Im fine using a state or federal issued app to use a digital ID instead of Apple's wallet. Apple is way overstepping here.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Imposing Strict Terms on U.S. States for Digital IDs in Wallet App
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It will be interesting to see how many states are turned off my this.
why? I do hope it will become available in CA
This is false. At least in Arizona it is. The state had a digital ID in development for a couple years or so which was finally released to the public in March 2021. A 100% of AZ ID holders can get their digital ID on an iPhone and/or Android, if they choose to do so, today. The staff and infrastructure is already in place to support this technology. The Apple wallet is just another option in addition to the state’s app giving the end user more choice.
There’s no way that trying to regulate the government isn’t going to blow up in their face.
I'd rather see Apple applying strict rules vs Facebook implementing this ...
The question is, do we trust the the government with IT security implementations? How many government organizations have been infiltrated by randomware or other forms of cyber attacks? A certain government owned transit corporation in Canada was recently under ransomeware attack.
You will probably be better off with Apple setting stringent guidelines and knowing that your personal data will not leak into the Internet.
You will probably be better off with Apple setting stringent guidelines and knowing that your personal data will not leak into the Internet.
Apple doesn’t have $2 trillion either.
I doubt that Google is not planning of doing this for Android users.
Maybe if states had gotten with the times and created their own system this wouldn’t be a big deal and any company would have to play by their rules. If anything Apple is saving states money by doing all the tech work they are so terrible at. A digital federal ID would be great but let’s not get started about America’s failure with federal IDs.
But also states that sign with apple pretty much have to sign with google. Otherwise it makes no sense from a tax payer perspective to fund this effort for a limited amount of users.
I think it’s common for states and the federal
government to contract these kinds of services out to private companies, and yep, it’s the taxpayer who foots the bill. Should government being privatizing these services? I would say no. Are we comfortable with one company owning all that data? With exclusionary practices to those not in the ecosystem? With unclear budget limits? No, i wouldn’t approve it. Maybe it should be put up for a vote, but the problem is systemic, apple is just taking advantage of a market opportunity.
government to contract these kinds of services out to private companies, and yep, it’s the taxpayer who foots the bill. Should government being privatizing these services? I would say no. Are we comfortable with one company owning all that data? With exclusionary practices to those not in the ecosystem? With unclear budget limits? No, i wouldn’t approve it. Maybe it should be put up for a vote, but the problem is systemic, apple is just taking advantage of a market opportunity.
TheYayAreaLiving 🎗️
Suspended
Doesn’t the driver's license contain sensitive and personal information?
Yeah why? It's not like CA is going to force you to do this.
This is no different from the standard Apple has required of airlines for tickets in wallet, banks for CCs in wallet, insurance providers for medical cards in wallet, etc.. it sounds like a lot, but its really just outlining for the state what their responsibility to the service and user is. That's it.
Usually a picture ID is used to identify the holder. How will the police ID a body if there is only an iPhone nearby?
No worries. The good news is states do not have to participate if they do not like the value proposition.
In fact I suspect there would be a handful of states declining for political reasons having nothing to do with cost.
Not sure I agree these are "strict terms." I particularly like this tidbit:
"States have to agree to 'allocate reasonably sufficient personnel and resources (e.g., staff, project management and funding) to support the launch of the Program on a timeline to be determined by Apple,' according to the documents...'If requested by Apple, Agency will designate one or more project manager(s) who shall be responsible for responding to Apple’s questions and issues relating to the Program,” the contract states.'"
Anyone who has ever worked with government employees knows exactly why that provision is in there 😂
"States have to agree to 'allocate reasonably sufficient personnel and resources (e.g., staff, project management and funding) to support the launch of the Program on a timeline to be determined by Apple,' according to the documents...'If requested by Apple, Agency will designate one or more project manager(s) who shall be responsible for responding to Apple’s questions and issues relating to the Program,” the contract states.'"
Anyone who has ever worked with government employees knows exactly why that provision is in there 😂
I just want to know when it’s going to launch in Georgia. Apple’s website still says launching in late 2021.
One's phone contains all the info necessary for an ID, whether that's in the Medical ID feature of iOS or the digital driver's license.
Especially since the initial states already have apps that can hold this information. It's unbelievable that this is going to be funded by tax dollars. Greedy Apple strikes again. Their worshipers will no doubt disagree.
The stricter the rules, the more likely that a local government will pass a law requiring Apple to allow their local app instead … or a way to circumvent the App Store. Clearly these decisions are being made for short term gain to push as many devs and companies to the App Store before its told otherwise
It seems inappropriate to me for any government (local or national) to want to go down this route with Apple.
Everyone involved ought to be working towards a standardised model that will work with any device. It doesn't seem equitable for a government to build a process around the devices of one manufacturer like this.
Everyone involved ought to be working towards a standardised model that will work with any device. It doesn't seem equitable for a government to build a process around the devices of one manufacturer like this.