Thursday 17 March 2016

RIP IDA – to lose one "identity provider" may be regarded as a misfortune

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.


Why did PayPal jump ship?
And when will Verizon climb back aboard?


The Government Digital Service (GDS) operate GOV.UK Verify (RIP) under a framework agreement. First there was Framework 1. Then there was Framework 2.

The eight Framework 1 "identity providers" were Cassidian, Digidentity, Experian, Ingeus, Mydex, Post Office, PayPal and Verizon.

Cassidian, Ingeus, Mydex and PayPal all pulled out. Why? We don't know. Which is odd. GDS say "we're building trust by being open – the sunlight of transparency is making things better". There's no transparency here, no sunlight and no openness. So, by GDS's logic, there's no trust.

Why did these four suppliers abandon ship? What did they know that the remaining four didn't? Why did the remaining four stay on board?

Framework 2 replaces Framework 1. The nine Framework 2 "identity providers" were Barclays, Digidentity, Experian, GBGroup, Morpho, Post Office, PayPal (back on board again), Royal Mail and Verizon.

GDS didn't like being stood up like that. It doesn't look good. It doesn't inspire confidence. It doesn't show respect. So when Framework 2 came along, the "identity providers" had to promise to bring an identity assurance service to market.

But PayPal have bolted again. GDS didn't tell us that. Neil Merrett did.

That's what PayPal think of GDS and of GOV.UK Verify (RIP). So much for PayPal's promise to deliver. And so much for GDS's ability to enforce that condition of the contract.

"To lose one parent may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose both looks like carelessness", as Oscar said. To lose five "identity providers", one of them twice, smacks of downright sloppiness.

Is it only five?

Or is it six? It's 10 days now since DMossEsq noticed that Verizon had disappeared from GDS's list of "identity providers".

GDS promised more news soon. That was nine days ago. Since then there's been no sunlight, no transparency, no openness and no news from either GDS or Verizon.

The Barclays GOV.UK Verify (RIP) service depends in some unspecified way on Verizon. "We may share your personal information with [lots of other organisations and] Verizon, our technical services partner, so they can perform certain parts of the Identity Service on our behalf", it says in the Barclays privacy policy. Can Barclays keep going if Verizon have disappeared?

GDS, 15 April 2013

We need to be sure that before any of the identity assurance framework suppliers begin providing services to departments, they are certified as being capable of delivering proof of identity as defined in the Government's Good Practice Guides.

The Cabinet Office has joined a standards certification organisation (tScheme), who will be one of the initial certification bodies to provide the necessary independent assessment of the framework suppliers for compliance with the guides.
All GOV.UK Verify (RIP) "identity providers" are meant to be certified as trustworthy. The Post Office's application for certification lapsed a year ago. Barclays, Morpho and Royal Mail all have applications extant and none of them have been certified yet. PayPal never even applied for certification.

GDS didn't tell anyone about that. DMossEsq did. And, once again, Neil Merrett.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is currently down to just three certified "identity providers" and it's due to go live in a fortnight ...

... about time too. It's been in beta for over two years ...

... and once upon a time it was "due to be rolled out for initial public services by autumn 2012".

Back then the identity assurance programme had a senior responsible owner (SRO), Mike Bracken: “It’s something that I put my hand up for because it’s so important". He departed the civil service last September. No replacement SRO has been nominated.

Meanwhile:
  • The GOV.UK Verify (RIP) account creation success rate keeps going down whereas GDS promised that it would be going up.
  • And the remaining "identity providers" are having trouble achieving even the lowly level of assurance needed by a civil court that account-holders really are who they say they are, let alone the level required by a criminal court.
  • And some of the departments of state that are supposed to rely on GOV.UK Verify (RIP)'s assurances are distancing themselves from GDS's programme and developing their own.
  • And some members of the public may not understand why, under GOV.UK Verify (RIP), just to see their driving licence details on-line, it is necessary to hand over reams of personal information to "identity providers" who promptly share it, beyond your control, with other organisations here in the UK and abroad.
It's looking a bit shaky. Which is not what you want in what is supposed to be a platform for cross-government public services – and especially not the platform embarrassingly earmarked by the Cabinet Secretary himself for increasing public trust in the civil service.

----------

Updated 12.4.16

Since the blog post above was published, Verizon have returned to the fold ...

... and GDS have published another blog post in their GOV.UK Verify: Technical delivery update series. Yesterday, 11 April 2016, saw the seventh episode so far. And once again, GDS's technical contribution to GOV.UK Verify (RIP) occupied centre stage: "To improve GOV.UK Verify [RIP] and make it better for end users, since our last update we’ve ... added new journeys to the hub to reflect the new features released by the certified companies ...".

Let's take a look at this new improved journey which GDS have made better for end users. There are nine steps involved. A bit long for modern attention spans but the dénouement is so dramatic that it's well worth investing the effort to concentrate.

The first four steps in your user journey may look like this:

First, you say this is your first attempt to register with GOV.UK Verify (RIP) ...

... then you take in the news that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is secure (no qualifications) and stops someone pretending to be you (no qualifications) ...

... at the third step, you discover that there are eight "identity providers" and that they are all without exception certified and that the service is free ...

... and at the fourth step, you start your journey

At this point in your journey, the style of the screens changes. These are the screens GDS are modifying like mad to improve them for user needs:

Step 5 is a bit of hand-holding, GDS are going to help you choose the right "identity provider" for you ...

... at step 6 you confirm that you have your up to date passport and your driving licence with you, you're going to hand over all the details on those documents to the "identity provider" GDS help you to choose ...

... next you confirm that you can install apps (viruses) on your smart phone ...

... and nearly finally, at the eighth step, you confirm that you're over the age of 20 and you've lived in the UK for the past year.

Eight steps and we're nearly there. At the ninth step, when you press Continue, GDS are going to recommend which "identity provider(s)" you should use. Wait for it:


Nine steps into your registration, and what are GDS telling you?

They're telling you that even though you've lived in the UK for the past year and you're over 20 and you can install apps on your smart phone and you've got your up to date passport and driving licence with you ...

... even though all of the above ...

... no less than five of their "identity providers" are "unlikely to be able to verify you".

You weren't expecting that, were you. You thought the answers you gave to GDS's finely crafted dialogue made you one of the easiest candidates for registration.

If the five "identity providers" who are "unlikely to be able to verify you" can't verify you, who on earth can they verify? No-one.

Those five "identity providers" – Barclays, CitizenSafe (GB Group), Royal Mail, SecureIdentity (Safran Morpho) and Verizon – must be, according to GDS, useless.

GDS started Framework 2 with nine "identity providers". First they lost PayPal. Now they've lost five more. They're left with just three.

