Tag Archives: icao


fbi biometrics

Oct. 26, 2015

Kaye Beach

The conversation surrounding the supposed impending enforcement of the federal REAL ID Act is so muddled that it is virtually impossible for anyone to develop an informed opinion on the matter. I am trying to help by providing documentation that will put to rest a few of the elementary aspects of REAL ID so that, hopefully, we can have a productive discussion about the matter.

To my mind, there is a few things about this federal law that we should understand before making a decision about whether or not our state should commit to it. For instance, we need to understand that REAL ID is a biometric ID and what the implications of moving the population en mass to this form of identification  are. Many seem to be confused about the difference between biometric ID and RFID so I want to write a post about that. We should also be aware that REAL ID requires the linking of our state databases and the is also an open ended aspect of the Act that we need to consider. There is much more to the REAL ID ACT but these are the items that come to my mind most immediately.

In my last post I addressed only one issue – are our Oklahoma state drivers licenses and ID cards biometric ID‘s? The answer is YES and you can take a look at the some of the sources of that information here.

In this short post, I am only going to address one subject as well.


The Federal REAL ID Act of 2005 REQUIRES that a digital facial image be captured from each driver’s license and ID card applicant.

These images must to be captured conformant to an international biometric format standard enabling the use of facial recognition technology and global information sharing.

The National Conference of State Legislatures is a trusted policy think tank that advises state legislators about a variety of policy matters. In 2014 the NCSL did a policy brief on REAL ID. Here is what they say:

NSCL REAL ID biometric


A digital facial image is required by the REAL ID Act.

202 facial image DHS PIA 2007

Link: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy_pia_realid_1.pdf

Buried in a pile of REAL ID rules is a notation that mentions a bit of technical information regarding the digital facial images that are required by the Act that reveals that the image is collected as biometric data (as opposed to just a simple photograph)

ICAO 9303 Real ID Rules 2007

And more from the Department of Homeland Security on how this biometric data is intended to be used.


Link: https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy_pia_realid_1.pdf

These are just a few sources that verify that REAL ID is indeed a biometric ID but in the spirit of trying to keep things simple, I am trying to provide just just enough information to put the question to rest.

real id is biometric id

Here is a one page PDF of this info in case you would like a copy of these sources.

Now we know that our current ID cards and driver’s licenses are biometric ID’s and that the federal REAL ID is also a biometric ID.

My next posts will cover the difference between RFID and Biometric ID and some of the implications of biomtric identification and what the difference is between having a state level biomertric ID vs. a federal one.

The Immigration Reform Bill – Prodding Forth Real ID, an INTERNATIONAL Biometric ID

global biometric id

Kaye Beach

May 14, 2013

On May 10th The Blaze ran a headline that asks; Is There a Scary Biometric ‘National ID System’ Tucked into the Immigration Bill?

The answer is YES!

But wait!  There’s more. . .I sometimes feel like I am belaboring the point but it seems to me the distinction between a national and INTERnational biometric identity system is a very important one.

Study that graphic up there.  It is the simple three step recipe for a single, global biometric identification system.  Read this post then look at it again and see if you can grokk what I’m telling you.

The federal Real ID Act of 2005 imposed federal guidelines that use international standards on state driver’s licenses and ID cards.  You may remeber that at least 25 states said no to Real ID by passing either a law or a resolution against the implementation of the Real ID Act.  Nevertheless, Real ID has continued to be implemented in most states to various degrees.

“By the deadline of January 13, 2013, most states will be substantially or materially or fully compliant with REAL ID” —Janice Kephart, Feb. 2012

It is important to note though, that ALL states are capturing and storing applicants’ digital facial images.  And although not all of the states are actually using this facial biometric as intended by the Real ID Act, eventually they will be.   The immigration reform bill (S.744, the ‘Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act’) will make sure of it.

In case you missed it, now, when you apply for a state driver’s license, a state identification card or any other form of government issued photo ID really, you are having your facial biometrics captured by a high resolution photograph.  High resolution digital cameras capture, map, digitize and database our facial features for the purpose of use by facial recognition technology.

Facial recognition technology enables remote identification and tracking through networked camera systems without our knowledge or consent.  As a matter of fact, facial biometrics is the governments biometric of choice because it can be used to identify and investigate us at-a-distance without our knowledge or consent.

Pay close attention here: This digital image on your state driver’s license or ID card is, by definition, a biometric.

