One of the biggest challenges facing transhumanity is how individuality is verified and protected. Despite the wealth of data accumulated on (or made available by) people online, the nature of resleeving makes identification a difficult task, compounded by the lack of a centralized system-wide verification system. Forking and the occasional death add a range of legal considerations and headaches to the mix. On top of this, some factions eschew identity verification and/or allow people to act with anonymity or under multiple pseudonyms. Criminal groups keep everything spicy by engaging in identity theft and forknapping.
==ID Systems== 
Most polities that embrace ID systems rely on nanotattoos and brainscans for physical identification. For infomorphs and AGIs, the cryptographically signed digital code embedded in the software of each brain-state serves as their unique identifier. Though not perfect, these procedures are the most reliable option given the circumstances—which isn’t saying much. ID systems are most commonly implemented by the authorities of the inner system, though even autonomists have use for them. [[Extropians]] use ID systems for the myriad of contractual agreements they engage in, the Titanian Commonwealth requires citizens to identify themselves to participate in the Plurality, and even [[anarchists]] adopt ID systems for simple identity management and security (such as protecting their backups).
===Brainprints=== 
Brainprint scans are considered the definitive method for identifying egos. Contrary to popular misconceptions, the term “brainwave scan” is a misnomer, as this form of identifier is not based on simple electroencephalography (EEG: a reading of the electrical activity created by neurons firing within the brain). The actual process for recording brainprints for identification purposes goes much deeper than that. It is based on the electrophysiological responses (event-related potentials) to invoked sensory stimuli as well as deep background neural activity measured by magnetoencephalography (MEG) and correlated between different regions of the brain. Controversially, this deep scan of the mind’s default network activity is considered by some philosophers and psychosurgeons as the “true self,” the unique thing that defines us as individual persons.
The process of recording a brainprint takes roughly an hour to systematically map out the core underlying structure and results in an unique identifier for each biological brain. There is one challenge to brainprints, however: they change over time. Transhuman brains are high-plasticity organic devices that incorporate new memories, suffer trauma, build new synaptic structures, and otherwise undergo changes. Luckily, these alterations only impact the core underlying structures identified by the brainprint in slow, incremental measurements. This means brainprints must be updated for accuracy on a roughly yearly basis. In practice, brainprints are usually updated each time a person undergoes a regular backup or uploads for egocasting.
Conducting a full deep brainscan “in the field” is impractical given the equipment and time required, decreasing its utility for security checkpoints and mobile police stops. To check that a person isn’t someone other than who they claim to be is a simpler affair. Police or security personnel can conduct a five-minute test using portable equipment to verify an ID. This portable brainscanner consists of a skullcap that is placed on a biomorph’s head, which then extrudes ultra-sensitive nano-electrodes into the scalp. A visor and ear plugs feed a sequence of images and sounds while the skullcap also applies tactile sensations. The cap measures the brain’s response to these stimuli and compares certain markers to the brainprint of the person provided in a secure ID database. Assuming no major deviation (or no deviations beyond the accepted rate of error), the brainprint is verified. Because this quick brainscan test is not fully accurate, it is not unknown for it to occasionally fail, particularly if a subject has recently undergone mental trauma, psychosurgery, or manipulated their brain with drugs or narcoalgorithms. Common procedure for failed field verification is to place the subject through a full brainprint analysis scan.
Scanning the brainprint IDs of people sleeved in pods or synthmorphs or existing in an infomorph state works a bit differently. Since there is no biological brain activity to measure, the individual’s software brain state must be accessed (requiring a direct connection via access jacks or software plugin). The emulated brain state is then fed a sequence of diagnostics input, producing output that roughly models the measurement of a biological brainprint. The advantage to running this test via software is that it proceeds far more quickly than biological scans, taking only a few seconds to verify the key markers as with most field tests. In the five minutes it takes to field test a biological brainprint, a tester can map out a pod, synthmorph, or infomorph’s brainprint as thoroughly as a full hour-long biological scan. Despite the ease of such testing, most checkpoints rely on the even quicker method of checking the ego’s digital code (and its cryptographic signature) for simple verification.
