e-Passport -- Security

e
-
Passport
--

Security
& Privacy Issues

Achmad Rully

arully@computer.org

BCS 2006

2


Intro: Privacy Issue

What is, What isn't


Privacy Goal:

Citizen VS Government



Intro: Privacy Issue

What is, What isn't

BCS 2006

4

Data


It
’
s all about data and its use


Revocable (alterable) data


Data which can be revoked or changed


Ex: handwriting, address, name, etc


Non
-
Revocable (permanent) data


Data which is an eternal feature of the object so that
one cannot revoke or alter it, or it is proven highly
impractical to do that


Ex: some biometric data (fingerprint, eye
-
retina, hand
geometry (palm
’
s vena pattern), DNA, etc)

BCS 2006

5

Revocable Data


Susi, a woman, has lost her smart card ID:


Name


Photo


Address


Password


Badu, a stalker, use the data to stalk Susi


Solution:


Persecute the person


Change address

BCS 2006

6

Non
-
Revocable Data


Budi, a businessman, has lost her ID:


Name


Address


Fingerprint


Pak Ogah, a criminal hacker, use the data to access
biometric protected resource in Budi
’
s office


Solution:


Persecute the person


You CAN NOT CHANGE YOUR FINGERPRINT

BCS 2006

7

Non
-
Revocable Data

(authentication, other case)


Budi, a Mercedes new series motorist, was
attacked by
stolen car
’
s mafia


His finger was cut so the mafia

can steal his Mercedes



Ethical question:

Which one you value most:


Your finger


Mercedes

Privacy Goal:

Citizen VS Government

BCS 2006

9

Privacy Goal:

Citizen VS Government (SP)


Government or Service Provider


Government or SP want to authenticate their
citizen before using their services


Ex: authenticate user to get a mobile phone
number


Corporation is included in this category


Citizen


Citizen want their data to be used in limited
purpose.


Ex: to get a new mobile phone number

BCS 2006

10

Biometric in Privacy
Issue

(1)


Biometric data, has been very useful in
authenticating an individual as a biometric data
will closely relate with particular individual that
own the data by using distinctive physical
features.


Biometric data has been in used as an ID system
in government and military facility, and now
beginning to be expanded in mass use.


Convenient, accurate, and auditable.

BCS 2006

11

Biometric in Privacy
Issue

(2)


Some government already introduce ID system
(National ID Card KTP in Indonesia, e
-
Passport,
etc) base on biometric data, without any
protection to the private data.


Yet even if they somehow provide protection,
there weren
’
t any guarantee whether the system
can not be reversed to retrieve the original data.


The possibility to recover protected data would
render the system itself not useful.

BCS 2006

12

Biometric in Privacy
Issue

(3)


Government Regime can change

(in Indonesia every 5 years).

Private non
-
revocable data can't


Therefore,
balancing

between the need
to authenticate trustfully, with the need to
protect private data
must be addressed
.


(look at minority report film)

BCS 2006

13

Biometric in Privacy
Issue

(4)


Developed Country:

Priority in convenience


Almost every one care about privacy


Developing Country:

Priority in survival


No one care about privacy

BCS 2006

14

Privacy protection:

Technology VS Law


Law: to protect human


Developed Country: US, Japan, Europe


Developing Country: Indonesia


Technology: to make life easier


Conventional: password, pass
-
phrase


Biometric ID: finger, iris, DNA


Mobile ID: RFID, touch card

BCS 2006

15

Comparing Country

in Privacy Data Protection

Indonesia

Japan

Data Retention

10 years

3
-
10 years

Responsibility

???

Very High

(harakiri, etc)

Corporate/Gov
Awareness

Low to Medium

Medium to High

Citizen
Awareness

Low to Medium

Very High

BCS 2006

16

Privacy in Indonesia

?


Poor:


No privacy law


No political will to address privacy issue


Low Corporate awareness


Low Citizen awareness


Good:


Minimal biometric feature implemented in national ID
card, Passport and almost other authentication



more convenience (?)

e
-
Passport

BCS 2006

18

e
-
Passport


Recommended (mandatory?) by ICAO


2 side of argument:


Government:

to make it easier & smoother for traveler


Citizen:

proliferation of private non
-
revocable data


Protection:


Originality Protection: paper feature


Data Protection: biometric feature


Country:

US, UK, Dutch, Malaysia, (and almost every
country).

BCS 2006

19

United Kingdom’s e
-
Passport

BCS 2006

20

Japan’s e
-
Passport

BCS 2006

21

Japan’s e
-
Passport

BCS 2006

22

Japan’s e
-
Passport:

Originality Protection

Laminate & Holograms

Micro
-
lettering Lines

Micro Letters

Watermark

(Mt. Fuji)

Laser
-
perforation

BCS 2006

23

Japan’s e
-
Passport:

Data Protection

BCS 2006

24

Indonesia’s Passport

BCS 2006

25

e
-
Passport: revocability


Address: easy
-

medium


Signature: easy


Photo: hard


Fingerprint: irrevocable


Iris: irrevocable

BCS 2006

26

Case example:

Indonesia e
-
Passport


6 February 2006


First phase, can be issued in 43 Immigration Office. Old
passport still valid until expired date


Feature


Revocable private data:

name, address, birthday


Non
-
revocable private data (biometric):

fingerprint, facial feature


BUT

Indonesia not yet provide e
-
Passport widely

Possibly, there is a dispute about procurement???


e
-
Passport


machine readable passport

BCS 2006

27

Case example:

Indonesia passport


Possible attacks


Tampering


Change passport data after visa approval


Not yet established security procedure


Originality protection: using freezing technique

Question

& Discussion

BCS 2006

29

Closing Remark


It is up to people to decide what is the boundary
of their privacy


Including, enforcing their privacy protection


People should maintain their own irrevocable
private data


Research in data privacy protection is not yet
mature


Security is time dependent, so not disclosing
your private data is better

Thank You