Jena Baker McNeill and James Carafano, Ph.D., both of The Heritage Foundation, have recently published a short paper, called a "WebMemo," in which they essentially have laid out the pros and cons of the Administration's proposed National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace. They caution that "[b]efore the federal government progresses too far on its project, it is worthwhile to draw some clear boundaries on what makes sense and what does not."
In a nutshell, The Heritage Foundation holds that while the Obama Administration may have set its sights on a target worthy of concern and analysis, the proposed "government-run or government-directed Internet ID system presents a risk to liberty that simply outweighs the potential security benefits."
The "cons," according to The Heritage Foundation, which are conveniently labeled "Red Flags," are that the proposed "government-directed national ID system could destroy online anonymity"; "become the equivalent of a national ID"; and could "crowd out private-sector efforts to improve online credentialing."
Not surprisingly, The Heritage Foundation's recommendations are aimed at addressing the above concerns by "[f]ocus[ing] on improving the efficiency, effectiveness, and integration of federal trusted identity programs"; "develop[ing] more effective public-private partnerships to address cyber concerns"; and "exploit[ing[ the advantages of the free market."
The Heritage Foundation's entire "WebMemo," dated January 27, 2011, can be found at the link provided above, or here.
Leave a Reply