It is worth noting that the unique nature of AGI brain states means that they are quite easily identifiable from biologically born and grown human brains. It is a simple measure to recognize an AGI ego with a brainscan field test. For this reason, AGIs that are sleeved in biological or synthetic morphs and not broadcasting their nature still tread carefully in habitats where AGIs are frowned upon or suffer discrimination—or worse yet, are illegal. Uplifts face a similar issue, particularly non-hominids, as their brainprints also provide tell-tale signs of their true nature.
===Digital Codes=== 
Digital egos are almost universally stamped with a digital code whenever they are created. This code is created by the entity/device that generates the digital ego, whether it be a backup or infomorph. Each code is digitally signed with a cryptographic hash, allowing it to be verified against databases online. Whereas this process is legally mandated in the inner system polities, it is a common procedure in the outer system as well to protect against identity theft.
Digital codes almost always include a copy of the person’s brainprint. This enables easier verification when egocasting and resleeving.
It is standard for AIs and AGIs to have digital codes embedded in their coding by default, though there have been exceptions with software intelligences created by criminal groups, exhumans, and some autonomists and mercurials.
===Nanotat IDs=== 
Nanotat IDs are created with specialized nanobot swarms, implanting an information-laden nanotat design on the index finger of both biomorphs and synthmorphs. Nanotat IDs are encoded with the user’s brainprint and other identifying information. Nanotat IDs are required in almost all inner system jurisdictions, though autonomists also use them for easy identification purposes.
Nanotat IDs are implanted when the person sleeves into the morph and are usually encoded with all of the information required by local laws or whatever information the person desires in more lax jurisdictions. The body bank relies on the digital code embedded within the ego when verifying identities before nanotat imprinting.
===Mesh IDs and Online Accounts=== 
In many senses, the mesh ID assigned to each person also acts as a unique identifier. Given that most transhumans are constantly meshed, often for months at a time without interruption, mesh IDs serve as a connection point linking together their mesh activities and online social profiles. Though easily faked and obfuscated, mesh IDs can unlock a treasure trove of data about someone’s interests, activities, physical presence, communications, and much, much more. The footprint left by this activity has been used in some legal cases as a proof of identity, and there is no denying its value to spies, marketers, and private investigators. The same is true for the online accounts each person uses to access various sites and social networks. Many people, in fact, are more well known by their online account handles than by their actual identities.
===Other ID Forms=== 
Though less common, other ID systems may be implemented by certain authorities, hypercorps, or other groups. The Jovian Republic, for example, with its large population of ﬂats and opposition to resleeving, does not rely so heavily on brainprints and nanotats. Instead, implanted wireless ID chips and biometrics remain the primary identifiers in Jovian habitats, particularly iris/retina scans, palm prints, and facial recognition scans. In more secure Jovian facilities, more sophisticated measures may be used, particularly if there is any concern about inﬁltration by non-Jovians. Among certain infomorph mercurial societies, unique crypto keys are used as personal software identifiers.
==Resleeving, Travel, and Egocasting== 
Whenever a person stops in for a backup, resleeving, or an egocasting upload, common procedure is to check the customer’s identity, verify and update their brainprint, and embed their digital code in their infomorph state. In black market and some brinker and autonomist circles, these procedures are often waived or bypassed; in such circles, your identity is whatever you want it to be. In more law-abiding areas, these procedures are mandated by force of law and the hypercorp or organization providing the services can be held accountable for ID verification. To verify the IDs provided, body banks and egocasters will run the information against whatever local databases are used for such purposes. Sharing ID data between habitat authorities and distinct polities is the exception rather than the norm, however, meaning that it is often impossible to fully verify the IDs of individuals originating from foreign colonies.