And having seen the public humiliation meted out to Barclays, CitizenSafe (GB Group), Royal Mail, SecureIdentity (Safran Morpho) and Verizon, using a laboriously reiterated GDS improvement process, "unlikely to be able to verify you", how long will the three survivors hang around?

The directors of Digidentity, Experian and the Post Office have their reputation to think about. And their future. They have shareholders to satisfy. And equity analysts to convince.

How long will they hang around?

As little time as their lawyers tell them they have to.

GOV.UK Verify? RIP.


Updated 14.4.16

Last seen, GDS were impugning the commercial prospects of Barclays, CitizenSafe (GB Group), Royal Mail, SecureIdentity (Safran Morpho) and Verizon. The GOV.UK Verify (RIP) services offered by these five "identity providers" were described by GDS as deficient. They were "unlikely to be able to verify you". Given that that's their job, these services were useless.

This changed some time yesterday. Barclays and CitizenSafe (GB Group) were re-admitted to the useful camp:


Three "identity providers" are still useless – Royal Mail, SecureIdentity (Safran Morpho) and Verizon. "They're unlikely to be able to verify you". Keep away from them. That's GDS's advice.

What has changed in the services offered by Barclays and CitizenSafe (GB Group)? How did they move from useless (according to GDS) to acceptable (according to GDS)? What are Royal Mail, SecureIdentity (Safran Morpho) and Verizon still missing (according to GDS)?

In an orderly market, the public would know the answers to these questions. As it is, we don't know. GDS haven't told us.

GDS are meant to be operating this identity assurance market. It's looking disorderly at the moment. Which isn't what you want in your transactions with government. Nor with anyone else. And certainly not what you want in the management of your identity.

GDS no doubt have the right to praise or damn any or all of their suppliers. In this case their "identity providers". And like the worst civil servants they can do so without giving anyone the reason why. It's their train set.

But they can't declare GOV.UK Verify (RIP) live all by themselves. Not if "live" means anything.

Going live, relying on GOV.UK Verify (RIP) as part of the UK's national infrastructure, inflicting the system on the public at large, is a decision for the Cabinet and the most senior officials in Whitehall.

And as that senior decision-making team looks on, with GDS publicly recommending that the declaration should be made in April 2016, with GDS saying that GOV.UK (RIP) is ready to go live any time in the next 16 days, what do the team see?
  • They see a system which was meant to be able to register at least 90% of the population but which can't. As at last week, the figure was 67%. 33% of the population would be excluded by default from on-line public services.
  • They see an unstable system in which the suppliers come into favour at GDS's whim and fall out of favour just as mysteriously.
  • They see a public which hasn't been prepared for the new system by any national information campaign.
  • They see the public being lured into a system which GDS say is "secure" but which everyone knows can't be.
  • They see the public being lured into a system which claims to protect the privacy of our personal information but which doesn't.
If you think GOV.UK Verify (RIP) should go live this month, you go on television and say so.

You face the press.

You sit there looking confident while Scotland laughs at you – they've got their own system, they don't need GOV.UK Verify (RIP) and they don't want it.

You grin hopefully as every responsible department of state leaves you twisting in the wind as they pursue their own alternatives to GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

You do it. Because you're not going to get any member of the Cabinet to do it. Nor any Whitehall mandarin.


Updated 15.4.16

The day before yesterday, GDS said there were three "identity providers" who could verify your identity when you try to register with GOV.UK Verify (RIP) – Digidentity, Experian and Post Office.

Yesterday, please see above, that number went up to five with the addition of Barclays and CitizenSafe (GB Group).

Today?

Barclays and CitizenSafe (GB Group) have been struck off again. Anyone who chose Barclays or CitizenSafe (GB Group) as their "identity provider" yesterday must be feeling pretty sick today:


You don't know where you stand with GOV.UK Verify (RIP). GDS have created a machine for making uncertainty.


Updated 20.4.16 1

Barclays, CitizenSafe/GB Group and Verizon are still out in the cold, "unlikely to be able to verify you" as GDS say. Yesterday morning, so were Royal Mail and Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity. Now those two have been admitted to the fold:


CitizenSafe/GB Group must be feeling a bit peeved. They use the same registration system as Royal Mail but they're out and Royal Mail are in. Why?

Verizon also must be feeling a bit peeved. They've got the highest marks awarded by tScheme to any "identity provider" and yet here's GDS doing their best to exclude them.

A bit rich when you consider that tScheme haven't yet approved the services offered by Royal Mail and Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity (or Barclays) and the Post Office's tScheme application lapsed over a year ago. Some certified companies are a lot less certified than others.

For the moment, your five-way choice of "identity provider" is between three uncertified companies, a Dutch company you've never heard of (Digidentity) and Experian, who have experienced the odd security problem and who reserve the right to store your personal information anywhere in the world.


Which "identity provider" to choose?

You don't have to make that invidious choice. Not according to HMRC you don't. You can use the Government Gateway instead. That's what HMRC say.

Unlike GOV.UK Verify (RIP), the Government Gateway's been working for 15 years. It went live in January 2001. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) might go live, according to GDS, some time in the next 10 days.

The most popular government website is Universal JobMatch. And how do you register there if you want to find a job? With the Government Gateway.

Suppose you help your mother to register with Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity today and tomorrow GDS cross them off the list again? What are you going to tell her then?

GDS have got a lot on their plate. They're trying to work out where they're at. And where they're going. And they've only got until September 2016 to work out a strategy. They've got enough to think about. They're trying to find themselves. Make life easier for them. They're searching for an identity. Go on, be kind, use the Government Gateway.


Updated 20.4.16 2

Unbelievable.

21:48, later that same day, and Royal Mail and Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity have been dropped again. Banished to the same wilderness as Barclays, CitizenSafe/GB Group and Verizon. We're back down to three "identity providers".

The "identity providers" don't know where they stand. One minute they "can verify you", next minute they're "unlikely to be able to verify you". They won't hang around for long if this is the way GDS treat them.

We the public don't know where we stand. Is it prudent or recommended to register with Royal Mail, for example, or isn't it? Faced with this uncertainty, entirely of GDS's own making, the only sensible option is not to register with any of the "identity providers".

The "relying parties" are meant to be able to rely on the affirmations of the "identity providers". If Barclays say that DMossEsq really is who he says he is, HMRC are meant to be able to rely on that. How can they when GDS themselves say they can't?

And the private sector. They're meant to be attracted to this new approach to identity assurance? GOV.UK Verify (RIP) could underwrite payments?

Certainty?

Trust?

Gone.


Updated 21.4.16

A heavy-hitting financial technology conference started in London yesterday, Consult Hyperion's Tomorrow's Transactions Forum 2016.

