Arizona and Georgia among first states to adopt driver's licenses and IDs in Apple Wallet

Shawn Knight

Posts: 13,498   +132
Staff member
What just happened? Apple’s vision of replacing the physical wallet with a mobile variant will soon be taking another step toward reality as the tech titan has announced that Arizona and Georgia will be the first states to allow their residents to add their driver’s license or state ID to Apple Wallet.

Users will be able to first take advantage of their digital licenses and IDs at participating TSA airport security checkpoints and lanes, Apple said.

Adding a driver’s license or state ID to Wallet will be similar to how users add new credit cards and transit passes to the app today. Simply tap the plus button at the top of the Wallet and scan your license or ID using your iPhone’s camera.

Apple said users will also be required to submit a selfie, and be prompted to complete a series of facial and head movements during the setup process for security and verification purposes.

The Cupertino-based tech company said neither it nor issuing states will know when or if users present their digital IDs. Their implementation supports the ISO 18013-5 mDL (mobile driver’s license) standard, which Apple helped develop. As it stands, users should never have to unlock, show or hand over their device.

“Driver’s licenses and state IDs in Wallet are only presented digitally through encrypted communication directly between the device and the identity reader,” Apple noted.

Connecticut, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Oklahoma and Utah are next in line to adopt the feature, although a timetable for the rollout wasn’t provided. Apple said participating states and the TSA will share more information “at a later date.”

Permalink to story.

 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,239   +3,449
While no system can guarantee 100% security, this is still far more secure than having a "physical" one that people have been losing, copying, forging for decades...

 

mgwerner

Posts: 128   +138
While no system can guarantee 100% security, this is still far more secure than having a "physical" one that people have been losing, copying, forging for decades...
Nope. Physical objects are inherently more secure than electronic ones, as they are never connected to a network, cannot be hacked, and do not require power/network access. While physical documents can be stolen, forged or lost, there are already mechanisms in place for that, many of which have been around for millennia.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,239   +3,449
Nope. Physical objects are inherently more secure than electronic ones, as they are never connected to a network, cannot be hacked, and do not require power/network access. While physical documents can be stolen, forged or lost, there are already mechanisms in place for that, many of which have been around for millennia.
And this is the fallacy that people perpetuate... physical things are NOT necessarily more secure. While they can't be digitally hacked, they can be spoofed, stolen, copied, etc...

People (often older ones) assume this, and they tend to be the ones advocating against digital "stuff"...

However, the real world is slowly understanding that it is FAR easier to secure a digital system than a physical one.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,339   +3,423
And this is the fallacy that people perpetuate... physical things are NOT necessarily more secure. While they can't be digitally hacked, they can be spoofed, stolen, copied, etc...

People (often older ones) assume this, and they tend to be the ones advocating against digital "stuff"...

However, the real world is slowly understanding that it is FAR easier to secure a digital system than a physical one.
I can secure my physical things on my own while I have to rely on someone else to secure my digital things I'm storing on their servers. I trust myself more than I trust some company to not **** something up. It's simply my prefrence to take control over my things rather than let someone else do it and if I lose my drivers licence for example I have no one to blame by myself.
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,239   +3,449
I can secure my physical things on my own while I have to rely on someone else to secure my digital things I'm storing on their servers. I trust myself more than I trust some company to not **** something up. It's simply my prefrence to take control over my things rather than let someone else do it and if I lose my drivers licence for example I have no one to blame by myself.
And that's the thing, isn't it... it isn't security that people want - it's CONTROL.

It's the same reason some people fear airplanes over automobiles... they feel that THEY are in control of their car, but not the plane... even though all evidence shows that planes are VASTLY safer than cars.

This goes for digital security as well. Some individuals might be more secure with their belongings... but... just like the awful drivers out there, there are those who suck at keeping their personal possessions secure.

But when you give your credit card to the cashier at the grocery store, restaurant, boutique, etc, are you 100% certain they aren't sneaking a photo / writing down the number somewhere?

Physical items ARE NOT more secure - they just give you the illusion of control.
 

brucek

Posts: 894   +1,297
Not sure I'm buying the loss of security given the full state databases already existed at the state DMV, law enforcement, and authorized partner level (some of whom may in turn hand it over to the "unauthorized user" level). The info is already in the cloud and has probably already been stolen or misused from there many times most of which you'll never hear about.

