I won't hand over any of that sort of information to any site. F the site and F + F the government.

Still, if this is limited to MSSM, then I'm cool as I have never signed up for any of them. That said, I fear that this will become the norm for all sites.

MSSM == Main Stream Social Media.

As i basically do NOT use social media It will not affect me. What annoys me is EVERY site wanting me to login to access, this is getting me p***sed off.

Having to remember possible multiple tens or even hundreds of user id and passwords is just mad...

Sounds like you need a password manager for all those logins. Personally I'd recommend KeePassXC, served me well for years. :-)

i basically do NOT use social media

Aside from commenting on website fora, that is

This is just insanity, they probably already have the information but not necessarily all joined up. This is Facebook, Twitter etc wet dream.

I would not trust them with anything, Facebook has repeatedly showed that it believes that it can operate outside of any regulation and authorities appear powerless to bring them to account.

This will sound absolutely crazy but, if you disagree with handing your passport or other identifying documents to the social media giants but are being forced to because of this law.. there's a simple solution.

When asked to hand over the docs, don't do it. Simply stop using the platform.

It's crazy I know, but you only have to hand over those docs if you continue to use the service.

Don't use it? Crazy right?

Oh YES, I want _so_ badly for them to do this!

It would be great to do this. Facefail and the rest need to die - at least in their current form.

The problem is that if you want to promote anything you have to sup with the devil.

My Wife has an indie published book out and the only tools for promoting it are the above mentioned evil corps.

This creates a problem as the accounts are in the name of her pen name rather than her actual name. How do you allow such promotional work while requiring people not to 'hide' behind fake IDs?

Typical stupidity of our benighted government!

Of course I don't use social media. However, if I set up a local club of, say, steam railway enthusiasts or something, there is no legal or social pressure for people to identify themselves to join. They can pay their dues (in cash if they like) and attend meetings, and use any name they like (or none at all). And can enjoy the social interactions, lively discussions and disagreements, share cars to drive to days out, etc. All without any needs to provide any identity information if they like.

That is part of the British way of life - we do not require ID for any normal purposes, and there is no stigma around not carrying or showing any ID.

So, now, if my railway group wants to put up a web page and allow people to continue the discussions online between meetings, do I suddenly need to start collecting ID? What the hell?

Why do you think I should be prevented from engaging in online social activity just because I won't identify myself?

This isn't just about Facebook, etc - this can prevent all social gathering.

No, because what is the definition of social media. Are El Reg comments counted as social media for the purposes of this law? Even if you dislike Facebook et al this could have very dangerous consequences.

El Reg is definitely "media"

I like to think we are a pretty social bunch, so ...

The main stream media dictators are not currently well known for handling informations a civil and respected manner. And the govt wants to give the more ?

In such a case one must ask oneself , what's in it for the govt ?

You cannot trust Social Media sites with all your information! it's just giving them the means to bite you over and over again. Rabid Dogs are less dangerous...

I'll hand my passport over when all government ministers publically post theirs and details of their DOB, mother's maiden name, first pet, first school and all the other 'security questions' commonly asked...

Idiots!

... I needed yet another reason not to use social media

I am sure nothing will go wrong. Is not like these data leaks things happen all the time nowadays, right?

I don't even trust Farcebook with my real name. I certainly wouldn't trust them with a copy of my passport. If this became mandatory, then Arsebook would probably lose most of their UK users. Not that would be a bad thing at all.

I was trying to register with FB once to keep in touch with some friends. I registered, and did a quick search for some friends, meaning to do all of the stuff (however that works with "friending" or whatever) some time soon. I was blocked within a few hours. Maybe because I did not upload a full nude pic of myself, or snaps of my food, or whatever FB is used for (food is Instagram?). The solution offered by FB? Send them a picture of my passport. Yeah, right. I would totally do that (no fscking way!). Nah, it was not my main email address, but a legimate cell phone number (which I thankfully no longer have!).

Not really. Those who have understanding will quit, or some at least. (If they truly understand, why are they using it already?) The mundanes will just comply.

Then comes the inevitable data theft...

Theft? They are selling the info and claim (state-backed) hackers when there's uproar.

Point me at it and I'll sign. Assuming I don't have to upload proof of identity first, of course.

There was a supporter of this on daytime TV talking about how this was a good thing, because it would have allowed the police to track down her stalker quicker. Nobody raised the point that, after the first breach or insider attack, the measure would also make it easier to find stalkees.

I suspect that any passport will do. How do they verify that the passport that I give them is mine ?

I think that we should all submit that of Nadine Dorries or Nick Clegg - depending on which gender we decide that we want to be today.