The standard specified in the Real ID regulations for your state driver’s license and ID cards ensures that the digital facial image is facial recognition compatible.  That standard is the adopted standard of the ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization, an agency of the UN.

(Want more information?  Read REAL ID – BIOMETRIC FACT SHEET)

International standards exist for one purpose;  to enable the global sharing of that information.

REAL ID is. . .the current face of a far larger, international government and private economic effort to collect, store, and distribute the sensitive biometric data of citizens to use for the twin purposes of government tracking and economic control.” -PA Rep. Sam Rohr

Real ID is technically voluntary for the states.  What the government has always intended, is for Real ID to be practically mandatory for the citizens.  This is why the threat hangs over our heads that if we do not have a Real ID card by a certian date, we will not be able to fly or enter a federal building.

“In the future, only those state issued Driver Licenses and  Identification cards which are fully compliant with the REAL ID act of 2005 will be authorized for use as identification for official federal
government purposes, such as boarding commercial aircraft and entering  certain regulated federal facilities.” Alabama DMV-STAR ID

The road to Real ID compliance has admittedly been a rather slow and arduous one but the Immigration Reform bill (S.744, the ‘Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act’), if passed, will put a stop to any state foot dragging on Real ID because citizens will have to have it in order to work!

 A Real ID compliant driver’s license is specifically named as one of the acceptable ID documents in the bill (but all ID documents specified in the bill are biometric ID’s.)

To be perfectly clear – with S.744, producing your government issued, internationally standardized biometric ID is mandatory.  You will not be able gain permission to work without it. 

In authoritarian societies you must always have permission.

Forget privacy.  That is not what this is about.  This is about the balance of power between us and our government.  This is about control.  If we wish to retain control over our own lives, we will not accept government serializing of our bodies and we won’t allow the government to turn our rights into privileges

The Sec. of the Dept. of Homeland Security also has the option to add any other biometric or security feature as a requirement for those who wished to be employed so facial biometrics is the minimum biometric requirement but iris scans, fingerprints, or any other biometric could be required as well.

The new comprehensive immigration reform bill is not the first step in enrolling US citizens in the global biometric identification system.  The first step was that every government issued ID (especially the driver’s license) captured and collected your biometric data and that that data was collected in accordance with international standards.  The second step is to share your biometric data, to connect databases so that they can get that data flowing freely from the state and local databases on to the federal ones and eventually into global data systems.

One other important step in this global system of identification and control is to make sure we have to produce our global biometric ID for everything.  Or at least everything that we do that government wants to track and control.  And don’t forget that with biometric ID, your body IS your ID.  It’s the databases and not the card we should be focusing on.

Here are a few more facts about the bill as drafted;

Requires ALL potential employees to be authorized to work through the Dept. of Homeland Security.  Even If you are already employed when the proposed law goes into effect, you still will have to go through this authorization process.

Authorization hinges upon biometric identification.  Biometric data, including but not necessarily limited to, digital facial image, is required.  Real ID compliant driver’s licenses are cited as one acceptable form of biometric ID but the bill leaves the door open for the Sec. of the Dept. of Homeland Security to add other security requirements as he or she see fit.

The immigration reform bill requires employers to use a “photo tool” to verify the identity of each employee.  The term ‘photo tool’ is simply a euphemism for facial recognition software that will be used to match the facial biometrics provided by the potential employee to a federal database.

Where will this federal database come from?  I asked this question of Mark Lerner, co-founder of The Constitutional Alliance,  the leading expert on biometrics and the Real ID Act.

Here is his reply:

 “The answer will come in the Rulemaking process. There are two possible scenarios. In either scenario the “key” will be the photos stored in state DMV databases. Whether it will be DHS requiring employers to send photos to DHS and DHS having direct or indirect access to state DMV photo databases or whether DHS will require the photos the employers uses to be provided directly to states for the states to compare to photos in the state DMV database remains unclear. I also believe it is clear DHS will get the photo regardless.”

Access to the biometric data held in state DMV databases will be a must. 

There are reasons I have been having a fit trying to get my biometric data OUT of the state Department of Public Safety database.  I think this bill goes a long way in making my argument for me.  Read more about my lawsuit against the state of Oklahoma for the unwarranted collection of my biometric data here.