But I do buy this is one more step towards a fully tracked, fully digitalized, fully reported life. Sure today it may only be the TSA that asks for it. But make it convenient enough and pretty soon you'll have to show one at the hot dog cart. And even if Apple and the state claim they aren't getting the visit data, some private 3rd party commerce will... and will probably end up selling it back to law enforcement and others anyway.
 

psycros

Posts: 3,613   +4,458
Because what you need is another thing to lose access to when your phone battery runs out. Is there anyone sane left in Big Tech?
 

PEnnn

Posts: 638   +620
I guess those who say a physical ID is more secure, never saw teenagers with fake IDs legally buying liquor or gulping alcohol drinks at clubs, because you know, the "superior" physical ID cannot be faked...
 

TheBigFatClown

Posts: 968   +393
And that's the thing, isn't it... it isn't security that people want - it's CONTROL.

It's the same reason some people fear airplanes over automobiles... they feel that THEY are in control of their car, but not the plane... even though all evidence shows that planes are VASTLY safer than cars.

This goes for digital security as well. Some individuals might be more secure with their belongings... but... just like the awful drivers out there, there are those who suck at keeping their personal possessions secure.

But when you give your credit card to the cashier at the grocery store, restaurant, boutique, etc, are you 100% certain they aren't sneaking a photo / writing down the number somewhere?

Physical items ARE NOT more secure - they just give you the illusion of control.

What evidence is that exactly? By way of statistics? Of course, way less people drive cars than ride airplanes.
 

Arbie

Posts: 277   +517
Arizona and Georgia - right. We the People want an audit of these driver license files NOW.
 
Last edited:

Nobina

Posts: 3,339   +3,423
And that's the thing, isn't it... it isn't security that people want - it's CONTROL.

It's the same reason some people fear airplanes over automobiles... they feel that THEY are in control of their car, but not the plane... even though all evidence shows that planes are VASTLY safer than cars.
Yes, we like having control over ourselves over someone else who's probably not reliable, I see nothing wrong with that and wouldn't change anything.

Physical items ARE NOT more secure - they just give you the illusion of control
I'm sure control and security overlap somewhere. If I have control over a physical item, it's on me to keep it secure, there's no illusion.
 

Rocky4040

Posts: 15   +17
And this is the fallacy that people perpetuate... physical things are NOT necessarily more secure. While they can't be digitally hacked, they can be spoofed, stolen, copied, etc...

People (often older ones) assume this, and they tend to be the ones advocating against digital "stuff"...

However, the real world is slowly understanding that it is FAR easier to secure a digital system than a physical one.
All of those things you said about actual physical things being less secure and how they can be spoofed,copied,lost or stolen can also be said about digital documents as well. Someone could scan your phone easy get all of your data and bang they got your everything and can copy it and do whatever they want with it. Heck it is even easier to do with digital because all you need for tools is the right software at least with physical the thief has to put some effort into it and go and find all of the tools needed to make things look and feel right.

But hey you can feel all safe with your digital everything just be for warned it is far far easier to dupe digital anything and change it than something that is physical.

besides that my physical license doe snot have a password attached to it that could be hacked why is that because it don't need one...lol I do also see the merits of digital as well but I also see it as a whole new stomping grounds for the hackers of this world to play in. I guess we are just gonna make their lives slightly easier for them and give them one more thing to hack at...lol
 

Squid Surprise

Posts: 4,239   +3,449
What evidence is that exactly? By way of statistics? Of course, way less people drive cars than ride airplanes.
Here's an interesting article explaining it :)

And here are the stats:

Driving is the most dangerous thing most of the population will ever do...

Yes, we like having control over ourselves over someone else who's probably not reliable, I see nothing wrong with that and wouldn't change anything.


I'm sure control and security overlap somewhere. If I have control over a physical item, it's on me to keep it secure, there's no illusion.
And that's what lots of people think... on average, they are wrong.
I'm not saying YOU might keep your physical items more secure than an online system. But there are millions of people in the US (and billions around the world) and all it takes is a low % of them to be stupid for the entire system to be compromised. The reason so many illegal credit card "copies" exist isn't because the physical system is intrinsically insecure - it's that you just need a few to be compromised... and there will always be mor0ns out there...

If there was one digital system, while it wouldn't be perfect, it would certainly be more secure than those "m0rons" in the physical world. It would therefore have far less breaches, on average, than a physical system.

For those of you who keep everything you own perfectly secure - yes, you would lose some security - but alas, you are in the minority.