Likewise, whenever someone arrives at a new station, whether physically or egocasting in, they can expect their ID to be verified in an even more thorough manner, assuming they go through normal channels. Almost all habitats, even anarchist holds, like to keep a careful roster of who is present inside for safety and security reasons. Depending on the authorities governing a particular checkpoint, the thoroughness of this ID verification can vary drastically. When it comes to egocasting, aside from whatever local databases they have to check against, security is often forced to rely on the verification of the services that uploaded and cast the ego over.
Naturally, habitat authorities are often suspicious of egos originating from a habitat owing allegiance to another political entity. Many egocasting receivers have a ﬁlter in place that ﬂags egos arriving from untrusted sources. These egos may be forced to go through extra ID verification, which usually entails running their brainprint through a more thorough and exhaustive database list. If they are unlucky, the ego may be shunted into simulspace to undergo psychosurgical screening, or may be assigned limited visitation visas that restrict their activities or place them under increased surveillance. Authorities that go messing around inside people’s heads too regularly are viewed with suspicion and hostility even within the inner system, however, so more invasive screening is typically reserved for those who have already raised eyebrows.
The intersection between autonomist zones and traditional habitat governments remains a sore spot. Inner system authorities rarely trust the digital codes and identity authentication transmitted with egos from autonomist stations. As a result, outer system travelers must usually go to some lengths to register and verify their identities with approved authorities if they wish to avoid hassle. Similarly, while many autonomist habitats do not restrict immigration, they often have policies requiring hypercorp, government, or military personnel from other polities to publicly identify themselves or face censure.
Hypercorps engaged in egocasting operations such as [[Nimbus]], eGo Travel, and Mindjump build their reputations by verifying identities at both ends of the transmission, in effect becoming trusted identification vetters for many habitat authorities. Others scrape various sources and mesh services for data and sell subscriptions to brainprint and identification databases. These private commercial databases are often used by habitat authorities that need to check out someone more extensively; said person is usually stuck with the bill for this ID validation as well. In Extropian habitats, ID-trust hypercorps make a business out of identity verification in place of governmental institutions.
If a person physically travels to a new location, rather than egocasting, it is entirely possible that their nanotat ID will not meet local requirements. Most customs checkpoints will do their best to verify the ego’s identity, erase the old nanotat ID, and implant a new one.
==The SAPIENT Initiative== 
//“With adoption of the SAPIENT system, the confusing array of different legal recognitions will ﬁnally have a coherent thread, and we will have a powerful tool to combat the growing problem of identity theft that threatens the security and emotional safety of the public.”//
—Desideria Perestrelo, Special Secretary on Social Justice, [[Lunar-Lagrange Alliance]], in a speech to the [[Planetary Consortium|Consortium]]’s Planetary Congress
Begun in AF3 as a response to the massive social confusion in the aftermath of the Fall, the Self-Aware Personality/Intelligence/Ego Novel Tag (SAPIENT) Initiative was an effort by the [[Erato]] colony government on [[Luna]] to consolidate and organize personal information for refugees. Lacking the resources to verify identity claims, particularly for newly sleeved infugees, social services and local government were struggling under a rash of lawsuits from credit account property heir claims to indenture contract disputes. Attempts to coordinate ID information and verification between habitats repeatedly broke down and suffered from ongoing political disputes.
Grown out of sheer necessity, SAPIENT was the ﬁrst ID program to gain widespread traction among multiple habitats and has since grown into a significant interplanetary socio-legal network. Various Lunar-Lagrange Alliance habitats were early adopters, with several Consortium-aligned colonies also signing up to ease the transition of their own infugee populations. Despite ofﬁcial endorsements by both the LLA and Planetary Consortium, and even implementation by most of their aligned habitats, neither political bloc enforces the initiative on their members. While some habitats rely solely on SAPIENT, others employ it in coordination with their own private systems. More than a few stations refuse to work with the network out of principle, stating either a desire for local procedural autonomy or disagreement with the initiative’s standards (notably, some habitats refuse to acknowledge the legal standing of uplifts and/or AGIs, which they claim the initiative enforces). It is not uncommon for private sole hypercorp-owned habitats to rely on their own ID systems as well.