There is more to this bill to be concerned about  For instance,  the unconstitutional lack of due process.  Every person must prove they are a US citizen before they can work.  If the system says you do not pass muster, you are required to be terminated from your job at the end of an administrative process.   Will have more info on this and other issues soon.

ultimate control whitehead

Iowa-House committee votes to block REAL ID Act











Kaye Beach

March 7, 2011


Twenty five states have passed either a law or resolution to prohibit Real ID. (even more have tried) I am happy that Iowa is joining the good fight.  Unfortunately our federal government is not about to let the fact that half of the states are in open rebellion against their plans to track and catalog us all from cradle to grave, stand in its way.   If you see a little gold star appear on you license-you have a “secure” driver’s license just like Mrs. Sample does. (this is the license formerly known as Real ID)

Many states are finding out the hard way that their  anti-Real ID legislation is doing nothing to actually stop an international ID from being forced up their state.  And yes, Real ID is actually a global ID.

Let me back up.

When the push for uniform standards began under REAL ID in 2005, each of the states had its own driver’s licenses specifications and standards.

The REAL ID Act of 2005 was intended to force  the states to comply with national standards (some of which are international standards)

In order to be in compliance with the Real ID states had to meet 18 specific benchmarks.

Even in the states that prohibit participation in Real ID the 18 benchmarks are still being implemented.  How?

“. . .many state motor vehicle departments are quietly doing the work to meet the law’s initial 18 benchmarks.” http://tinyurl.com/4rgrv87

All 18 benchmarks can be found here

An International ID?

On page 68 of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Real ID Act you will find a tiny little footnote that reads as follows: “The relevant ICAO standard is ICAO 9303 Part 1 Vol 2, specifically ISO/IEC 19794-5 – Information technology – Biometric data interchange formats – Part 5: Face image data, which is incorporated into ICAO 9303.”


Iowa-House committee votes to block REAL ID Act

March 3, 2011

An Iowa House committee voted Thursday to advance legislation that would prohibit the state Department of Transportation from implementing the REAL ID Act.

The REAL ID Act was passed by Congress in May 2005 and created a new set of standards for identification cards, imposing federal mandates about what would have to be done in order to provide an ID. It also requires new information to be labeled on the cards, including a new, unique identifying number.

The Iowa bill — House File 237 –  prohibits any agency from requiring a REAL ID to be shown, collected or used in Iowa.

HF237 concludes:

This bill states the general assembly’s findings that the REAL ID Act is inimical to the security and well-being of the people of Iowa, will cause unnecessary expense and inconvenience, and violates the principles of federalism contained in the tenth amendment to the Constitution of the United States. The bill states the general assembly’s intent that Iowa not participate in implementation of the REAL ID Act.

Read more


What is happening is that  the same 18 benchmarks that make up the Real ID Act of 2005 are still being implemented, the bureaucrats doing it will not call it REAL ID.

If you remember this much about what it takes to create a global biometric ID then you will  be ahead of the game.

Your Body Is Your ID Fact sheet




Real ID and that little gold star on your driver’s license

Kaye Beach

Feb 5, 2011


The Sneetches, by Dr. Seuss
Now, the Star-Bell Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars.
Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small.
You might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.

The REAL ID Act imposed federal guidelines that States must adopt for their state  driver’s licenses and identification cards. Furthermore, those federal guidelines include international standards.  Why is that important?  There is only one reason to set international standards and that  is allow for international sharing of the information.  So while we continue to debate whether or not Real ID is a national ID card, the truth is that it is actually an international ID.

The federal guidelines for REAL ID  are comprised of 18 benchmarks.

Benchmark #1. Mandatory facial image capture and retention of such image.

At least eleven nineteen States have met all of 18 benchmarks that constitute Real ID.

Even if your state was one of the 25 that have passed either a law or resolution against Real ID,  the federal government doesn’t find that fact to be any obstacle at all to continuing to force the states to implement Real ID.  Your state is most likely still  working to implement Real ID.  Real ID compliant driver’s licenses will be marked with a gold star.

How can that be?  Well, the policy is simply not being called “Real ID” although the  benchmarks are the exact same ones set for Real ID.

“. . .many state motor vehicle departments are quietly doing the work to meet the law’s initial 18 benchmarks.”  http://tinyurl.com/4rgrv87


The ASI card, also known as “the card with the star,” is marked with a gold star indicating that it’s materially compliant with the Real ID Act’s regulations and can be used as identification for federal purposes” March 22, 2010 Nevada link

So right under the noses of our state legislators, some of whom went to bat and got a law passed to prohibit  Real ID,the administrators of State Departments of Public Safety or the Departments of Motor Vehicles are continuing to work on enrolling us all into an international biometric ID as though nothing ever happened.  Neat trick huh?


