N※N

Brits Fear Digital ID Could Enable Mass Surveillance, Express Finds

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. ould-enable-mass-surveillance-express-finds.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Tuesday, November 11th 2025 at 4:03 GMT by Daily Express

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-11 234 x 216 / 9683 Bytes

2025-11-11 245 x 206 / 9384 Bytes

2025-11-11 224 x 224 / 11459 Bytes

2025-11-11 223 x 224 / 12790 Bytes

Brits fear digital IDs could fuel mass surveillance, warns the Express

In a growing chorus of concern over a government‑backed digital identity scheme, an Express investigation into the UK’s “digital ID” plans reveals that a majority of Britons are wary that a single online identity could give the state unprecedented surveillance powers. The article, which draws on a recent poll, expert commentaries, and a series of linked sources, paints a picture of a nation torn between the promise of convenience and the price of privacy.

The plan on the table

The government’s Digital Identity Programme, launched by the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS), proposes a secure, government‑issued digital ID that would replace physical passports and driver licences for online transactions. The ID would use multi‑factor authentication – a combination of biometrics, a secure “token” app and a government‑issued PIN – to allow citizens to prove their identity when accessing services from banks, the NHS and even e‑voting portals.

According to a briefing released by DCMS (link: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/digital-identity), the scheme aims to “reduce fraud, make it easier to prove who you are, and create a seamless, secure online environment for everyone.” The government claims that the system will be built on the same standards that govern the UK’s NHS and tax services, and that it will be compliant with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the UK’s Data Protection Act.

Public alarm

Yet, when the Express consulted a sample of 2,500 voters for a poll conducted by Ipsos Mori, 67 % of respondents said they were “very worried” that a digital ID would “make it easier for the government to track my movements, my spending and my online behaviour.” The survey also found that 42 % of respondents said they would be unwilling to sign up for the scheme even if it was mandatory for accessing health or financial services.

“Digital identity is not just a tech issue – it’s a fundamental question about how much we are willing to give up for convenience,” said Dr. Emily Saunders, a sociologist at the University of Leeds. “We’ve seen, in other countries, how digital ID systems can be co‑opted for mass surveillance.”

The voice of privacy advocates

The article brings in the Open Rights Group (ORG), a UK‑based digital rights charity, to caution that the government’s “one‑stop shop” could become a “panopticon” for public and private entities. “The danger is not just in the data itself but in the sheer scale of data that would be pooled under a single identity,” said ORG’s chief technology officer, David Jones. “When a single identifier can be matched across all services – banking, health, transport, and beyond – the potential for misuse is enormous.”

The ORG points to the European Court of Justice’s ruling on “profiling” and surveillance, stressing that “any system that collects behavioural data must be transparent, proportionate and subject to robust oversight.” While the government has pledged an independent regulator to oversee the ID, sceptics argue that such a body would lack sufficient power.

Lessons from other jurisdictions

The Express also follows a link to a BBC feature on the use of digital IDs in other democracies (link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-xxxx). The BBC article contrasts the UK’s approach with that of India’s Aadhaar, where the government has faced international criticism over data breaches and privacy violations. It also highlights the European Union’s “eIDAS” regulation, which seeks to standardise digital identities across member states but has been criticised for its limited enforcement mechanisms.

“What makes the UK case unique is the lack of a clear separation between public and private use,” noted the BBC article. “In many other countries, a separate “public identity” system is kept distinct from commercial data trails.”

Government’s defence

In response to the backlash, the DCMS released a statement asserting that privacy concerns have been fully considered. “The digital identity will be built on a zero‑knowledge proof model,” the statement reads, meaning that users will not need to reveal personal data to every service they use. The government also said that “the ID will only be shared with third parties after explicit user consent and under strict regulatory oversight.”

A spokesperson for the Digital Minister, Mr. James Callaghan, said that “mass surveillance is not the aim of the digital ID – the aim is to protect citizens from fraud and to improve access to services.” He also pointed to the “digital ID” as a tool to enable citizens who currently lack a formal passport, such as those born overseas, to gain secure access to the UK’s digital infrastructure.

The cost of complacency

The Express article’s final section warns that complacency could have long‑lasting effects. “Digital IDs are becoming the backbone of everything from voting to banking,” the article notes. “If the system is hijacked by surveillance powers, it could set a precedent that erodes civil liberties and erodes public trust in digital services.”

It calls for a “robust public debate” that includes civil society, technologists, lawmakers and ordinary citizens. The article ends with a call for the government to publish a detailed, third‑party audit of the system’s data handling and to establish a transparent public oversight board.

Bottom line

While the digital ID scheme promises increased efficiency, the Express report underscores a clear divide: one side of the public is excited about a more connected, fraud‑free world; the other is frightened of a future where the state could watch, record and analyze every aspect of life. As the UK moves forward, the balance between security, convenience and privacy will be the fulcrum on which the country’s digital future hinges.