A hacker's dream': Britons on Keir Starmer's plan for digital ID cards

"Keir Starmer has announced plans for a digital ID system, which will become mandatory as a means of proving the right to work in the UK. From concerns around civil liberties and cybersecurity to a helpful system to streamline services in line with other European countries' existing ID schemes, eight people share their views. This issue was not given to the electorate in the mandate and is being addressed in a parliamentary recess."

"Most European nations have a similar scheme in place it allows streamlined access to services and is universally accepted by the population and businesses alike. We already have gifted our personal information to both private and publicly owned companies extending this from the NHS and HMRC apps can only be a good thing. The personal details held by private companies are more easily hacked than our government-held data, and yet we seem so happy to share it."

"Absolutely terrible idea. Holding all your information in one place is a hacker's dream. We already have countless ways we can provide our identity passports, driving licences and so on. There is absolutely no need for this, and it's just so the government can try to gain control over illegal working in this country. It makes me absolutely livid that they expect us to put our data at risk to try to control an issue"

A mandatory UK digital ID will be required to prove the right to work. The proposal raises civil liberty and cybersecurity concerns, including potential mass surveillance, state control, data security, privacy and oversight issues. Some observers note similar schemes across Europe that streamline access to services and enjoy broad population and business acceptance, and argue that consolidating government-held identity services could reduce exposure compared with private-sector data holdings. Counterarguments stress that centralized identity storage increases hacking risk, that existing identity documents already suffice, and that a digital ID alone cannot prevent determined illegal border crossings.

Read at www.theguardian.com