IE carries a great many articles and news items about the use of personal data across the insurance industry. It is the foundation of both risk pricing, speeds up admin and helps settle claims effectively and fairly in most cases. But personal data has to be shared by consent in a democracy.
Recently former political party leaders Tony Blair and William Hague called for digital ID to become law in the UK. But is this another step towards China style social credit scores and total digital surveillance? Despite the advantages for insurance brands knowing exactly who someone is, where they are, what they are buying and more, maybe we need to pause and think about privacy for all – not just the wealthy elite?
Here’s some food for thought from Lauren Wilson-Smith.
CEO and Founder of ID Crypt Global, Lauren Wilson-Smith, commented:
“In the modern age, identity is being considered as the ‘next oil’ because the data associated with who we are and what we do is already being exploited and monetized to an alarming extent. So it’s hardly surprising that those organisations who carry out such practices are also fierce advocates for a singular digital identity.
However, a singular universal identity is an extremely dangerous path to tread and requires you to prove and provide every detail about yourself, from your passport, driving licence, tax records qualification and more. In doing so, you are essentially handing over the keys to your life to a third party, a third party that is susceptible to its weakest link and the threat of cyber criminals and we’ve seen countless times before how this data can end up in the wrong hands.
As it stands, cybercriminals currently rely on the correlation of many different data points, obtained via many different channels. A singular digital identity considerably simplifies this correlation as the trail of breadcrumbs all lead back to one place.
Identity isn’t a singular thing, it’s a domain, a collection of multiple different identities, each one defining who you are to an extent. Identity therefore shouldn’t be governed by one organisation, but operated by the many and even the infrastructure that underpins identity solutions needs to be open and owned by everyone.
Multiple identities coupled with the identity owners ability to hold those identities and their attributes securely, on their own personal devices is the answer. With multiple identities there is no need for there to be just one singular issuer of those identities, rather there should be multiple issuers, each focussed only on that part of identity they need to prove. This significantly reduces identity theft risks and puts our privacy at the heart of any solution.
Take ID Crypt Global as an example. As a digital identity issuer, we verify the claims and attributes about your identity to an ultra-high standard-level, but only specific attributes that make up your identity. We then issue a digital identity that cryptographically can verify these attributes about your identity. We don’t hold that data, rather you do as an individual, you own it, control it and manage it. The identity issued also does not contain everything about you, other identities are required from other providers, for example to incorporate tax information, qualifications and more.
With ID Crypt Global, our systems will never know for example, what you earn, rather we would empower your employer to be able to issue you with an identity that confirms your earnings. That data is then sovereign to you, as an individual, held on a device you control. You can then present that ID when applying for a bank loan for example, and ID Crypt Global would never track the fact you had a relationship with the bank, let alone allow third party companies to utilise it and bombard you with additional loan offers. That’s exactly how digital identity needs to work and the current proposals are unfortunately a world away.”
Be the first to comment