of total domination by sadistic tyrants.
| highcountess wrote:
| What happens if you don't have a "smart phone" or any
| phone/tracking devices at all?
|
| Are we all getting bar code tattoos and will be prosecuted for
| not having a barcode tattoo?
| whitehexagon wrote:
| As soon as the local banks here started the push of 'you'll be
| locked out of your account if you dont activate our App' I
| switched to a dumb-phone. Tech has turned against us, and as a
| developer I feel very sad about that.
|
| I strongly believe that a smart-phone should not be a requirement
| to partake in society.
|
| Something as basic and important as a passport should not be
| entrusted to these ad-phones. Same with the push for smart-phone
| fintech / digital currency, or card-only retail. The 'easy
| option' seems to cost us more and more freedoms.
|
| 'This app requires permission to access your passport details.
| This is only to confirm your date of birth, and thus your
| eligibility to access the ad infested internet'
|
| Having ranted about all that, I have to say that requesting a new
| UK passport last month was The best website experience I have had
| in a very long time. Simple UI, clear process, and worked
| perfectly without needing the latest nightly build of whatever
| new browser API / GB framework is the monthly fad. Just a shame
| it is quite ugly compared to the previous European one.
| ProllyInfamous wrote:
| >I strongly believe that a smart-phone should not be a
| requirement to partake in society.
|
| I'm 40; I stopped using email in 2016 (save temp-burners for a
| few necessary signups); essentially never do I carry a cellular
| phone, nor do I app/text.
|
| My bank treats me like a criminal, locking me out of online
| banking; occassionally they cancel my debit card ("didn't you
| see our app notification?!"). Jokes on them, though: I live one
| block away from this bank, so I just walk in constantly to ask
| them for account balances/transactions, and to poke fun at
| their ideas of security (e.g. text 2FA, which login.gov
| specifically declares "bad practice").
|
| It's actually kind of nice, having built rapore with a few of
| the tellers who already know why I'm visiting their location so
| often: bad company policies, dependant upon smartphone apps.
|
| Should physical identification ever be legislated out of
| existance, I'd probably just expatriate (at this point, semi-
| retired).
| ddingus wrote:
| Which bank did that ?!?
| HeatrayEnjoyer wrote:
| Which bank is that?
|
| None of my banks or credit card companies have any app
| requirement like that.
| gregoriol wrote:
| As soon as you put everything on a single point of failure, it
| will fail you.
|
| It is not a good idea to have keys, documents, passes, ... all on
| a smartphone: it can break if dropped, it can be stolen anytime,
| it can have no battery. Those devices are not good for such
| important elements of a travel.
| cyberpunk wrote:
| Ah! I know this one! You buy the compatible watch and tablet
| too! ;)
| ProllyInfamous wrote:
| >As soon as you put everything on a single point of failure, it
| will fail you.
|
| And thus: Gregoriol's Law is born.
| fredfoo wrote:
| This article seems like a baseless assertion to me. There are
| lots of fast track like systems that are basically equivalent to
| a return to the earlier practices of using licenses at borders.
| That wasn't anywhere near a viable replacement to the issuance of
| all passports back then and the same issues are present now.
| surfingdino wrote:
| Two thoughts:
|
| 1. How would it work in case of dual citizenship? Would one be
| able to choose under which nationality they want to cross the
| border?
|
| 2. "(...) no fallback systems in place." This is worrying. Do we
| just send people back (at their own cost, I presume), because
| they were rejected by the system? This seems like a pile of
| lawsuits for unlawfully preventing family members to visit each
| other or generally restricting freedom to travel with no
| accountability.
| Aachen wrote:
| Had to read a bit but, ah, there it is: the war on general
| computation
|
| > A DTC, according to the United Nations' International Civil
| Aviation Organization (ICAO), which is behind the approach, is
| made up of two parts: a virtual element, which represents the
| information stored on passports, and a physical part, the bit on
| your phone. The two are cryptographically linked to ensure
| they're not forgeries.
|
| Your phone, apparently, can't simply carry this data and provide
| that at your choice to the passport checkpoint for it to verify
| by taking a picture of you and comparing it against their
| database. No, it needs to be locked down. If you are the admin on
| your device, you could make a copy, so it sounds like this will
| never be allowed to run on a phone that isn't locked
|
| Smartphones are supplanting computers for a lot of people but
| manufacturers lock it down in a way that you can't fully see (let
| alone control) what it does. Some manufacturers let you flip a
| switch and get this access, but then big corps and governments
| try to counteract that and refuse to provide their service on
| your unlocked device
|
| For a smartcard (bank chip, SIM card, yubikey, passport, oyster
| card, etc.) this isn't a problem because the device is dedicated.
| I don't need access to the private key on a SIM card because I've
| got no intention of forging it. Would be cool to see its
| internals but it doesn't have a microphone or its own uplink.
| However, I do want access to my smartphone because I use it for
| all sorts of things (including making a full backup instead of
| dealing with individual apps' manual or adb export functionality)
| and it processes all sorts of personal data about me that I want
| to be in control of (I often open an app's data folder to see
| what is stored, queued for uploading when I don't give it network
| access (SwiftKey has telemetry reports queued for years and
| years), or to modify some setting that the GUI doesn't expose).
| One of my primary devices wouldn't really be mine if I need it to
| carry these things requiring DRM
|
| These applications have legitimate reasons to want to be on a
| smartcard, for it would require an always-online database who the
| counterparty (such as border control) _can_ trust if they can 't
| trust me or my device. It just doesn't belong on a smartphone,
| like get your own secure storage if that's what you want me to
| carry. Payment, passports, and public transport can all bundle
| their thingies onto one smartcard just fine (if they can
| standardise on phones, they can also standardise on a much
| simpler device with more uniform functionality). It could even be
| a smartcard chip _inside_ my phone, but it shouldn 't _be_ my
| phone with my data on it that needs to be locked down for this
| unrelated purpose
| slackfan wrote:
| Cold, dead hands.
| bookofjoe wrote:
| https://archive.ph/pKO54
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-12-28 23:01 UTC)