4 ms·

Years ago hotels and currency exchanges when traveling abroad would simply look at your passport, and maybe write down some info by hand. Then they started phot

Years ago hotels and currency exchanges when traveling abroad would simply look at your passport, and maybe write down some info by hand. Then they started photocopying the passport. And now they scan it. Full color high-resolution scan. I dislike this intensely. All kinds of random places are keeping hi-res scans of documents that are perfect for identity theft and fraud. I've tried suggesting that looking at the passport should be sufficient to verify my identity -- they don't need to make a copy of it -- but I've had no luck. Has anyone had success at pushing back on this? Are there laws in any country that say that you can't take photocopies or scans of customers' passports?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
jltsiren 4y ago
It's better to assume that the data page of a passport is public information. There are far too many places in the world where storing a copy of the information (at least for foreign visitors) is a legal requirement. Also, high-resolution scans of passports are not a new thing. They were already pretty common in the late 2000s. The biggest change from then is that hotel employees are now more likely to be comfortable with electronic documents than paper copies.
- paranoidrobot 4y ago
  > It's better to assume that the data page of a passport is public information. Unfortunately there's a disconnect here for what it's used for. If that page is treated as public information, then information on it can't also be used for the 100 Points of ID that public and private organisations want. The document number on my passport is enough to get a credit card with a high limit in my name, sent to an address that's never before been connected with my identity. Maybe some more conservative banks will want the address to match. That information is precisely what was leaked by Optus.
paranoidrobot 4y ago
I've pushed back on it in individual situations. A house booked and paid through booking.com wanted me to email them a copy of my passport. I said no, but they could see it in person when I arrived. When they arrived they wanted to take a photo of it. I said no, then, too. They were really quite unhappy about that, and claimed they've had people stay on fraudulent cards before, and this was the only way to protect themselves. Employers doing things like SOC2 are also wanting to go through third party background-check services. All of those also want things like selfies and scans of passports. They all claim the same "We delete it after the check is complete" thing, too, which I don't believe.
- naruhodo 4y ago
  It probably comes down to proving to an insurance company that the document was sighted.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

jltsiren 4y ago

It's better to assume that the data page of a passport is public information. There are far too many places in the world where storing a copy of the information (at least for foreign visitors) is a legal requirement. Also, high-resolution scans of passports are not a new thing. They were already pretty common in the late 2000s. The biggest change from then is that hotel employees are now more likely to be comfortable with electronic documents than paper copies.

paranoidrobot 4y ago
> It's better to assume that the data page of a passport is public information. Unfortunately there's a disconnect here for what it's used for. If that page is treated as public information, then information on it can't also be used for the 100 Points of ID that public and private organisations want. The document number on my passport is enough to get a credit card with a high limit in my name, sent to an address that's never before been connected with my identity. Maybe some more conservative banks will want the address to match. That information is precisely what was leaked by Optus.

paranoidrobot 4y ago

I've pushed back on it in individual situations. A house booked and paid through booking.com wanted me to email them a copy of my passport. I said no, but they could see it in person when I arrived. When they arrived they wanted to take a photo of it. I said no, then, too. They were really quite unhappy about that, and claimed they've had people stay on fraudulent cards before, and this was the only way to protect themselves. Employers doing things like SOC2 are also wanting to go through third party background-check services. All of those also want things like selfies and scans of passports. They all claim the same "We delete it after the check is complete" thing, too, which I don't believe.

naruhodo 4y ago
It probably comes down to proving to an insurance company that the document was sighted.