There is currently a major push in the inner system to have all major polities and habitats adopt the SAPIENT ID program as a common transgovernmental personal identifier. Proponents argue that it defends against impersonation, establishes a common standard for fork identification, allows for a smoother transition of infugees back into society, increases security by making it harder for criminals and subversives to operate, and saves time and resources for all authorities involved. Various uplift groups have spoken in favor of the project, as it further enables their recognition as citizens and provides them a modicum of legal protection. The Consortium’s Oversight is also lending its weight to the initiative as an effective tool for countering external threats and corruption. Detractors claim that it impinges on personal freedom by providing no opt-out option from the data sharing between habitat and commercial organizations and creates a system where habitat governments would be forced to recognize some egos differently than they would like. Some postulate wilder suggestions of hypercorp, Factor, or TITAN conspiracies.
SAPIENT has widely been rejected by [[Morningstar Constellation]] affiliates, though the Venusians are laying the groundwork for their own alternative. Though some outer system habitats have signed up, none of the major stations have. The Jovians already have an ID system of their own (with a much heavier emphasis on biometrics), the Titanians have a lightweight system for their Plurality, and most anarchists and brinkers scoff at the notion. For some, the idea of being tracked in a universal system simply offends their sense of individual rights. With the current ability to change who and where you are at a moment’s notice, an immutable marker of their identity beyond their control is appalling. Isolates frequently espouse this view, though some philosophical adherents to multiplicity and individualist memes feel the same.
===Opting In=== 
//“It will make record-keeping much easier, our demographics division will get much better customer data, and we can get favor with the pols for early adoption. The only thing I don’t like about it is that we didn’t come up with it first.”//
—Xue Dingxiang, EVP of Marketing, [[Solaris]]
For the majority of transhumanity, the SAPIENT program offers a way to better organize information and protect oneself from identity theft. Years of living with and actively participating in comprehensive surveillance have changed expectations. A system to unify the current patchwork of ID databases into a cohesive and simple format is seen as a social good. As the majority of the transhuman population already lives and works in the inner system under Consortium and LLA banners, the SAPIENT Initiative is widely viewed as an inevitability and debate focuses on specifics of implementation.
Though there are social issues regarding citizenship and personhood rights for uplifts, AGIs, and forks, most see those as problems to resolve rather than reasons to oppose the program itself. On Luna particularly, the program is seen as a huge opportunity to organize and better catalog the millions of egos still in cold storage from the Fall. Assigning all inactive egos a static SAP ID and entering it into the general database allows for easier identification of friends and loved ones for rescue, a way to avoid abuses of indenture where copies of one ego are sold to multiple parties while the original is kept on ice, and a sound legal start to personhood for newly instanced infugees.
===Sidebar: SAPIENT Subversion=== 
**Proxy A:** I don’t think there’s any question whether we should consider SAPIENT problematic. Operational challenges aside, we lose people every day trying to find, catalog, and quantify the x-threats that are out there. You don’t think they’re trying to do the same to us? I don’t give a toss for intentions; we need to stop this now unless we want to give whatever is going to come after us next a to-do list for snuffing us out.
**Proxy B:** Personally I think that line of reasoning borders on paranoid fringe ranting.
**Proxy C:** Extreme, perhaps, but there is a valid concern here. Centralization has its drawbacks. Currently personal activity is split up over a bewildering array of personal and public networks and databases. Although it is still possible to hack and track almost everything someone does, it requires a great deal of time and attention as well as going through the security measures of each system in turn before the data can be brought back to any shared identifiers. If the SAP ID # were to become more universal, it would become much easier to track an individual’s activity as their SAP ID use would provide a common thread for searching and spoofing attempts.