Barclays Bank were in attendance. They were flying the flag for GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

All the while, the Government Digital Service (GDS) were undermining them, as they still are, displaying a message to anyone who tried to register for GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to the effect that:
  • Digidentity, Experian and the Post Office are OK.
  • Barclays and the other four "identity providers" in the doghouse are no use.
If you had had to guess in advance which of GDS's eight "identity providers" would be best at registering new victims for GOV.UK Verify (RIP), Barclays would surely have been at or near the top.

Unlike GDS, they've got all the qualifications. They're used to registering people. They verify identity all day every day, that's their job, that's what retail banks do. They know about identification and verification and authentication and authorisation. They're undaunted by the huge numbers of people involved. They're used to on-line systems and security and the subtleties of design for comprehensibility and trust. After several centuries of experience, they know how to maximise the probability that those are the right counterparties at each end of a financial transaction.

And yet, according to GDS, Barclays are "unlikely to be able to verify you". What's gone wrong?

Suppose that's the wrong question. Suppose nothing's gone wrong. Your first impression was that Barclays would be among the best at doing the registration job – suppose you were right.

Barclays might not be getting enough punters through the door for GDS's untutored liking but they might be doing the job properly.

Barclays live and breathe the skills of KYC and AML (Know Your Customer and Anti-Money Laundering). When they've broken the rules of KYC and AML they've paid the fines and they've suffered the loss of reputation, see Private Eye. That's not a million miles away from another reason you know that Barclays know how to do registration properly.

GDS set a target of 90% coverage for on-line registration. Where did that figure come from? Thin air? What's it based on? Wishful thinking? Callow insouciance?

90% may be unattainable. It may be a political requirement but that doesn't mean it's realistic. It may simply be that GOV.UK Verify (RIP)'s exclusively on-line registration is not feasible. Perhaps that's what the disappointing account creation success rate is telling us.

What is the percentage of GOV.UK Verify (RIP)'s target population which can have its identity verified on-line with an adequate level of assurance? Null hypothesis: whatever percentage Barclays can achieve.


Updated 25.4.16

GDS seem to have got rid of the ants in their pants. The list of recommended "identity providers" has remained stable for a few days now.

No changes, Digidentity, Experian and the Post Office are the goodies. They "can verify you now".

And Barclays, CitizenSafe/GB Group, Royal Mail, Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity and Verizon are, according to GDS, a waste of space, they're the baddies, they're "unlikely to be able to verify you".

One of the touted benefits of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is the wide choice of competent "identity providers". It is unfortunate that in the week when GDS are likely to declare the system to be "live", whatever that means, the wide choice has fallen from nine to eight to three.

That's GDS's opinion, of course – others might recommend that the number of "identity providers" it is wise to register with isn't three at all, it's zero.


Updated 26.4.16

Barclays and CitizenSafe/GB Group have now been added to GDS's list of recommended "identity providers".


The list of GDS-approved "identity providers" for GOV.UK Verify (RIP) @ about 15:00 on 26 April 2016

People expect the government-provided identity management system to which we are entrusting a colossal amount of personal information to look dependable and stable. With "identity providers" coming into favour and falling out of favour every few days and, sometimes, every few hours, GOV.UK Verify (RIP) looks anything but stable.

It looks a bit frantic. A bit desperate. A bit amateur.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) looks like a public service that it would be irresponsible to declare to be ready for live use.


Updated 27.4.16

Keep up, you at the back there. Yesterday, Barclays and CitizenSafe/GB Group were on GDS's list of competent "identity providers" you could feel confident about. Today, they have re-joined the company of the clueless and you're advised not to bother trying to register with them. If you did register with them yesterday, that's not GDS's fault. Nothing is.

The list of GDS-approved "identity providers" for GOV.UK Verify (RIP) @ about 16;30 on 27 April 2016

Updated 1.5.16

Here we are, four days after the previous update, and the Government Digital Service (GDS) are still recommending the same three "identity providers" to people who wish, for whatever reason, to register with GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

This marks a welcome period of calm predictability and stability. Much needed after the frenetic farce-like action over the past few weeks when "identity providers" appeared on stage unexpectedly for a few hours and then inexplicably fell down stairs or out of windows and retreated to the wings.

To keep on changing the list of competent "identity providers" makes it look as though GDS aren't sure what's going on, they're event-driven, nervously reacting to new percepts over which they have no control.

That is no way to inspire trust in the population who are meant to sign up for GOV.UK Verify (RIP). It must be slightly giddy-making for the "identity providers", too. Not to mention the relying parties like HMRC and DWP who are meant to rely on the affirmations of the "identity providers".

If Barclays, for example, tell HMRC that, yes, this man who claims to be Abraham Lincoln really is Abraham Lincoln, can HMRC rely on it? When Barclays were acceptable to GDS one day and unacceptable the next? If GDS can't make their mind up about Barclays, how are HMRC supposed to?

Far better to make a decision and stick with it. Digidentity, Experian and the Post Office are acceptable to GDS as "identity providers". And Barclays, CitizenSafe/GB Group, the Royal Mail, Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity and Verizon aren't. That way we all know where we are.

Unfortunately for GOV.UK Verify (RIP), that's not the only area of farce.

For months now, GDS have said that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) would go live in April 2016. As late as 26 April 2016, Computer Weekly magazine reported: "With the official 'live' date for the programme set for 29 April 2016, Hughes is confident everything is on track".

That's Janet Hughes, programme director of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) and three days later her confidence had melted away and she found herself writing "we’re very nearly there". Nearly. But not quite. In fact, we're not there.

Here we go again. Now you see it. Now you don't. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is live, yes it is, no it's not.

On the same day, 29 April 2016, Neil Merrett tweeted "GOV.UK Verify tomeet live service requirements 'shortly'" together with a link to one of his excellent articles, giving a selection of reasons for the latest hold-up.

It doesn't matter what reasons are proffered. We can't believe them any more.

If GDS change their mind daily about who is an acceptable "identity provider" and whether GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is live, they are just as likely to change their mind about the reasons.

Two days later, today, 1 May 2016, Mr Merrett tweeted again, "GDS to 'shortly' confirm a rescheduled date for when GOV.UK #Verify platform will switch to a live service" with a link to the same article.

It would clearly be a mistake to do what the first tweet suggested and claim that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will "shortly" meet the requirements to be declared live. First it's ready to go live, then it isn't, then it is, all in a matter of days? Not confidence-inspiring.

Better perhaps to stick to the second tweet and make an announcement "shortly" that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will be ready to be declared live in six months time or whatever – six months is GDS's traditional interval on GOV.UK Verify (RIP) progress reports going back to 29 October 2014.

It's not as though there's any hurry. No-one wants GOV.UK Verify (RIP). No-one needs it. We've got the Government Gateway and scores of other identity management schemes. Any haste now will just make GDS look as though they're not in control again, and don't know what they're doing.