Like that we would stop SM sites from data mining our passports & joining up everything we do on-line; before it all goes AWOL in a huge data breach or is sold to some future Cambridge Analytica.

I identify as an iPhone - who's pic should I use?

Icon for the PFY -->

I'd suggest one of the Kardashian clan.

Other reality 'stars' are available ...

I can see this going wrong where Facebook have access to the government gateway or other, to verify the details you have submitted.

Then, i am sure that the there would be a data mining of the government system to "verify" others not using Facebook as some sort of test, or blatant data extraction.

Without a government portal, then how can Facebook "confirm" that the passport you have entered is valid ?

I can see this going wrong where Facebook have access to the government gateway or other, to verify the details you have submitted

This is not required. The passport can be stand alone electronically validated and the photo compared to live video of the subject.

How do they verify that the passport that I give them is mine

In exactly the same way banks use passports online to verify their customers identities for the "Know Your Customer" Anti Money Laundering requirements. The passports biometrics are read using a phones NFC and verified. The digital photo is extracted from the biometric data and the phones selfie camera is used to video the user following instructions to look up/down/left/right to build a 3D model of the users face. This is then compared to the 2D face from the passport biometrics and the physical photo from the passport. Whilst it does not stop the verified user handing their login credentials to someone else it does tie the id created to the Government issued passport and presumably only a single id per passport would be required.

Somewhere somebody has brushed the dust off the old ID-card plans haven't they? I mean, they can't seriously mean that everyone should put their passport details onto the internet. So it must be some other form of "Government-issued ID".

So the next step will be "We've had a lot of feedback, and passports aren't the right solution. So we'll create another government-issued ID for this proposal."

And once it's created, and all the Facebook/Twitter addicts have signed up to keep getting their fix, then they can tie the government-issued ID in to state-provided services. All you will need to do is to show your ID on your phone to access them. No smartphone? "No problem, we'll issue a physical card with it on, so you can use that. And if you need to show it to anyone with the lawful authority to demand to see it, then they can scan it, and verify who you are. (See appendix F for the list of all those who will have the lawful authority, and the penalties for refusing to do so when so demanded.)"

They have ID cards in most European countries, but the difference between the ones here and in the UK is that they aren't a vast, we-want-to-know-everything-about-you-and-put-it-in-one-central-database nonsense like they the UK was proposing.

I honestly can say in the eight or so years I've lived here I've actually used mine maybe three or four times (if you don't count checking my social security number off the back). Actually I've mainly used it so they could look me up on the COVID vaccination database because it also has my NHS number on it.

They have ID cards in most European countries, but the difference between the ones here and in the UK is that they aren't a vast, we-want-to-know-everything-about-you-and-put-it-in-one-central-database nonsense like they the UK was proposing.

You sure about that?

The European Digital Identity will be available to EU citizens, residents, and businesses who want to identify themselves or provide confirmation of certain personal information. It can be used for both online and offline public and private services across the EU.

Operated via digital wallets available on mobile phone apps and other devices to:

- identify online and offline

- store and exchange information provided by governments e.g. name, surname, date of birth, nationality

- store and exchange the information provided by trusted private sources

- use the information as confirmation of the right to reside, to work, or to study in a certain Member State

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/european-digital-identity_en

" they aren't a vast, we-want-to-know-everything-about-you-and-put-it-in-one-central-database "

Of course it's a big database, how else would it work?

Simple - it could be a signed certificate.

Government creates a CA, then an issuing cert - this signs the certs of local authorities who then sign your ID without ever having to store the details.

" they can't seriously mean that everyone should put their passport details onto the internet "

This government? Yeah, they can...

I am STRONGLY against this even though I avoid the likes of Facebook and the others. Whilst it shouldn't directly affect me, there is the obvious question if it becomes normal for people to hand over their complete identity for social media, at what point will other sites start asking for the same? Online shopping, for instance. And I don't just mean the likes of Amazon and eBay - a fair few of us use online services of supermarkets these days. Would you trust Tesco with your complete identity?

""People will now have more control over who can contact them and be able to stop the tidal wave of hate served up to them by rogue algorithms," said Dorries."

Nice to know that, as ever, legislation is being justified with well-reasoned debate, free from bluster and hyperbole. But won't she think of the children?

> Dorries

....

> think

I found your mistake

I wonder if Nodding Doris knows that a different arm of her own government is intent on [1]preventing people being able to challenge the malign effects of rogue algorithms.

But presumably those particular malign effects feed back into party coffers.

[1] https://www.computerweekly.com/news/252502634/UK-taskforce-calls-for-cutting-GDPR-protections

What planet are we on?

