Public Safety Minister Vic Toews states that the government’s proposed lawful access legislation is on a par with a phonebook linking phone numbers to a residential address. This is highly misleading (The Poop On E-Snoop – letters, Dec. 3).
Anyone can look up information in the phonebook, but they cannot compel Rogers or Bell to turn over “phone record” data that the government is after. The minister has not noted that his proposal would expand “phone records” from three items (name, address, telephone number) to 11. We are familiar with what those three items mean, but how many can decode the mysterious acronyms of digital and mobile communications: the IP address, the MIN, the SPIN, the ESN, the IMEI, the IMSI, the SIM? The minister isn’t talking about phone records, but about giving authorities access to a range of identifiers that tell a great deal about our personal lives. So, can we please have a debate about the Internet instead of one about “phonebooks”?
Category: Writing
The potential for ubiquitous surveillance that emerges with Enhanced Drivers Licenses (EDLs) could only be imagined by the Stasi in Communist East Germany, but is a genuinely looming specter for contemporary North American democracies. Provincial and state governments in North America are proposing to ‘enhance’ driver’s licenses in coming years by including a Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chips in them. These ‘enhanced’ licenses emit unique identifiers and will be optional when they are first available to the public, though they will be required to enter the United States using a driver’s license beginning in July 2009. The proposed Enhanced Driver’s Licenses (EDLs) are intended to be associated with border security, but are also accompanied with concerns linked to individuals’ reasonable expectations of privacy.
An early piece I wrote on enhanced drivers licenses.