Lastly... think of someone you know of "average intelligence"... now... think about how dumb that person is... now think harder: half the world is DUMBER THAN THEM!!
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 544   +421
Physical drivers licenses have been counterfeited for a long time - same as student cards , Age IDs .

In the seventies I could easily travel in say africa on a fake passport - even 80s or 90s - somethings just putting say your passport in a british leather cover was enough.
In India you could cheaply buy or get made rubber stamps in any language - Visa extended was a good one - on the road using coins with the Prez's head - you could do a stamp - the guys at the land borders were bored, maybe not paid for awhile - some batteries for their radio or cigarettes would sort out any missing papers - like where is your vehicle you brought into the country

You could get on international flights , with someone else's boarding pass.

You probably travel some developing countries land borders now on fake/doctored passport.
Remember when Americans could visit Mexico on a drivers license?

Now you are scanned electronically - if you fail you just have to hope you get a useless immigration officer.

Still I sure - do your homework or pay your money you will get a password that is officially issued .
Depends how they do bio-metrics on you ie do clashes pop up?- they are probably only triggered if flagged . Probably safe on electronic photo - but not eye or fingerprint scan.

IE the system tests probably who you say you are - and not who you could be - as must be lots of false positives
 

waclark

Posts: 104   +66
Nope. Physical objects are inherently more secure than electronic ones, as they are never connected to a network, cannot be hacked, and do not require power/network access. While physical documents can be stolen, forged or lost, there are already mechanisms in place for that, many of which have been around for millennia.
Nope, can you show any proof of your assertions? A physical ID can be easily forged, I know this due to the high number of fake ID that comes into my bar. A digital ID can be made such that it cannot be forged. You can encrypt and create unique "hashes" of a digital ID that would make it far harder to forge than a simple ID card.

Could digital ID be compromised, sure, but I guarantee that if done properly, it would be much harder to duplicate legit ID in a secure digital format than a physical ID with basic forgery countermeasures.
 

cliffordcooley

Posts: 12,991   +6,310
Surely there was a better image to use. Maybe a state DL image that has actually joined in the adoption. I didn't see Hawaii listed as one of the states.
 

Nobina

Posts: 3,339   +3,423
And that's what lots of people think... on average, they are wrong.
I'm not saying YOU might keep your physical items more secure than an online system. But there are millions of people in the US (and billions around the world) and all it takes is a low % of them to be stupid for the entire system to be compromised. The reason so many illegal credit card "copies" exist isn't because the physical system is intrinsically insecure - it's that you just need a few to be compromised... and there will always be mor0ns out there...

If there was one digital system, while it wouldn't be perfect, it would certainly be more secure than those "m0rons" in the physical world. It would therefore have far less breaches, on average, than a physical system.

For those of you who keep everything you own perfectly secure - yes, you would lose some security - but alas, you are in the minority.

Lastly... think of someone you know of "average intelligence"... now... think about how dumb that person is... now think harder: half the world is DUMBER THAN THEM!!
I hate the idea of changing or taking things away from majority of "normal" people because someone is too stupid to live. I think it's a wrong way of doing things. If they're incompetent let them learn or get left behind and move on. If you let's say ban driving because of accidents they will never learn, plus, everyone else has to suffer because you decided if they can't drive, nobody can. I shouldn't have to have my life invaded because some ***** had sex with a power outlet and died and as a result power outlets got banned as well. Eventually when digital takes away from us we will all become stupid since we don't have to think about anything. Why not cater to smart and competent people instead?

I can quote that George Carlin as well, doesn't make me smart.
 

ZedRM

Posts: 631   +395
Nope. Physical objects are inherently more secure than electronic ones, as they are never connected to a network, cannot be hacked, and do not require power/network access. While physical documents can be stolen, forged or lost, there are already mechanisms in place for that, many of which have been around for millennia.
Well said! And correct.
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,712   +4,246
And this is the fallacy that people perpetuate... physical things are NOT necessarily more secure. While they can't be digitally hacked, they can be spoofed, stolen, copied, etc...

People (often older ones) assume this, and they tend to be the ones advocating against digital "stuff"...

However, the real world is slowly understanding that it is FAR easier to secure a digital system than a physical one.
Are you REALLY going to repeat the fallacy of "digital is easier to secure" after the repeated hacks of various companies and government organizations have left over 2/3rds of american's personal information out in the open to be abused? I dont recall millions of SS numbers being taken by one person in the paper days.....