Updated 23 June 2016

It was 12 April 2016 when we noted that the Government Digital Service (GDS) were telling new applicants for GOV.UK Verify (RIP) accounts that only three of their "identity providers" were likely to be able to do the job.

DMossEsq has been monitoring the situation ever since. For most of the past two months, Digidentity, Experian and the Post Office have been promoted by GDS, and GDS have been warning applicants not to use the other five "identity providers" – Barclays, GB Group/CitizenSafe, the Royal Mail, Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity and Verizon.

Sometimes Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity appears on the recommended list for a few hours. Then it drops off again. Ditto GB Group/CitizenSafe.

Yesterday, the recommended list grew to six "identity providers". Today we seem to be back down to four. For the moment.

What do the shareholders of Verizon, say, think about this peculiar business. Verizon have signed up with GDS to provide a public service that GDS tell the public Verizon are incapable of providing. If you were a shareholder in Verizon – or Barclays or Digidentity or Experian or GB Group/CitizenSafe or the Royal Mail or Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity – wouldn't you be asking the directors "what on earth are [you] up to wrecking the brand like this?"


Updated 9 July 2016

As at 00:30 this morning, we are back down to just three "identity providers" who can register us with GOV.UK Verify (RIP) – Digidentity, Experian and the Post Office.

As there are eight "identity providers" signed up to GOV.UK Verify (RIP), does that mean that the other five are no good?

No.

GDS told us at 00:30 that only four of them are no good – Barclays, GB Group/CitizenSafe, the Royal Mail and Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity.

Verizon are no longer mentioned. They've gone missing again:


Two questions:
  • The Barclays service relies on Verizon. If Verizon are no longer operating, can Barclays survive?
  • Why haven't GDS told the public that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) has lost an "identity provider"?

RIP IDA – to lose one "identity provider" may be regarded as a misfortune

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.


Why did PayPal jump ship?
And when will Verizon climb back aboard?


The Government Digital Service (GDS) operate GOV.UK Verify (RIP) under a framework agreement. First there was Framework 1. Then there was Framework 2.

Tuesday 15 March 2016

@gdsteam & the search for doctrinal authority

Icon depicting the Emperor Constantine,
accompanied by the bishops of
the First Council of Nicaea (Sprint325),
holding the Niceno–Constantinopolitan Creed
of Sprint381.
Wikipedia:
The purpose of a creed is to provide a doctrinal statement of correct belief, or Orthodoxy. The creeds of Christianity have been drawn up at times of conflict about doctrine: acceptance or rejection of a creed served to distinguish believers and deniers of a particular doctrine or set of doctrines.
Twice we have recently drawn attention to the troubled creed of the Government Digital Service (GDS).

On 3 March 2016 we noted the article of faith in the primacy of user needs and how that is no match for the superior faith in digital-by-default, please see RIP IDA – users and their expressed, tacit and created needs for the truth.

In the same text, we recorded the inability of the assisted digital sect to get off the ground and suggested that the same fate may befall the interoperabilitarians.

Many creeds believe that they are uniquely open, even when they manifestly aren't. GDS are no exception.

Why have Verizon shut the church gates against new adherents for the past 10 days or so? To convert to "Framework 2", GDS intones. Not convincing. The other "identity providers", as they are cabalistically known, have all managed this transformation on the hoof ...

... all apart from the recalcitrant PayPal, of course, the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) serial apostates. Why have PayPal refused communion, not once, but twice? Silence on the conflict from GDS.

Many creeds deny plain facts, preferring instead the revealed truth. All "identity providers" are "certified companies" is part of the liturgy. But they're not, as any plain disciple can see. It must be confusing for them. It must test their faith severely.

Thus it ever was. Mystery is key to any religion. As is security, which is promised by GDS but renounced, at least on the internet, by Barclays and just about everyone else.

Mystery, security and miracle. Who can resist the miracle of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) and its invisible link to DWP's Universal Credit? Or the miracle of its link to DEFRA's non-existent computerised Basic Payment Scheme, which even the old can't remember ever witnessing.

We drew attention also to those who profess 90% penetration. Not just on 3 March, we returned to the question this morning, please see RIP IDA – reciting the creed. The commandment says 90% but penetration has actually fallen in the past six weeks from a heady 77% to 62%.

Disappointing, again, for the plain disciple but somehow 62, for the truly penitent, is the new 90 because iteration is the same as improvement.

GDS believe that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will be a magical improvement on the way that the great unwashed accesses public services. They want you to donate all your personal information to the "identity providers", who will then share it out among the international clergy thereby bestowing redemption on us all.

How does this abide by the promise of privacy? It doesn't. DMossEsq has raised this question in secret convocation with the Privacy and Consumer Advisory Group. The decision passed down by the orthodox canon lawyers in their ecclesiastical court is that, in their judgement, actually, GOV.UK Verify (RIP) abides by all nine identity assurance principles. Even though it doesn't. So be it.

GDS have experimented with a number of icons for veneration in their Holborn temple ...

... so far without success.


May we proselytise therefore on behalf of St Agile de Rebais?

A bit later than Nicaea, admittedly, but a lot earlier than yesterday, the date of birth conventionally adopted by most GDS disciples, St Agile is thought to have lived from about 583 to 650 ACE.

Two key points in Agile's favour:
  • He was a doer, he got Rebais Abbey built: "Agile ... se rendit à Rebais où il fit continuer et achever les travaux. Une fois la dédicace de l'église abbatiale effectuée, les prélats, dans une assemblée tenue à Clichy, firent d'Agile le premier abbé de ce monastère, c'était en 636". As we all know, if you're agile, "you don’t have to go far to see digital teams doing the do".
  • He was a brave defender of (high-born) women's rights: "la reine Brunehilde, veuve de Sigebert II, se mit à persécuter Saint Colomban parce qu'il défendait l'entrée de son monastère aux femmes, fussent-elles de haut lignage ... Celle-ci, outragée, fit publier, par son petit-fils, Thierry un édit qui défendait aux moines de saint Colomban de sortir de l'enceinte de leur maison ... [Agile] se heurta aux soldats qui empêchaient quiconque de sortir du monastère. L'un d'eux voulut le frapper de son épée, et son bras retomba inanimé, jusqu'à ce qu'Agile ait eu prié longuement pour lui. Le soldat, voyant le miracle qui venait de s'accomplir, se convertit en rejoignit l'abbaye. Le roi, instruit de cet évènement, accueillit Agile les bras ouverts, et confirma la règle qui défendait l'accès du monastère aux femmes".
They've already got good hymns. Be consistent, not uniform. Don't procure, commission. The unforgettable Good services are verbs, bad services are nouns. Punctuation can slow people down. JFDI, by Agile people. That sort of thing. But somehow GDS still lack doctrinal authority ...