States should treat ObamaCare like REAL ID

That is a great idea and if those in charge on both the state and federal level had more respect for the American people and the law, this response should be adequate.  The reality is that those in charge are not following  the rules, they are too busy circumventing them.

They will do the same thing with the blatantly unconstitutional Health Care Reform Bill or any other DC mandate for that matter if we do not speak up.

Just saying NO! doesn’t seem to be working very well.

The states should be the guardians of their citizens’ domicile information and only share this data when the federal government has a legal need or right to know.


Back to our “Gold Star” resistors down in Florida who are demonstrating appropriate outrage to the situation that they have found themselves in.

Those Sneeches who do NOT have a star will be prohibited from:

  • Accessing Federal facilities;
  • Boarding Federally regulated commercial aircraft;
  • Entering nuclear power plants; and
  • Any other purpose that the Secretary shall determine.

That’s right!    Janet Napolitano  can add ANY other purpose that she decides should require the “gold star” at her sole discretion.  She doesn’t need your approval or even the approval of the person you  elected to represent you- your congress person.

Do you have a little gold star on your driver’s license and what does this star mean?

What happens if you don’t get the “gold star”?

This Florida resident and co-host of the radio show “Liberty Underground”,  explains why the “gold star” is where he draws the line.

Read more about Florida and getting the  “gold star card”

I-Team: Questions About New National ID Card

A Surveillance Society or a Free Society?

Sept. 26, 2009

By Mark Lerner, for the Constitutional Alliance, Inc.
The Big Question ‐ should government control the people or should the people control government?
Orwell’s prediction of a future big brother government came true. Whether acknowledged or not, Americans now live in a surveillance society.
Most of that American public falls into one of the categories the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) calls “potential threats;” environmentalists, animal lovers, anti‐war protestors, pro‐lifers, evangelical Christians, observant Jews, Constitutionalists, returning veterans, and third party candidate supporters are all “potential domestic terrorists.”  Just how far is the American public willing to let the government go in order to assure public safety? Do the people want the police on every block, all emails read by the government, phone calls overheard, or every financial transaction monitored? Do the people want sensors placed in cities that detect how much an individual perspires, in order to assess and monitor supposed guilt?


How about computer software programs that decide whether or not the way people walk or dress presents a threat to the government? In Britain citizens are captured on surveillance cameras an average of 300 times a day; does the American public want to be subjected to this level of scrutiny?

The Real ID Act 2005 mandated that facial recognition technology be used for all drivers’ license photos; facial recognition, a biometric, measures distances between facial characteristics ‐ specific parts of the mouth, eyes, nose and so on – and digitizes this information. Using this technology, each citizen would be enrolled into a single global biometric identification system.

No matter where a person is ‐ Oklahoma City, Oklahoma or Paris, France that person can be identifiedwith the use of facial recognition technology. Closed circuit television cameras/surveillance cameras (CCTV) and linked computer systems make possible remote surveillance and global information sharing.

The “standard” for the digital facial image/photograph in the Real ID compliant driver’s license was contained in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the Real ID ACT 2005. This “standard” is from the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), an agency of the United Nations.The Real ID Act 2005 has not yet been implemented ‐ 26 states have rejected this federal law and have said “No” to this act.
The Real ID Act is but one of the many laws, programs and initiatives that have one thing in common: track, surveil, and control. Government tells the people these laws, programs and initiatives are needed “to protect” them and that giving up privacy, freedom and mobility are small prices to pay for security.
When did rights become privileges?
A rare agreement: Both the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), representing the left and the right, stand opposed to the federal Real ID Act of 2005.  Who redefined privacy? It is one thing to believe that people should have no expectation of privacy
when in public; it is another to say when in public, technology will be used to identify and profile people, without their knowledge or consent. Courts have gone too far when they rule that a police officer does not need a warrant to go onto private property, install a GPS device on a vehicle, and track both car and driver wherever.

Are Americans so afraid that they are not willing to accept some risk in order to preserve freedom?
Isn’t it time the discussion took place on the growing surveillance and monitoring of the American public? What about the time‐honored presumption of innocence?  Americans have the responsibility to pass on to their children and grandchildren the rights, liberty and freedom that so many sacrificed for, in order to live in a free society. Americans have the responsibility to resist a surveillance society, which is contrary to those rights, that liberty, and that freedom.