**Proxy A:** Authorities that opt-in to the SAPIENT project would have to share data and therefore increase permissions between their own proprietary and heavily defended networks and data centers. That effectively creates one more avenue of attack in the event of any hostilities. It opens the route for a serial infection, where a virus or digital attacker moves from one compromised system to another.
**Proxy B:** But if we’re talking something on the level of the TITANs, we’re already talking about a threat with the capability to infiltrate multiple secure networks quickly and easily.
**Proxy A:** Well, why would we make it easier for them? It’s simply too risky to consolidate that much data. Centralized networks and databases were one reason they were able to bone us the first time around; we shouldn’t replicate that sort of weakness again.
**Proxy C:** There are other concerns aside from the TITANs. The strong Planetary Consortium involvement in the SAPIENT Initiative raises fears about possible misuse. There are already reports that SAPIENT has been manipulated to track and “disappear” undesirables. And just think what an outfit like Project Ozma could do with those resources, using it for probabilistic or predictive surveillance against autonomist or other oppositional elements. There are many potential vectors for abuse.
**Proxy B:** Are you also considering what use it might be to us? To Firewall?
**Proxy C:** Oh, I have, I have. Do you really think we are any more worthy of trust with such capabilities? We must always consider the possibility that we may be a threat to transhumanity ourselves.
==ID Problems== 
Though there are astounding amounts of data produced and gathered on each individual, the information sets generated are rarely correlated, a fact that imposters and identity thieves constantly exploit. In fact, identity theft remains a major problem, particularly in the inner system. Several criminal cartels, particularly the ID Crew, specialize in penetrating ID databases and selling that data on the black market in remote corners of the solar system. It is not uncommon for someone to ﬁnd out that their data has been used to establish a fake persona in another polity, and it can be even harder to get such impostors removed. Even more effectively, digital codes are sometimes cracked and copied or brainprints are stolen and emulated, creating fake alter egos that are even more resilient. This is particularly troublesome when combined with forknapping, as detained forks can sometimes be abused to verify an impostor’s activities as legitimate. Stolen or copied brainprints can lead to major difficulties as you cannot get a new brainprint without major psychosurgery that effectively changes who you are.
Identity theft is used for many purposes. The most common is to bypass authentication in order to access someone’s personal credit accounts, private networks, and social network proﬁles for theft, spying, or blackmail purposes. They are sometimes used to establish legitimate businesses and accounts that underworld groups employ as a front to mask their secret activities. Spies and other undercover operatives use them as disposable cover personas while they go about their work. When employed on a mass scale, they can be especially effective. Fake IDs are sometimes used en masse for political astroturﬁng campaigns (faking a grassroots movement in support of a political actor’s goals) or as sock puppets to promote more personal agendas. They may also be used to sabotage or game someone’s rep score—a common claim in certain political arenas, especially during heated elections. Some theorists speculate that particularly sophisticated ID thieves have entire automated networks of fake IDs that they use to establish legitimacy for other falsified personas before they are used or sold to others.
Privacy advocates consider ID information to be a thorny privacy issue. They point out what little control people actually have over their ID proﬁles that are stored in various private, government, and commercial databases and the lack of recourse those people have for correcting information that is false or incorrect. Many databases are known to be riddled with errors, often causing confusion between people with overlapping details. ID proﬁling is also cited as a concern in various restrictive polities where police and security personnel are often more prone to target AGIs, mercurials, or people with particular backgrounds for extra screening or even discriminatory or abusive behavior.
