-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Politech submission: Australian ePassports - Minister states random UID used Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:16:14 +1000 From: Irene Graham <execdir@efa.org.au> To: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com> Declan Information about the implementation of chips in Australian ePassports has recently been provided by the Aust. Minister for Foreign Affairs in response to written questions asked in the Aust. Senate by Senator Natasha Stott Despoja (Aust. Democrats). As has been previously mentioned on Politech, e.g. http://www.politechbot.com/2005/11/02/replies-to-us/ one of the concerns is whether chips emit a random or fixed UID and whether in fact any chip manufacturers implement random UIDs. The Aust. Minister has stated that the chip in the Aust. ePassport emits a random UID and that the UID does not contain any data that might allow identification of the issuing authority (Aust. Gov) or that the chip is in an ePassport. Obviously that info only applies to the Aust. ePassport - the U.S. and some other countries might be implementing fixed UIDs. However, if they are not intending to implement random UIDs, one might ask why not given such chips are apparently available. The above and other Q&As about the ePassport chip implementation were tabled in the Aust. Senate on 9 Feb 2006. Senate Hansard page containing the Q&As is here (permalink): http://parlinfoweb.aph.gov.au/piweb/TranslateWIPILink.aspx?Folder=HANSARDS&Cr ite ria=DOC_DATE:2006-02-09%3BSEQ_NUM:167%3B While those Q&As don't state what type of chip it is, I understand it complies with ISO 14443 Type B (i.e. not Type A). That's what Sharp Corporation announced they were shipping to the Aust. Gov for epassport trials in late 2004 http://www.sle.sharp.co.uk/news/pressreleases/04035_epassports_Final.pdf and in very late Oct 2005, Bob Nash (Assistant Secretary, Dept of Foreign Affairs and Trade) told me during a phone conversation (in response to a question) that the same chip is being used in the Aust. ePassports (that had commenced being issued to the general public a few days previously). Btw, for info of people not familiar with Aust. Senate procedures, the Q&As above are not of the type where a Minister is asked a question and expected to answer it immediately. The Aust. Senate has a procedure whereby any Senator can send written questions to a Minister and the Minister is (at least in theory) required to provide written answers within 30 days (which are then tabled in the Senate). The purpose is to enable Senators to ask detailed questions and give Ministers time, if necessary, to find out the answers from e.g. Departmental staff. Ministers do not always answer such questions. When they do, imo it's far more likely than not that the answers are factual. Regards Irene -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Irene Graham Executive Director - Electronic Frontiers Australia Inc. (EFA) Web: <http://www.efa.org.au> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _______________________________________________ Politech mailing list Archived at http://www.politechbot.com/ Moderated by Declan McCullagh (http://www.mccullagh.org/) ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]