Enhanced driver's licences too smart for their own good appeared in the Toronto Star recently. It was written by Roch Tassé (coordinator of the International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group) and Stuart Trew (The Council of Canadians’ trade campaigner).
A common refrain coming out of Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano's visit to Ottawa and Detroit last week was that the Canada-U.S. border is getting thicker and stickier even as Canadian officials work overtime to implement measures that are meant to get us across that border more efficiently and securely.
One of those measures – “enhanced” drivers licences (EDLs) now available in Ontario, Quebec, B.C. and Manitoba – has been rushed into production to meet today's implementation date of the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative. This unilateral U.S. law requires all travellers entering the United States to show a valid passport or other form of secure identification when crossing the border.
But as privacy and civil liberties groups have been saying for a while, the EDL card poses its own thick and sticky questions that have not been satisfactorily answered by either the federal government, which has jurisdiction over privacy and citizenship matters, or the provincial ministries issuing the new “enhanced” licences.
For example, why introduce a new citizenship document specific to the Canada-U.S. border when the internationally recognized passport will do the trick?
Or, as even the smart-card industry wonders, why include technology used for monitoring the movement of livestock and other commodities in a citizenship document?
More crucially, why ignore calls from Canada's federal and provincial privacy commissioners, as well as groups like the civil liberty groups to put a freeze on “enhanced” licences until they can be adequately debated and assessed by Parliament? It's not as if there's nothing to talk about.
First, the radio frequency identification devices (RFID) that will be used to transmit the personal ID number in your EDL to border officials contain no security or authentication features, cannot be turned off, and are designed to be read at distances of more than 10 metres using inexpensive and commercially available technology.
This creates a significant threat of “surreptitious location tracking,” according to Canada's privacy commissioners. The protective sleeve proposed by several provincial governments is demonstrably unreliable at blocking the RFID signal and constitutes an unacceptable privacy risk.
Facial recognition screening of all card applicants, as proposed in Ontario and B.C. to reduce fraud, has a shaky success rate at best, creating a significant and unacceptable risk of false positive matches, which could increase wait times as even more people are pulled aside for questioning.
Recently, a journalist for La Presse demonstrated just how insecure Quebec's EDLs are by successfully reading the number of a colleague's card and cloning that card with a different but similar photograph. It might explain why, when announcing Quebec's EDL card this year, Premier Jean Charest could point only to hypothetical benefits.
Furthermore, the range of personal information collected through EDL programs, once shared with U.S. authorities, can be circulated excessively among a whole range of agencies under the authority of the Department of Homeland Security. It's important to note that Canada's privacy laws do not hold once that information crosses the border.
So while the border may appear to be getting thicker for some, it is becoming increasingly permeable to flows of personal information on Canadian citizens to U.S. security and immigration databases, where it can be used to mine for what the DHS considers risky behaviour.
Some provincial governments have taken these concerns seriously. Based on the high costs involved with a new identity document, the lack of clear benefits to travellers, the significant privacy risks, and the lack of prior public consultation, the Saskatchewan government suspended its own proposed EDL project this year. The New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island governments, citing excessive costs, have also abandoned theirs.
The Harper government owes it to Canadians to freeze the EDL program now and hold a parliamentary hearing into the new technology, its alleged benefits and the stated privacy risks.
Napolitano has repeatedly said that from now on Canadians must treat the U.S. border as any other international checkpoint. It might feel like an inconvenience for some who are used to crossing into the U.S. without a passport, but the costs – real and in terms of privacy – of these provincial EDL projects will be much higher.
My main problem with this article is the title, which should have been, “Enhanced driver's licenses too stupid for their own good”.
That's because we have the technology to design smart driver's licenses and passports so they have NONE of the problems described – but so far, our governments don't do it.
I expect it is we as technologists who are largely responsible for this. We haven't found the ways of communicating with governments, and more to the point, with the public and its advocates, about the fact that these problems can be eliminated.
From what I have been told, the new German identity card represents a real step forward in this regard. I promise to look into the details and write about them.