... the authority in Whitehall that St Agile of Rebais could confer on them.

@gdsteam & the search for doctrinal authority

Icon depicting the Emperor Constantine,
accompanied by the bishops of
the First Council of Nicaea (Sprint325),
holding the Niceno–Constantinopolitan Creed
of Sprint381.
Wikipedia:
The purpose of a creed is to provide a doctrinal statement of correct belief, or Orthodoxy. The creeds of Christianity have been drawn up at times of conflict about doctrine: acceptance or rejection of a creed served to distinguish believers and deniers of a particular doctrine or set of doctrines.
Twice we have recently drawn attention to the troubled creed of the Government Digital Service (GDS).

On 3 March 2016 we noted the article of faith in the primacy of user needs and how that is no match for the superior faith in digital-by-default, please see RIP IDA – users and their expressed, tacit and created needs for the truth.

In the same text, we recorded the inability of the assisted digital sect to get off the ground and suggested that the same fate may befall the interoperabilitarians.

Many creeds believe that they are uniquely open, even when they manifestly aren't. GDS are no exception.

RIP IDA – reciting the creed

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.

What are the Government Digital Service (GDS) up to? Making GOV.UK Verify [RIP] the default way to access digital services. That's what they're up to. So they say.

"GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is for everyone". So they say.

Not right now it isn't. Right now, at most 62% of people who try to register with GOV.UK Verify (RIP) succeed in doing so – at least 38% fail:


So it's not "for everyone". Even though GDS say it is.

"... we draw together GOV.UK Verify [RIP] performance data with our findings from user research and feedback from users, and work directly with each service planning to use GOV.UK Verify [RIP], to build a rich picture of how GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is working".

All that performance data and user research and feedback and direct work and planning and the rich picture they're building may sound good but it doesn't alter the fact that at least 38% of enrolment attempts currently fail.

"In January we blogged about work we did with the Office of National Statistics to estimate what proportion of the public will be able to use GOV.UK Verify [RIP]". They certainly did. And here's their estimate:


Here we are, just over two weeks away from April 2016, and the verification rate was expected to be over 90%. The observed rate is at most 62%.

"We've been working on the design of the GOV.UK Verify [RIP] user journey throughout the life of the service, iterating and improving it to make it as clear and straightforward as possible for users". This is the creed. Iteration is the same as improvement. The creed is repeated even when the facts undermine it.

Despite GDS's continual iteration, the account creation success rate is going down. Not improving. It was 77% at the end of January 2016. Six weeks later, it's down to 62%. But, in GDS at least, iteration is still equivalent to improvement.

"[If] it’s clear to you why your identity needs to be verified to protect you from someone pretending to be you, then you are much more likely to be willing to spend an initial 10 minutes verifying your identity than if that’s not the case". That's a big if.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) requires you to divulge a colossal amount of personal information to a large number of organisations who may store it in any number of foreign countries. It's a reverse people-trafficking operation, moving you in a vulnerable vessel from relative safety into a war zone. Far from protecting you against it, it opens you to fraud.

Before you register with Morpho, say, one of GOV.UK Verify (RIP)'s "identity providers", they've never heard of you.

After you've registered, they know your "full name, date and place of birth, postal address, email address, telephone number, user ID, gender, date, time and duration of a communication, IP address, Operating System, Browser, passport details, Driving License details, Marriage Certificate details, Birth Certificate details, Poll Card details, bank account number" ...

... they will have checked your "Credit Record History, Electoral Roll History, financial court orders records (CCJ, IVA, DRO, Bankruptcy), Land Registry records and Companies House records" and they "might in certain circumstances verify if you are active on social networks" ...

... and they may share your personal information with "GDS, DVLA, HM Passport Office and any other relevant HMG Department, Morpho sub-contractors including third party fraud-prevention agencies and credit agencies, law enforcement and tax authorities, and the head office of the Morpho Group, Morpho SAS, based in France" ...

... all of which you're supposed to weigh up and comply with in 10 minutes flat.

That can't reduce the risk, in fact it must increase the risk of your personal information being misused.

"We’re learning all the time", say GDS, once again reciting the creed.

RIP IDA – reciting the creed

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.

What are the Government Digital Service (GDS) up to? Making GOV.UK Verify [RIP] the default way to access digital services. That's what they're up to. So they say.

"GOV.UK Verify [RIP] is for everyone". So they say.

Not right now it isn't. Right now, at most 62% of people who try to register with GOV.UK Verify (RIP) succeed in doing so – at least 38% fail:


So it's not "for everyone". Even though GDS say it is.

Sunday 13 March 2016

RIP IDA – what is the point of GOV.UK Verify (RIP)?

No need to say it, it goes without saying, it should be obvious to all but,
just in case it isn't obvious to all,
IDA is dead.

IDA, now known as "GOV.UK Verify (RIP)",
is the Cabinet Office Identity Assurance programme.

In a few weeks time, in April 2016, according to the Government Digital Service (GDS), GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will go live.

Time for someone at last to summarise the implications.

A spreadsheet has been prepared summarising the terms and conditions of business of the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) services offered by each of GDS's nine "identity providers". Not just the business terms but the privacy policy also:


GOV.UK Verify (RIP) summary spreadsheet
It's too wide to display properly on this blog. Readers are asked kindly to take a look here. [Added 12.5.16: updated version of spreadsheet now available. [Added 3.7.16: updated version of spreadsheet now available. [Added 4.1.17: updated version of spreadsheet now available. [Added 24.9.17: updated version of spreadsheet now available.]]]] The effort is worthwhile. It reveals that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is a machine for collecting and storing your personal information and sharing it widely in the UK and abroad.

What is the point of GOV.UK Verify (RIP)? Answer, it's a personal information publishing service. That's what the summary spreadsheet shows.

-----  o  O  o  -----

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) would collect a spectacular amount of personal information about us. Nothing like that is needed when we use the Government Gateway, as we have been doing to access public services for 15 years since January 2001.

And the Government Gateway doesn't broadcast our personal information to all corners of the internet the way GOV.UK Verify (RIP) would.

Some of us may want to access public services on-line. It is quite unnecessary to share so much personal information with so many organisations in so many countries at the same time.

Barclays, for example, say that in the name of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) they will collect everyone's "name, address (with 3 years of history), email, mobile phone number, gender, details of your passport, driving licence and bank account, IP address, browser type and version, device type, operating system and version, locale, a unique visitor cookie, user ID, time, URL + We may receive information about you if you use any of the other websites we operate or the other services we provide. We also work closely with third parties to provide aspects of the Identity Service (including sub-contractors, analytics providers, search information providers and credit reference agencies) and we may receive information about you from them".

