- Identity verification laws have been imposed by all means, justified on the grounds of security
- Identity verification does not work for security
- In reality the collection of personal and biometric data is for a control system
- Using this data, they seek to achieve "the fusion between physical identity and the digital identity"
From facial recognition to fingerprint analysis, corporations and governments display these technologies as the ultimate protection against identity theft and unauthorized access.
But this so-called "high-tech security" meets the reality that the real danger lies not in the "authentication" method but in the vulnerabilities of the databases that store the most sensitive information.
Biometrics and digital identities are promoted as the future of security, but the truth is that these systems are not as "strong" as we are told and actually the core of security lies at the center of the computer system: the vast databases that store the personal data of millions of people and that is where the leaks and thefts happen.
It is important to understand, that computer systems, are NEVER stable, have vulnerabilities or end up developing them. For this reason they also generate dependence and need for constant maintenance.
Governments often threaten to use hackers and phishing(identity theft) prevention as an excuse to obtain more and more personal data. However, over the years it has been demonstrated time and again that when hackers actually appear, these data repositories are the main objectives and if they succeed, the repercussions are devastating.
Data Leaks
Let's take Discord's recent gap as an example. Hackers infiltrated a third part related to the platform, and they were able to access government IDs used for state-imposed age-verification checks.
In general, but especially on digital platforms, this system is being enforced around the world by laws with the excuse that they are "fundamental to verifying age and identity, ensuring compliance with legal norms and maintaining social order."
Moreover, if one believes in the excuses of these identity laws, an irony stands out: the same tools supposedly used to confirm identity, can being used for the opposite purpose.
After this data leak, Discord was forced to warn its users that they might now be targeted by phishing scams.
The same systems of identity verification protocols designed to protect users, end up being a potential source of exposure to the same threats they supposedly prevented.
Does not affect many people
Most sites when they talk about these cases, make it seem that it is simply the responsibility of the platform that suffered the problem. IT IS NOT THE PLATFORM'S FAULT, if they were decent and serious they should explain to the public that this situation is INEVITABLE IN ALL COMPUTER SYSTEMS, there will always be a threat.
However revealing this is not convenient, they who are always so emotional, curiously become more formal than a calculator. Since if they reveal that digital identities they are not effective in preventing identity theft, it means that they have to explain for what they are really for, and these are their interests: the conversion of private life into an economic asset, a product to exploit and manipulate.
They assure us that filtering does not affect many people. And what does that matter? Recently the same thing happened on other digital platforms, such as "tea app." Tomorrow can happen in the databases of the states themselves, and in that case it will be "by accident," of course.
Biometric data and stolen documents cannot be erased, while "identity verification" laws remain in place, ready to cause more victims.
Consequently, when these "few affected," because of these oppressive laws have to "confirm their identity" on another platform, they will find that they cannot do so, that they have done so, or that someone accesses these new digital accounts.
This laws are not for "safety"
These laws that impose on digital platforms to collect biometric data, for identification, as well as digital corporations that directly impose it, are not looking for "security".
The only thing that matters to them is achieving a plan that is concerning to anyone who cares about privacy and autonomy: "the fusion of real and physical identity with a digital identity." THIS is the real goal behind the imposition of biometric garbage
The corporations and institutions behind these systems are not interested in protecting; their true motivation is to create an integral fusion between our real and virtual identities.
Why? Because when our physical identity is intertwined with digital profiles, it is exponentially easier to manipulate, monitor and control our lives. This is not mere speculation - it is a calculated strategy based on the desire for power, influence and profit.
Data collected, stored and potentially exploited, are not merely for authentication; it is a tool of surveillance, behavioral prediction and social engineering.
The illusion of security provided by biometric systems is just that - a false illusion. Behind the scenes, the real goal is control.
In the end, the biggest risk is not the hackers who steal our data - it's the governments who want to own our identities completely.
And as long as we continue to accept these systems without scrutiny, we are complicit in the erosion of our privacy and autonomy.
Biometrics is more useful for phishing than for preventing it