The men and women in law enforcement, the military, and in intelligence agencies commit to upholding the U.S. Constitution. They share in the responsibility of protecting those rights, that liberty and that freedom. It is time for American public to put aside partisan differences and decide if they want government to control the people or the people to control government. Media has a responsibility to facilitate such a discussion. Just as the American public must put aside their partisan differences, so too must the media.

Mr. Olbermann, Mr. Matthews, Ms. Maddow, Mr.Hannity, Mr. Beck, , Mr. O’Reilly, Mr. Dobbs, Mr.Sanchez, what say you? Each of you is an intelligent individual. The public may not agree with each of you on every subject but on the issue of protecting our liberty, rights and freedom nearly all citizens would agree it is time to have the discussion we propose. Which of the aforementioned hosts has the courage to have the discussion on their show?  Healthcare, immigration, wars, the economy, terrorism, corruption in government, unemployment and other issues are all very important issues. Which of these issues should take precedent over a discussion concerning our civil liberties in the context of national security?

If not now, when?

The Constitutional Alliance will be issuing a call for action alert next week.

In this alert we will be asking every organization, group and citizen to stand with us demanding such a discussion as we
propose take place immediately.

We expect every group from the “far” right to the “far” left to stand with us. We have already started contacting potential panelists for such a discussion. These panelists are well respected and represent the views of many on the right, left and in the middle. The federal government and more specifically the DHS would be expected to participate in the discussion.

Let’s get down to brass tacks and stop the name calling, insults and playing of the “blame game” long enough to have a serious discussion about where we are headed as a country. What type of society do we want to leave for the children of today and the children of the future?

Call Sen. Lieberman! Pass Act Hearing Tomorrow.


People are STILL being told that the Pass Act does not mention biometrics when they call.


Here is exactly how to respond;

1. The Pass Act does not repeal Real ID.  

2. Real ID is still federal law and the rules that require certain standards be met still apply.

3. It is true that  Biometric standards are not specifically mentioned in the PASS Act or The Real ID ACT of 2005. . .

BUT a digital facial image that meets ICAO (International Civial Aviation Organization) standards is required in the rules that direct Real ID and The PASS Act if that bill were to become law.


 If you are challenged on this information , you may tell them to;

4.  Please access page 68 of the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making) at the bottom of the page (footnote 17).  it states the following:

“17 The relevant ICAO standard is ICAO 9303 Part 1 Vol 2, specifically ISO/IEC 19794-5 Information technology – Biometric data interchange formats – Part 5: Face image data, which is incorporated into ICAO 9303.”


You could also ask them to explain why the Privacy Imapact Assessment of the Real ID Act on page 3 states;

“as a result of the Act, state databases will contain standardized photo images that will allow law enforcement agencies to use facial-recognition technology to help apprehend criminals, and the state DMVs will be able to use the images and application data to prevent drivers whose licenses have been revoked in one state from obtaining them in another.”



That is all you need to say. 

THEY need to do their homework! 

You can also refer them to the website  www.stoprealidcoalition for in depth information and evidence.


This information is irrefutable! 


Senator Lieberman is not allowing anyone who is in opposition to the PASS Act, to testify before the committee. 

Why is that?

You might  reccomend that Mark Lerner of the  Stop Real ID Coalition be allowed to testify. 

He knows this information inside and out and can explain to them exactly what, how and why the Real ID and Pass Act will create a Global Biometric ID System.


  These are our objections to The Pass Act S. 1261;


 The hearing will be tomorrow, Wed. the 15th of July and Mark Lerner is ready and willing to be there to testify.

 The focus now needs to be on Senator Lieberman who is stifling any opposition.

 The truth must be heard!!


Call-Senator Lieberman  (202) 224-4041  Chairman

 the other committee members are listed here.  Call them too if at all possible.


Time is running out. . .

  • We are opposed to the Real ID Act and the PASS Act


  • We are opposed to being enrolled into a biometric identification system


  • We do not want our social security numbers in state DMV databases


  • We do not want RFID chips in our drivers licenses


  • We are opposed to the federal government intervening in the issuance of state driver’s licenses
  • What’s The Big Deal About Biometrics?





