Well, first you must cede the idea that government will be responsible for national security. You might argue that if it can't deliver the mail, then it shouldn't be responsible for protecting the country either. In that case, stop right there and advocate for a private army. But if you cede that government should have responsibility for national security (and I do), then there are a host of things it must do to further that goal. Being able to make sure that people are who they say they are is one step towards separating the terrorists from the non-terrorists, thus creating a safer state. I am not a computer security expert, so I would not presume to have a detailed plan as to how exactly this should be done, but I would argue that without oversight, the risk of abuse is very high. I would also say that paranoia of abuse that leads to the abandonment of steps toward stronger security is also a huge risk. That's why I advocated for a separation of powers approach. I hope that helps to answer your questions.