==ID Protection== 
Many transhumans use the tools of surveillance to their advantage and instruct their muse to monitor local mesh feeds for any indications of identity crime or unauthorized fork activity. Some go even further and employ dedicated scanners (usually simple AI agents, but sometimes freelance infomorphs) to station themselves in the mesh nodes of other major habitats to monitor for identity theft. Numerous hypercorps provide this service at reasonable rates; high-end options exist that monitor transactions and activities in the larger commercial and private databases as well. An Extropian hypercorp known as Persona+ has extended similar protections to autonomists, extending branch ofﬁces in various outer system habitats. Their efforts to monitor inner system networks on behalf of their clients have suffered from Consortium-enacted roadblocks and an outright smear campaign launched by Stellar Intelligence.
===Sidebar: Identity Monitoring=== 
**PersonaNoctis12:** Hi SnackBoi, this is a clarification check from your Persona+ monitoring service.
**PersonaNoctis12:** Have you traveled to Luc’s Cluster on [[Ceres]] in the past 3 weeks?
**SnackBoi:** No, I’ve never been.
**SnackBoi:** What’s up?
**PersonaNoctis12:** One moment please.
**PersonaNoctis12:** Persona+ has detected unexplained activity under your good name!
**PersonaNoctis12:** A verdict of Guilty: Aggravated Felony Property Damage to Habitat Systems has been entered against you!
**PersonaNoctis12:** Sentence of VR Conditioning and Reparation is pending your arrest. Three separate ego hunter firms have logged their intent to pursue.
**SnackBoi**: WTF?!
**SnackBoi:** I haven’t been off [[Extropia]] in over a year!
**PersonaNoctis12:** We are sorry for the bad news. Unfortunately your current Persona+ service level does not include remediation services. Would you like to meet with one of our counselors to discuss additional ways we can assist you? Select yes to enter Persona+ simulspace for a free consultation.
==ID and Forking== 
Identity gets a bit tricky when forking is called into play. Alpha forks have the same brainprint as each other, at least at ﬁrst. For legal purposes, most jurisdictions treat alpha forks as the same person up to a certain time period of divergence (4 hours being common in the Consortium, but ranging up to a day or even a week in some habitats) or alternately treat the originators as legal guardians of their alpha forks (and thus legally responsible for their actions). Cognitive scientists disagree over how long it takes and what makes a fork a distinct personality and therefore a separate ego, and so the legal standing of forks varies even more than AGIs and uplifts. In some polities (notably many Consortium stations), alpha forks that diverge beyond a set period become legal non-entities with no rights unless specifically “emancipated” by the originating ego. This policy neatly side-steps property claims and inheritance issues, but it does sometimes leave alpha forks open to discrimination or even murder (deﬁned as “termination” by this viewpoint) without consequences. In others, non-merged forks become full but separate citizens. Most habitats require forks to be identified as such in their digital codes and nanotat IDs; if the fork becomes a separate legal entity, it is of course granted a separate ID. Alpha forks that diverge from their originators will still register the same brainprints for up to a year and sometimes more, however, creating occasional legal entanglements.
The situation is even hairier for beta and delta forks. These forks do not register the same as their originating ego on brainprint scans. With the exception of a few extremely liberal jurisdictions, they are universally considered property rather than separate sapient beings and so have nothing in the way of individual rights. Even in autonomist circles opinions vary; most anarchists treat beta forks the same as weak AIs—as things, not persons, and delta forks even more so. A small but growing number of colonies, particularly in the outer system, consider beta forks to be unique persons with the full rights and privileges the progenitor ego enjoys. Like alpha forks, beta and delta forks are almost always required to make their nature known in digital codes and nanotat IDs.
New technology that looks at psychographic data is being developed for behavioral surveillance that establishes personality norms to help verify identity in case of forking or imposture. These procedures are not considered reliable or practicable yet. Some of the parties involved in research, including Cognite and a joint research venture between Titan Autonomous University’s Individuality Studies faculty and the University of Mars Cognitive Science Department, have come under criticism for their methodology, which has involved invasive cortical stack procedures and similar steps considered to be an invasion of personal privacy.

[ [[Home]] | [[Setting Information]] | [[Surveillance]] ]