    See also; RFID


    What’s the Problem Exactly? Digital Photo SB 483

    Kaye Beach

    April 10, 2009

    Question posed by a friend-(condensed.  entire question bottom of post)

    I think we need to clarify some of information on this digital photos issue with SB 483.  I’m not going to pretend to know everything about exactly what you mean, but when you keep saying digital photos, it comes off as either tinfoil-hatted or naive to me as I’m sure it does to many.  I’m sure there’s something to this, but the term digital photo just isn’t conveying it to me.
    I’m not doubting you at all that there is something to be concerned about, and it may very well be in what manner they use to take the photos, but when you say allowing them to take digital photos for IDs is going to allow them more control of biometric information, the term doesn’t quite explain why, nor when the term is used in your arguments does it make any more sense to me.  There has to be a better way of describing what they are doing.  If there isn’t, I think we need to be proposing a superior alternative to digital photography for tax payers.


    I hope you don’t mind me answering your question on my blog-but as you indicated, if you are wondering others are too.

     My head is so crammed with info on this subject it is nearly impossible for me to approach the subject simply or rather I try and overshoot.  When I say digital as if that had some special meaning what I should explain is that it takes a digitized photograph of specific quality to be used for biometric purposes and that is the significance.  Digital is as common as dirt.

    Let me try to convey exactly the issue with regard to digital photos.

    Facial recognition technology makes a map of the face.  The program or software used to render biometric data from the photo requires a certain pixel count or resolution to in order to read this “map” properly.

     The lower the pixel count, the less accurate biometric facial recognition is.   International standards call for 90 pixels between eye centers.  Our DMV photos, by design, meet this standard as was called for by the Real ID Act of 2005. 

    The difference between the international standard for digital photos to be used as biometric samples and a resolution that is approximate a quarter of the resolution required by the ICAO’s (International Civil Aviation Standards) 90 pixels between the eyes is practically indistinguishable since these photos are not printed at high resolution anyways, so there is no reason except for the facial recognition requirements to photograph with such detail. And the purpose for this standard is so that we have a globally interoperable system for data exchange.

    I am not an expert in photography so I will have to check to be sure, but I believe that many if not most digital cameras operate easily at this resolution.

    I appreciate you asking this question.  I wish everyday to prove this fear wrong so that I can go back to my normal life and pursuits and the more I know….the worse it gets so far.




     Read this letter to the IACOhttp://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/terrorism/rpt/icaobackground.html

    Original question in full;

    I think we need to clarify some of information on this digital photos issue with SB 483. I’m not going to pretend to know everything about exactly what you mean, but when you keep saying digital photos, it comes off as either tinfoil-hatted or naive to me as I’m sure it does to many. I’m sure there’s something to this, but the term digital photo just isn’t conveying it to me.

    Just the term “digital photo” indicates to me an image taken by digital means, such as a digital camera. Nothing very ominous about that at all. The only thing opposite to this would be capturing an image by some analog means, such as 35mm film or photographic plates. Obvious beneficial reasons to going to digital photography are that it’s cheaper, images are easier to reproduce, and easier to store. These are all things most tax payers can appreciate. Additionally, even if photos were taken by an analog method, could they not be readily converted to a digital image via a high resolution scanner? Sure, it leaves the possibility for a rendering error, but in the end, they get the image anyway. Proportions of the face, a metric commonly used in facial recognition, will remain the same, assuming the analog photo is copied properly. To note, analog photography is always more capable of higher resolution, and thus higher quality, images than digital photography. This is because all analog signal transmission has the potential for infinite signal resolution.

    I’m not doubting you at all that there is something to be concerned about, and it may very well be in what manner they use to take the photos, but when you say allowing them to take digital photos for IDs is going to allow them more control of biometric information, the term doesn’t quite explain why, nor when the term is used in your arguments does it make any more sense to me. There has to be a better way of describing what they are doing. If there isn’t, I think we need to be proposing a superior alternative to digital photography for tax payers.




    The first few pages are basic explanation of how signals are digitized. The process works the same for converting any sort of wave pattern from an analog to digital, whether it be sound waves, light waves, or radio waves. All digitization is doing is converting the continuously variable line of the wave into a series of 1’s and 0’s.

    REAL ID-lifting the curtain……

    Jan 1, 2009

    From the Stop Real ID Coalition;

    L-1 Identity Solutions shares with China, Biometrics, AAMVA and the Drivers Liscence Agreement-partnering with Mexicao and Canada.  North American Union?