Well unfortunately all those who voted for the Tories to 'Get brexit done' and 'take back control' and other phrases which mean nothing, are now having to live with these clowns and their badly thought out 'won't someone think of the children' policies.

Because Labour never proposed anything as wildly insane, obviously, and the Lib Dems never supported it the same nonsense whenever they had the chance.

The civil service are the ones pushing all this ID card stuff, otherwise the policies wouldn't remain so consistent over multiple governments of different wings and parties. People allowing themselves to be conned by the superficial political theatre of Parliament is half the reason this country is in the state it's in. Unfortunately I don't have a solution, but I expect it would be easier to find one if more people let go of political tribalism (and all the rhetoric of division that comes with it) and started paying attention to who actually runs the country.

More likely than the civil service pushing it is that every time a new minister, be it in Home Office or, as currently, DCMS, comes in with a new wheeze strongly hinting at ID cards, the relevant Sir Humphrey merely dusts off the last proposals, updates a few references, removes some old flaws while adding new ones, meaning it'll still fail to make it to the statute books.

No, I think you have it the wrong way around. There was an old story about Ken Clarke (I think)... when he was appointed Home Secretary he received a delegation of senior Home Office civil servants, and senior police officers, demanding that he introduce stronger ID requirements and even ID cards. They explained how there was a lot of serious crime, fraud, immigration offences, etc which could be prevented with mandatory ID cards.

He refused. It is the British people's right to stick the finger up to officials, and refuse to identify themselves as long as they are going about their own business.

The delegation said "OK - well we had to try, you know. We'll try again with the next one."

The civil service are the ones pushing all this ID card stuff ... if more people let go of political tribalism (and all the rhetoric of division that comes with it) and started paying attention to who actually runs the country.

True, but when people said that about the European Commission (the EU civil service) during the Brexit debate they were roundly shouted down as talking nonsense.

Our elected officials have less & less control over the civil "servants" who are supposed to serve us .

They want people to hand over details of their passport and build a treasure-trove of PII just waiting to leak.

For what gain? It won't make the blindest bit of difference to levels of online abuse/hate. Just look at the reports from Twitter et al whenever they have to block accounts for racist abuse towards footballers: the accounts are almost always in the user's own name. We *already* have the ability to identify a significant number of those throwing abuse around and laws to catch a lot of it (there are gaps, admittedly), what we lack is the resources to actually pursue it in any meaningful way.

Rather than twatting about building up stockpiles of data-protection disasters, why doesn't the government look at properly reversing it's under-resourcing and under-funding of both the Police and the Criminal Justice System. It doesn't matter what new crimes you create when there's a years long wait for justice.

There's stuff in the Online Harms/Safety Bill I do agree with, but the vast majority of it is tech-illiterate and dangerous. It'd be better to scrap the whole thing and start with a new, more tightly scoped bill to introduce the specific new offences that are actually required.

The pandemic has demonstrated that the masses are more than willing to sacrifice almost all their freedoms in exchange for "safety", so it should come as no surprise when the government proposes such a scheme.

Eventually, everything you do online will be tracked and monitored. The EU, for example, has been explicit in this aim:

https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/europe-fit-digital-age/european-digital-identity_en

While I understand the desire for "credentials" in order to create a user account - this is world of nope.

If my profile is full of Anti-Trump Jokes, and for some reason Trump gets back into a position of relevance; does knowing that my passport relates to Anti-Trump jokes cause a problem?

US entry paperwork already (voluntarily) asks for social media details.

There emphatically is a problem here to solve regarding bogus accounts spreading misinformation; including the many, many Russian troll farms.

But handing over details like this would be an instant account close.

"some platforms may choose to provide users with an option to verify their profile picture to ensure it is a true likeness"

Are they insisting that the profile picture is the one in the passport, or at least the same person? That isn't online safety. that's a stalker's and extortionist's charter, making everybody post their true likeness with their real name. So, anybody being threatened would in effect be made to let the bastards threatening them have access to their online lives, for the sake of their own "online safety"....

This idiotic idea does anything but make people safe - it is guaranteed to cause harm.

Updated my driving license recently and they used my passport photo. So for the next 10 years my driving license has a photo that was already 10 years old when it was printed.

That's really up to date as ID then - NOT!

Preaching freedom somewhere someone else, reign them in at home.

The hypocrites moaning about Putin took more lessens from him than what is good for us.

Uh, you do realise that RT actually manages to be even more biased and batshit crazy than Fox News, right?

The sad part is that it took starting a war before anybody really noticed.