25 January, 2006 - 12:03pm

David Shenk of the New York Times wrote an interesting article today on technology outpacing the public debate on security versus civil liberties. He notes that "In our post-9/11, protowireless world, democracies and free markets are increasingly saturated with prying eyes from governments, corporations and neighbors. For better and worse, free societies are fast entering the world of total surveillance." This is precisely why we need Identity 2.0 mechanisms, that can provide for privacy, anonymity, and security.

More specifically, an Identity 2.0 solution must be able to satisfy the privacy requirements of the user whilst also supporting the security needs of governments. It should automate digital identity exchanges enabling users to easily release their data while allowing for anonymity and/or proof of credentials. And it should support auditing to allow authoritative bodies to ensure their security policies.

How is this relevant now? A small sampling of current online surveillance examples that Shenk cites include the recent Justice Department demands for search engine queries from Google (and the other major search engines), Google computers reading Gmail messages, Amazon tracking of your purchases, and Apple monitoring iTunes you listen to on your computer. This doesn't even include real world digital surveillance such as the use of RFID tags or "spy chips" by retailers and librarians, and video monitoring of all cars in the UK, the ramifications of which were eloquently deliberated by Kim Cameron.

This brings to mind the nightmarish scenario portrayed by Will Smith in "Enemy of the State", where the NSA uses surveillance from satellites, bugs, and other sophisticated snooping devices, infiltrating every facet of his existence, tracing each physical and digital footprint he leaves. And that was produced 8 years ago!

Cameron posits, Will there be any rules about how this information is stored and made available? About who can get at it, and when? About whether a warrant is required? Who is thinking about these questions, all very much related to digital identity? That's a very good question.