It's a lot but apparently it's not enough personal information. The "identity providers" aren't going to achieve GDS's goal of being able to register 90% of the population. Not with "just" this mass of personal information. GDS want them to store even more, but they've felt unable for the past year to tell the public what extra information of ours it is that they want.

Having collected it, Barclays will share everyone's personal information with "a credit reference agency (including Equifax), a fraud prevention agency, other member organisations of the fraud prevention agency, other Barclays companies, Barclays business partners, suppliers and sub-contractors, HM Passport Office, DVLA, Verizon, GOV.UK Verify, anyone who buys a Barclays business or Barclays assets" in addition to the public or private services which rely on Barclays' identity verification work.

There is no intention here to suggest that Barclays are unique. They're just being used as an example. The other GOV.UK Verify (RIP) "identity providers" are just the same. (Except that Verizon have for the moment shut up shop to new applicants – will the Barclays service which relies on Verizon survive? – and PayPal have once again bolted.)

-----  o  O  o  -----

Something has clearly gone wrong. All we wanted, some of us, was a way to obey the law for example by submitting our tax returns to HMRC on-line, something we can perfectly well do using the Government Gateway. GDS seem to have missed the point. We did not want to give our credit history to Verizon and we did not want our personal information to be sold when Barclays sell a subsidiary.

Something has clearly gone wrong. GDS repeatedly emphasise that they do not want to create the National Identity Register envisaged for the old ID cards scheme (2002-10, RIP). They have ended up creating nine of them.

GDSDelivering Identity Assurance: You must be certified
Something has clearly gone wrong. GDS repeatedly emphasise that all the "identity providers" are "certified companies". It's easy to check and when you do you find that Barclays isn't certified. Neither is the Post Office nor Morpho (SecureIdentity) nor Royal Mail nor PayPal.


Something has clearly gone wrong. Everyone knows that there is no such thing as unqualified security on the internet. Barclays, to their credit, are realistic and say as much in their privacy policy: "Unfortunately, the transmission of information via the internet is not completely secure. Although we will do our best to protect your personal data, we cannot guarantee the security of your data transmitted to our site. Once we have received your information, we will use strict procedures and security features to try to prevent unauthorised access".

And what do GDS say? Unpardonably:


Something has clearly gone wrong. GDS want the GOV.UK Verify (RIP) population register(s) to support a platform for public services offered by multiple central government departments.

HMRC are the pre-eminent suppliers of computerised public services and they have already distanced themselves from GOV.UK Verify (RIP). As have the NHS. And DWP seem to be developing and promoting their own identity assurance procedures for Universal Credit, not GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

If GOV.UK Verify (RIP) goes live next month, some individuals will be able to submit their tax returns to HMRC, but no companies. After four years of development, GOV.UK Verify (RIP) still doesn't work for companies. Or partnerships. Or trusts.

DVLA and HM Passport Office are suppliers to GOV.UK Verify (RIP) – please see the summary spreadsheet – so they don't need it. Rather, it's the other way round. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) needs DVLA and HM Passport Office.

There is no sign of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) being used with GDS's individual electoral registration batch application system. And no reason to believe that it would be capable of helping to compile the national census.

GDS claim that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) supports DEFRA's rural payments scheme. But it can't, because GDS's computerised rural payments scheme has had to be discontinued, it was unusable and farmers currently indent for their payments using pencil and paper.

There is no identity assurance platform for public services ...

... and GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is no use to the private sector either. The private sector has its own platforms already for authenticating account-holders and authorising payments. And it's developing its own new platforms. They don't depend on GOV.UK Verify (RIP). Again, it's the other way round.

Something has clearly gone wrong. In the past, so we are told, Whitehall would specify the requirements for a public service and four years later a computerised system would arrive, not meeting the public's requirements.

GDS repeatedly emphasise that they have overcome that problem by adopting agile software engineering methodologies. And yet what do we see?

Four years after work started, GOV.UK Verify (RIP) arrives, not meeting the public's requirements.

Something has clearly gone wrong. GDS repeatedly emphasise that they pride themselves on the care they take to act responsibly on behalf of the entire nation. They published a blog post the other day, Writing content for everyone, in which they preened themselves over the effort they expend on comprehensibility:
Accessible and inclusive content

At GDS, we always try to design for the least experienced user so no one is excluded from understanding and using a service. We also try to apply the same principle to users with low literacy. By writing for all literacy levels, it means more people can use the government services they depend on.
Some readers can be put off by apostrophes, GDS say – "punctuation can slow people down". Capital letters can deter understanding – "even readers with higher literacy levels can find that reading words all in capitals slows them down".

What are GDS doing luring these people into the treacherous waters of GOV.UK Verify (RIP)?

Something has clearly gone wrong. The Cabinet Secretary is relying on GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to improve public confidence in the civil service. How? If anything, it can only achieve the reverse.

Even after everyone knew it couldn't work it took years to put an end to the NHS's National Programme for IT (NPfIT) and it cost the nation tens of billions of pounds.

If Whitehall have learnt nothing, then the announcement will be made next month that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) has gone live and a lot of people can pretend that it's true, just as a lot of people pretended for years that NPfIT was in robust health.

But that's just the point. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) isn't in robust health. And a lot of people know it. Like NPfIT, like the ID cards scheme, it's dead. RIP.

----------

Updated 8.4.16

Since the post above was written:
  • It has been reported that Verizon have been hacked. Verizon nevertheless claim that "you can be confident that we know how to protect you to the highest standards".
  • Verizon have subsequently returned to registering new victims of GOV.UK Verify (RIP).
  • The "identity providers" summary spreadsheet has been updated accordingly.
  • Digidentity have started to try to sell GOV.UK Verify (RIP) account-holders YubiKeys on the grounds that these devices make the use of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) more secure. They do not answer the question whether it is insecure to use GOV.UK Verify (RIP) without a YubiKey.
  • CitizenSafe have announced that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) replaces the Government Gateway. If the Government Gateway is discontinued, HMRC will no longer be able to collect tax. Do CitizenSafe understand that point? And what are they doing making this announcement? Surely the end of the Government Gateway should be announced by a minister.
  • The NHS have announced that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is not secure enough for their users' needs.
  • GDS have released data showing that a material percentage of the UK population cannot have its identity verified by GOV.UK Verify (RIP).
The conditions set by GDS themselves which must be satisfied before GOV.UK Verify (RIP) can go live have not been met. GDS continue to announce that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will nevertheless go live this month, April 2016. It's not their decision, though. It remains to be seen whether their superiors will take the reckless decision to declare GOV.UK Verify (RIP) live.


