kvp#6
Nehany idezet a belinkelt oldalon talalhato whitepaper-bol:
"A safer Internet needs to support the option of identities based directly or derivatively upon in-person proofing, thus enabling the issuance of credentials that do not depend upon the possession of a shared secret by the person whose identity or identity claim is being verified. To some extent, government activities and markets themselves are driving in-person-proofing regimes. For example, many governments are issuing (or considering issuing) e-ID cards for government functions. But, to
be clear, in-person proofing need not be controlled by governmental or quasi-governmental organizations; banks often have relationships with their customers that start with branch visits, schools have relationships with students and may routinely take in-person attendance, and employers know their employees and often issue identity cards based upon in-person proofing.
With that background in mind, it remains true that ensuring that people can be identified raises the most complex social, political, and economic issues, with the No. 1 issue being privacy. The concern is twofold: (1) if authenticated identity is required to engage in Internet activity, anonymity and the benefits that anonymity provides, will be reduced; and (2) authenticated identifiers may be aggregated and analyzed, thus facilitating profiling.
Clearly, this approach will not satisfy those who see the Internet’s anonymity as the ultimate protector of privacy. This may particularly be true in those cases where anonymity promotes and protects unpopular speech. But the fact remains that if we hope to reduce crime and protect privacy, we need to give users the ability to know with whom they are dealing (if they so choose) and law enforcement the capability to find bad actors.
Put another way, if authentication were possible, what if every social networking site, e-mail system, and Web site required authenticated identities? As we become increasingly dependent on the Internet for all our daily activities, can we maintain a globally connected, anonymous, untraceable Internet and be dependent on devices that run arbitrary code of unknown provenance? If the answer to that is “no,” then we need to create a more authenticated and audited Internet environment—one in which people have the information they need to make good trust choices."
Ez sokminden de nem megnyugtato. Kulonosen, hogy kiemelik a "nepszerutlen velemenyt" megfogalmazo emberek elleni kormanyzati fellepes lehetosegenek megteremteset. Legalabb hivatkoztak volna a terrorizmusra...