I think in most countries, and ID is to identify yourself with it. Not to copy it by giving someone a photo of it. If you give someone a photo, they could identify as you with that photo, breaking the whole concept of an "ID".
What happens if you don't give them a photo of your ID? Do you already have funds from you? Are they in the same country as you? I would be surprised if they could legally blackmail you into giving them a photo of your ID.
I can imagine that there is a law which mandates that you make sure to know with whom you are dealing. And looking at their ID would be an appropriate way to do that.
Identifying someone by receiving a photo of an ID would be absurd. As that very act makes the photo of the ID not able to identify someone anymore. As everyone who receives a photo can now also "identify" as that person.
And looking at their ID would be an appropriate way to do that.
How does that work for companies like Wise, which don't have a nation wide branch network?
Identifying someone by receiving a photo of an ID would be absurd. As that very act makes the photo of the ID not able to identify someone anymore. As everyone who receives a photo can now also "identify" as that person.
That's why KYC verifications have been increasingly moving to picture of ID + video.
So I still think there is no law that mandates forcing users to send copies of their ID over the wire.
In this particular circumstance though, that's a distinction without a difference. If you're a customer of wise (or any other financial institution that doesn't have a retail presence), KYC laws basically mandate that you upload your documents, because there's no alternative.
Well, all this nonsense is just what happens when the provider of analog IDs (usually a federal, state, or local government) does not step up and provide a digital equivalent.
Online photo ID verification just does not make any sense at all: Identity documents usually have physically hard to forge features that just make no sense in a remote context, and that’s not even factoring in generative AI.
Looking at an ID document without a person standing next to it (whether online or in person) is one level of ridiculous beyond that.
But all of this is brought to you by the industry that thinks an SSN is a bearer authentication token, so I’m not too surprised.
True but there have been reported cases where even a fake ID obtained through such KYC helped catch criminals (I struggle for link, it was part of some story). It's still evidence.
Sure, but evidence after the fact is usually little consolation.
As an individual, my first concern isn't whether the bank/company/whoever got fooled by scammers is eventually made whole and/or the fraudsters are prosecuted: I just don't want my identity to be that easily forgeable in the first place!
And that would solve the larger societal problem too: Make identity theft much more difficult and there won't be as much need for zero-liability provisions, a dispute mechanism for fraudulent credit record entries, law enforcement chasing perpetrators (which is often futile if they're abroad and using unwitting accomplices/money mules) etc.
How does it mean more biometrics? Many governments already issue plastic ID cards; it's possible to embed a smart card chip in these and use the ID as a secure remote authentication method with almost any smartphone.
Such an infrastructure needs to be neither centralized nor government-run: If you prefer state/local governments to be in charge of ID, or even private notary-like entities, you totally can.
Stronger guarantee makes it a more attractive target. If some magic token is an absolute proof that it is you then lose that token and go prove to someone that you is you. Just lose your card and if I find it then I am you and you're done.
Comments
I think in most countries, and ID is to identify yourself with it. Not to copy it by giving someone a photo of it. If you give someone a photo, they could identify as you with that photo, breaking the whole concept of an "ID".
What happens if you don't give them a photo of your ID? Do you already have funds from you? Are they in the same country as you? I would be surprised if they could legally blackmail you into giving them a photo of your ID.
AML/KYC laws mandate that they "blackmail" you into giving your ID, otherwise they risk being prosecuted for failing to comply.
Define "giving your ID".
I can imagine that there is a law which mandates that you make sure to know with whom you are dealing. And looking at their ID would be an appropriate way to do that.
Identifying someone by receiving a photo of an ID would be absurd. As that very act makes the photo of the ID not able to identify someone anymore. As everyone who receives a photo can now also "identify" as that person.
How does that work for companies like Wise, which don't have a nation wide branch network?
That's why KYC verifications have been increasingly moving to picture of ID + video.
So I still think there is no law that mandates forcing users to send copies of their ID over the wire.
In this particular circumstance though, that's a distinction without a difference. If you're a customer of wise (or any other financial institution that doesn't have a retail presence), KYC laws basically mandate that you upload your documents, because there's no alternative.
Well, all this nonsense is just what happens when the provider of analog IDs (usually a federal, state, or local government) does not step up and provide a digital equivalent.
Online photo ID verification just does not make any sense at all: Identity documents usually have physically hard to forge features that just make no sense in a remote context, and that’s not even factoring in generative AI.
Looking at an ID document without a person standing next to it (whether online or in person) is one level of ridiculous beyond that.
But all of this is brought to you by the industry that thinks an SSN is a bearer authentication token, so I’m not too surprised.
True but there have been reported cases where even a fake ID obtained through such KYC helped catch criminals (I struggle for link, it was part of some story). It's still evidence.
Sure, but evidence after the fact is usually little consolation.
As an individual, my first concern isn't whether the bank/company/whoever got fooled by scammers is eventually made whole and/or the fraudsters are prosecuted: I just don't want my identity to be that easily forgeable in the first place!
And that would solve the larger societal problem too: Make identity theft much more difficult and there won't be as much need for zero-liability provisions, a dispute mechanism for fraudulent credit record entries, law enforcement chasing perpetrators (which is often futile if they're abroad and using unwitting accomplices/money mules) etc.
I wrote the fake ID helped catch criminals, how is that evidence after the fact? Maybe I misunderstood your phrasing
That usually means biometrics and more power into the hands of the government (or whoever hacks it)
How does it mean more biometrics? Many governments already issue plastic ID cards; it's possible to embed a smart card chip in these and use the ID as a secure remote authentication method with almost any smartphone.
Such an infrastructure needs to be neither centralized nor government-run: If you prefer state/local governments to be in charge of ID, or even private notary-like entities, you totally can.
Stronger guarantee makes it a more attractive target. If some magic token is an absolute proof that it is you then lose that token and go prove to someone that you is you. Just lose your card and if I find it then I am you and you're done.