Updated 22.4.16

Since the previous update:
  • The Office for National Statistics have confirmed that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will not be used to help compile the 2021 UK national census.
  • Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs have commended their digital personal tax accounts and recommended logging in through the Government Gateway. Logging in through GOV.UK Verify (RIP), they say, restricts you to a limited service.
  • The Government Digital Service (GDS) have taken to dividing their eight remaining "identity providers" into those which work and those which don't. Their recommendation changes frequently but in general new victims of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) ...
    • ... are advised to register with Digidentity, Experian or the Post Office ...
    • ... and they are advised against trying to register with Barclays, CitizenSafe/GB Group, the Royal Mail, Safran Morpho/SecureIdentity or Verizon.
  • The reported account creation success rate has been measured at 71%, still a long way from the 90% required for GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to be declared live.
  • GDS have increased the minimum age for new victims from 19 to 20, thereby cutting GOV.UK Verify (RIP) off from another 1.2% of the population and making it even harder to achieve 90% penetration.
There's a week left before the end of the month. Probably the press releases are already written and nothing can stop the announcement of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) going live some time next week.

Whichever unfortunate ministers and Whitehall officials have their names associated with that announcement are approaching the last weekend on which they can be taken seriously.


Updated 4.5.16

It was too much for them.

No-one wanted their name associated with the declaration that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is now live.

And so, on 29 April 2016, GDS announced that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is "nearly there", but not quite. A miss is as good as a mile. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is not live. After four years of development and two years of testing and several promises that it would go live in April 2016, it didn't. As usual.

Sir Jeremy Heywood, the cabinet secretary, tried to put a brave face on it. Not even he, panjandrum that he is, can disguise the fact that there is nothing there for the relying parties like HMRC to rely on. Nor that GDS themselves continue to say that five of their eight "identity providers" are unlikely to be able to provide you with an identity.

GDS put out one of their amusing little films about GOV.UK Verify (RIP). Apparently the system is safe, simple, fast, secure and private.

It remains the case that about 29% of attempts to create a GOV.UK Verify (RIP) account end in failure. It has particular trouble handling the young, the old, the low-paid and the out of work. It remains the case that account-holders have no control over who sees their data, which can end up anywhere in the world. And that there is still no dashboard for the Government Gateway on GDS's performance platform.

It proved beyond GDS's powers to stop the PR campaign:

Updated 15.5.16

It's been a busy 11 days since the last update and nothing has happened.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) has still not been declared live. It can't be. It still shows no sign of meeting GDS's "objectives for live". The account creation success rate is down to 68%. The target minimum is 90%. The authentication completion rate is down to 36%. And, unchanged for a month, GDS still tell new GOV.UK Verify (RIP) applicants that five of their "identity providers" are useless. Or, as GDS put it, they're "unlikely to be able to verify you".

No progress there, but there has been an inordinate amount of displacement activity. Verizon have changed their logo. And GDS tarted up their Introducing GOV.UK Verify [RIP] web page on 9 May 2016. You can almost see the space left for all the new services that were due to be connected to GOV.UK Verify (RIP) when it went live in April. But that was not to be.

There was a bit of tweeting on 13 May 2016 about how marvellous it is that one of the country's major retail banks, Barclays, supports GOV.UK Verify (RIP). No recognition that Barclays is one of the "identity providers" GDS says are useless but the Twitter thread did reveal that Lloyds Bank had been in negotiations to join GOV.UK Verify (RIP). No explanation of why those negotiations failed.

6 May 2016 saw the publication of GDS's What kind of fraud do our standards prevent?. Good question.

The answer is spoiled by GDS's failure to mention the ID hub. That's the single point of failure in GOV.UK Verify (RIP) where all communications come together and GDS failed to address how the hub defends against fraud or, to put it another way, how it doesn't promote fraud. Instead, GDS repeated that they have eight "identity providers" (should be three as five of them are useless) and how they're all certified (four of them aren't).

It's unfortunate that on the same day, 6 May 2016, it was reported that Equifax had been hacked. Equifax have been certified trustworthy by tScheme and are relied on by four of GDS's "identity providers" – Verizon, Barclays, CitizenSafe/GB Group and the Royal Mail.

Not a propitious day on which to talk about the standards set by GOV.UK Verify (RIP) for fraud prevention. It's just lucky that GDS don't actually set the standard, whatever they say, and that so few public services are connected to GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

Two days later, 8 May 2016, the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a new draft of their Digital Authentication Guideline. There's a summary and then there are four detailed documents. NIST's new guideline casts doubt on the way GDS are using levels of assurance in GOV.UK Verify (RIP), it impugns the use of secrets in GDS's recommended identity-proofing procedures and it "deprecates" GOV.UK Verify (RIP)'s two-factor authentication.

It may have occurred to you, too, but what NIST are doing is to raise the question whether it is feasible at all to verify somebody's identity entirely on-line. It's only a hypothesis that it's feasible. The hypothesis could turn out, in practice, to be disproved. In fact it has been. That's why GOV.UK Verify (RIP) can't be declared live.

Where all else has failed, NIST seek salvation in biometrics:
Biometric matching SHOULD be performed locally on claimant’s device or MAY be performed at a central verifier.

Biometrics SHALL be used with another authentication factor that SHALL be revokable.

The biometric system SHALL have a tested equal error rate of 1 in 1000 or better. The biometric system SHALL be operational with a false match rate of 1 in 1000 or better.
As we know, NIST might as well call on astrology. It looks as though online-only identity verification isn't feasible. Not for NIST and not for GDS. GOV.UK Verify? Forget it. RIP ...

... which takes us back to where we started in the blog post above – GOV.UK Verify (RIP) doesn't verify your identity, it's a machine for publishing your personal information far and wide, out of your control, in the UK and abroad.

The Privacy and Consumer Advisory Group say that that's not true. They're wrong.

The Government Gateway is the unsung hero of on-line access to UK public services. It's sat there for 15 years and more, working. It's been instrumental in collecting trillions of pounds of public revenue. The Government Gateway takes much less personal information from you and, to a much greater extent than GOV.UK Verify (RIP), it keeps your personal information under the control of UK government departments.

So what's this we read in PublcTechnology.net on 13 May 2016? Dell appointed to decommission Government Gateway. It's all there on Europa.eu. The Government Gateway will be shut by the end of March 2018. The system that works and provides a modicum of privacy is to be discontinued. The system that doesn't work and that blasts all privacy to kingdom come is to be pursued.

It's a new world we're living in. That's what Stephen Foreshew-Cain, GDS's executive director, told us in Where we’re at, and where we’re going on 8 April 2016. And that's what he told TechUK's Public Service 2030 conference on 10 May 2016. His speech was meant to tell delegates what to expect over the next 15 years or so. Read it, and you will be none the wiser about the new world except for Mr Foreshew-Cain's prediction of the end of parliamentary democracy: "The way that the law is made will have changed".

That's a fairly major contention.