    The federal government under the provisions of the 1994 Driver’s Privacy Protection Act has access to our personal information stored in any State’s DMV database. This is precisely why DHS wanted the digital facial image required by the Real ID Act to be in accordance with ICAO adopted standards for compatibility with facial recognition technology. DHS added the requirement for the digital facial image to the Real ID Act so DHS could get around the provisions of the 1974 Privacy Act. They argue now it is not DHS but rather the States that will be collecting the biometric facial image. Although perhaps that is technically true, it is undeniably true that DHS is mandating the States collect the biometric facial image and that DHS knows they can get it from the State DMV databases without a warrant or probable cause. The digital facial image and the standard for it create a biometric sample which is then used to create biometric data from which a template is created.

    Th FBI announced they are going to spend $1 billion to create the world’s largest biometric database. Where does anyone think the biometric data for the database will come from?

    Yes, there are databases that the federal government does have that currently do contain some biometric data but the Real ID Act will allow for the collection of all licensed drivers biometric samples. The Real ID Act’s primary motivation is to enroll Americans into an international biometric (facial recognition) identification system.


    L-1 Identity Solutions has become the de facto issuer of Real ID compliant driver’s licenses and the enhanced driver’s licenses that can be used in lieu of passports to cross our borders. They also have been awarded a contract to produce Passport cards. This same company has provided their facial recognition technology to a Chinese businessman that is competing in a trial by Red China to acquire facial recognition technology. There is a valid question that must be asked, Has L-1 broken federal law that prohibits the transfer of this technology to China. The company’s argument will be they did not provide the technology directly to Red China. That being said they did provide it to a Chinese citizen knowing he would provide it to the government. In fact Chinese authorities have already approached the Chinese citizen and asked that he use the technology to identify dissidents. L-1 gets a percentage of all revenue this “businessman” would get from the Chinese government.

    L-1 a few months ago announced they were purchasing Digimarc’s license division. Between the two companies they control nearly 95% of the U.S. production of State driver’s licenses. You would have thought there would be anti-trust considerations. Instead of L-1 having face anti-trust issues they were granted a free pass by the Federal Trade Commission. That should be of no surprise to anyone. The Board of Directors of L-1 reads like a Who’s Who list of former heads of government agencies and departments incluing the likes of George Tenet and Admiral Loy among others.

    L-1 formerly known as Viisage Technology has a PDF page that is titled “Real ID Solutions”. On that page is picture of a driver’s license that has a person’s political party on the front of the license. I cannot speak for everyone but I believe it is a fundemental right of all Americans not to have to divuldge their party affiliation unless they want to. Obviously when voting a voter registration card serves the purpose if needed to provide a person’s politcal party of choice. A driver’s license is seen by retailers, banks and others that have NO business knowing yours or mine politcal affiliation.

    Robert Mocny of DHS has made no secret of the fact that DHS not only intends to share biometric and other personal information with other governments but also with corporations. He asks the question, How is it right not to share?

    The DHS went to great lengths to hide the fact that facial recognition samples are going to be collected under the provisions of the Real ID Act. It is only in the footnotes of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that the standard for the photo (digital facial image) mandated by the Real ID Act can be found. Many of the state and national lawmkers I have met with including the committee staffers and counsel I have met with had no idea of the significance of the standard for the digital facial images. In short, they were not aware the standard was international or that it meant the photos collected by States for driver’s licenses would allow the federal government to be able to spy on each of us.

    Many times I have heard people say that if a person is doing nothing wrong then they have nothing to worry about. That is not true. Facial recognition technology does not work well in a surveillance application. An IBG (International Biometric Group) study conducted specifically states that facial recogntion technology will not work when large databases such as the one called for by the Real ID Act are used. As a matter of fact there is a very good chance a person will be misidentified as someone other than who they are.

    Aside from First, Fourth and Tenth amendment issues, the Real ID Act has another major downside. DHS has named AAMVA (American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators) the “backbone” of the Real ID Act. AAMVA is an international organization. AAMVA is promoting the Driver’s License Agreement. The agreement calls for the United States, Mexico and Canada to share all drivers information stored in each country’s respective DMV databases. Grant money from the federal government has been available to States to participate in the DLA. http://www.aamva.org/aamva/DocumentDisplay.aspx?id=%7BC600908E-2538-4135-8166-1B25BB682698%7D This is the precusor to the North American Union otherwise named the Security and Prosperity Partnership. If we want to stop the NAU or SPP we MUST repeal the Real ID Act. I have the actual DLA paperwork. Scary does not do it justice. It threatens State’s rights and U.S. sovereignty.