The Deeper Issues with Centralized Digital IDs

Digital identity today implies and affects far more than it did only a decade ago — it’s no longer merely logging into your email or unlocking your phone. It’s becoming the passport to nearly everything online, connecting both your physical and digital existence — banking, education, communication, and public services. It basically defines your access to the world. Which is why when governments and corporations are rolling out national digital ID wallets, we can’t not rise eyebrows and ask deeper questions.

The obvious danger is that your existence — your ability to function — becomes conditional.

The Global Push Toward Centralized Digital ID

From the EU’s European Digital Identity (EUDI) initiative to similar frameworks across India, Canada, and the UAE, the global push toward centralized digital identity wallets is accelerating. The promise is simple: one ID to access all services — from health and banking to transport and education.

But the deeper implications seem to be brushed over and not discussed enough.
A 2024 Access Now policy brief warned that these systems “create new layers of surveillance and discrimination, particularly in the absence of clear data governance and opt-out mechanisms” .

Meanwhile, the European Digital Rights (EDRi) network highlighted in their 2024 report that the push toward mandatory ID wallets risks undermining data minimization principles enshrined in GDPR and could “institutionalize exclusion” for the digitally marginalized .

In Denmark, citizens rely on MitID to access healthcare, banking, and even public libraries. A glitch or expired credential can mean losing access to essentials. In Estonia, the government proudly showcases its e-ID system — but behind the efficiency lies a brittle dependency: access is centralized, conditional, and vulnerable .

As Bruce Schneier, renowned security technologist, put it:
“Centralized identity systems make mass surveillance easy, and abuse scalable” .

Overreach, Exclusion, and Fragility

The deeper problem with the whole perspective painted by the centralized system being developed now is total dependence.

In these systems, identity becomes a tool of control. Age-verification laws start as child safety measures — then quietly evolve into ID mandates for adult websites, social platforms, and encrypted messengers. What began as convenience morphs into gatekeeping.

We’ve seen this before. Financial deplatforming, where individuals are denied access to banking for political reasons, is now technically feasible for identity. If your credentials are revoked or contested, your access to critical infrastructure goes with them.

What Owning Identity Actually Means

SourceLess Labs Foundation explores alternative models where identity shouldn’t be conditional but sovereign.
With SourceLess tools:

• STR.Domains + STR Talk give you an encrypted communication layer tied to your personal Web3 domain. You don’t rent your identity — you own it.
• Modular usage allows your ID to serve you across finance, education, and communication — without locking you into any single app or database.

The goal is full privacy and functionality without being at the mercy of centralized control. Systems that work without watching. Access without dependence. Identity that belongs to the individual.

Final Question

If 2023 was about exploring the promise of digital ID, 2025 is about facing its consequences. Systems being built now will shape the next decade of access, inclusion, and autonomy. Will they serve individuals or or will individuals serve them?