So much so that he quite forgot to mention in his speech that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will after all go live this month, May 2016. But he did remember to tell a journalist from UKAuthority.com, Verify to go live by end of month. That's how you keep the public informed in the new world.

We'll see. As long as it depends on GDS, it seems unlikely. As Mr Foreshew-Cain told us himself, GDS don't like actually going live. It's the journey that's important to them – "In 2030, and in the years that follow, we shall still be iterating. We shall still be doing the user research, doing the hard work to make things simple ... There’s no definition of done. We’re never done ...".

With the Government Gateway gone, and with GDS busy iterating and researching, let's just hope that HMRC have an alternative up their sleeve to raise the revenue to pay for public services. As things stand, it's "no Government Gateway, no revenue".

But be not disheartened. Even while all around seemed bleak, on 12 May 2016 GDS won a prize. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) was awarded Best Innovation in eGovernment/eCitizen at the European Identity and Cloud Conference 2016. Everyone – even Mr Foreshew-Cain – was, and remains, speechless.

A busy 11 days. As you see. Even if there has been no progress.


Updated 16.5.16

"Read him early. Read him often."

If only DMossEsq followed his own advice he would have remembered to include two more GOV.UK Verify (RIP) incidents in yesterday's review of the 11 days 4-15 May 2016.

Firstly there was Neil Merrett's 6 May 2016 article HSCIC seeks ID authentication market engagement. The National Health Service in England is going to the market to see what's available by way of identity assurance for "over 1 million users and 28,000 system endpoints across 21,000 organisations". If GOV.UK Verify (RIP) isn't obviously good enough for the NHS, is it good enough for you?

Second there was Neil Merrett's other 6 May 2016 article DWP "evaluating" GOV.UK Verify for Universal Credit. "Currently claimants prove their identity by showing ID to their work coach. We are evaluating the Verify system and will announce any plans in due course", said a Department for Work and Pensions spokesperson. Taking their time about it, aren't they. Not a resounding vote of confidence in GOV.UK Verify (RIP).

Read him early, that Neil Merrett, and read him often.

Him, and Mark Say.

Mr Say published an article in UKAuthority.com on 9 May 2016, Questions arise over local 'Government as a Platform': "... There are also questions around the ability of children and old people to obtain identification through GOV.UK Verify [RIP], the role the NHS could play as an identity provider, and how citizen accounts run by local authorities and the Scottish Government could fit into the picture". Local government is clearly no more convinced about the efficacy of GOV.UK Verify (RIP) than central government.

Of course Neil Merrett covered that story as well: "The briefing noted that children and elderly users may find difficulty in being able to authenticate themselves under the current GOV.UK Verify [RIP] arrangements ... Additional concern was also raised that should the NHS choose to deliver its own ID provider solution based around the NHS number, how could it sit alongside GOV.UK Verify [RIP] ... Similarly, local authority citizen account registers and Scotland's mygov.scot account services were also seen as having roles within an increasingly competitive identity provider marketplace ...".

But stay with Mark Say a moment. We have referred to his work a few times over the years. Notably on 19 February 2016: "About 15 central government services are expected to begin using the GOV.UK Verify [RIP] service for online identity assurance when it shifts from public beta to live in April".

Going live is not a big step for GOV.UK Verify (RIP), according to GDS. Those 15 central government services could have begun using GOV.UK Verify (RIP) in April whether or not the system was declared to be live.

They didn't.

That is an incident significant for its absence.

There is a marked reluctance to connect to GOV.UK Verify (RIP). And no evident enthusiasm.

Meanwhile, with 22½ months ahead of it on Death Row, the Government Gateway continues quietly to rake in the PAYE income tax, National Insurance, VAT and Corporation Tax that pays for ... GDS and GOV.UK Verify (RIP).




Updated 23.5.16

Unlike marriages, weddings are public affairs. That's the point of them. Proud or nervous or both, the principals expose themselves in daylight, to their friends and relatives, in front of the municipal authorities, whether civic or ecclesiastical. The solemn ceremony is an open statement made to the community. It looks to the community for authorisation and recognition, and it seeks in return the commitment and respect of the community.

Something similar was called for in declaring GOV.UK Verify (RIP) to be live.

GOV.UK Verify (RIP) "underpins the digital transformation of government", no less. And yet, instead of a proud and clear announcement, its launch in the community on 19 May 2016 was a fly-by-night, hole-in-the-corner affair. Its advent was smuggled surreptitiously into a speech about the ethical framework for data science full of juvenile exuberance and devoid of either ethics or science. Mutual respect? No. Mutual contempt from the very outset.

Why didn't GOV.UK Verify (RIP) go live in April 2016 when it was meant to?

"We haven’t yet finished the Service Standard assessment process" was the official explanation on 29 April 2016. After four years of development and two years of beta testing? Not convincing.

"... the confirmation of the eight certified companies that will authenticate individuals' identities was only completed in the course of the month" was an alternative explanation offered on 10 May 2016.

Someone imprudent decided to announce that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) would go live in April 2016, if we are to believe these explanations, even though the service assessment hadn't been completed and even though the "identity providers" hadn't been "confirmed", whatever that means.

The trouble is that it's becoming ever harder to believe GDS:
  • They talk about eight certified companies when they know perfectly well that only four of them are certified.
  • They tell applicants trying to register for a GOV.UK Verify (RIP) account that five of these companies are useless.
  • They have jettisoned their own GOV.UK Verify (RIP) "objectives for live".
  • Even having moved the posts, they still can't score a goal. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is in no position to replace the Government Gateway but that's what we are told it will do by 31 March 2018. Starting on 1 April 2018, the UK Exchequer will have no revenue.
  • HMRC, DWP and the NHS are all reluctant, to put it mildly, to rely on GOV.UK Verify (RIP). They are thought to be working on their own identity verification schemes. As Scotland has done.
  • GDS claim that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) is secure, without qualification, when everyone knows that it can't be.
  • Their credibility is further impugned when they claim that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) abides by nine privacy principles when it patently doesn't.
  • And NIST consider that GOV.UK Verify (RIP) provides nothing more than self-certification – it can't do identity-proofing.
There will be triumphant speeches at the noisy reception, probably tomorrow, 24 May 2016. GOV.UK Verify (RIP) will sit at the top table, beaming, while ancient relatives and old friends talk about all the public services that will rely on it.

Check the list carefully. Is each service new to GOV.UK Verify (RIP) or has it been using GOV.UK Verify (RIP) for months already? In the case of newcomer services, why are they announcing their adherence to GOV.UK Verify (RIP) now? Why couldn't they announce it before? Are they reluctant adherents? Is that why GDS missed April? Did arms have to be twisted? Did unwelcome promises have to be made to get them on board?

We may never know why it died but the end of this marriage is in its beginning.