That's the way how most of the world has mostly solved identity theft, however, it's not that easy to implement in USA because there's no system of universal secure IDs in USA (by design) - there's a multitude of ID forms, some of them are not really secure (easy to forge, no verification if it was really issued by the institution who did so, no easy process to quickly verify online if the provided credential has been lost/stolen/revoked, etc), and there's a sufficiently large minority of potential customers who don't have a valid ID.
It would be helpful to have laws that clearly assign the credit fraud risk fully onto the defrauded companies instead of the people whose identities were used, as experience shows that this would rapidly result in improvements to fraud elimination (there's all kinds of measures that simply are not taken since they add friction), however, a proper solution does require a decent state-run identity system as the foundation of trust, and USA has made a political decision to not have one.
My hope is their anti-vax research eventually leads them to learning about DNA.
So, in practice, anything that pattern-matches to "people will need to carry some sort of token given by a big organization (private or public) to pay or be paid for goods and services" will be viewed by some as the Mark, or a slippery slope towards the Mark.
Anyway, the Mark as described in Revelations is pretty... bodily, for lack of better term. It evokes the image of getting a barcode stamped on your arm or your forehead, in exchange for swearing fealty. The Mark feels like a concrete, physical thing. That's why things like "government ID" or "payment chip in your arm" pattern-match to this prophesy for so many people, while things like "mobile phone number" or "e-mail address" don't.
(There's also a factor of scale/graduality. For people alive this century, countries and governments were always a thing. A big thing. Banks too. The governments, the UN, the international financial system - they look big, evil, and pattern-match to the Beast. In contrast, for most people alive today, mobile phones and e-mail addresses were something they've seen introduced gradually, from great many independent vendors. They don't have this obvious Beast-like quality.)
Source: grew up as Jehovah's Witness. While I obviously can't speak for all fundamentalist Christians, and while JW teachings don't consider government IDs to be the Mark[0], I got pretty familiar with the patterns of thinking people show around this topic.
--
[0] - They do, however, believe that the Beast described in the Revelations is currently embodied by the United Nations. So if the UN ever proposes a common ID scheme or an electronic payment system, I'm pretty sure plenty of Witnesses will throw a fit.
But I think this is mitigated as long as it’s optional for a company. The company is held liable for any fraud that they allow. The company has the option to use the government ID to prevent fraud, but they can also assume more risk and take on a customer without the “official” gov ID, if they want to.
I can see this resulting in something like creditors saying: “either you can use a govID to sign up for this credit card, like normal. OR you can send us a $10k deposit and forego the govID entirely, if you like.”
This solution makes it so that companies are held more responsible, but decreases the risk of having more government power by making it a decision for the company’s “risk management team” to decide.
How does that not already happen, just inefficiently? It's hard to function in the U.S. if you don't have a Social Security Number — that's why people bother using someone else's — and we already have a de facto ID system for most people but it's a patchwork at the state level which was somewhat federalized with RealID.
It's hard to imagine an environment where people would unjustly be “cut off” where the state level system would prevent abuse which would otherwise happen — it's not like, for example, California stopped politically-motivated DHS activity during the Trump era.
The root of the problem is sharing the private information. Why your credit reports are shared among completely different entities? Nobody want to gives them a consent to share your private information.
> system of universal secure IDs
Actually, it's the opposite. US has universal ID(not secure though). That's the problem. If there exist one idiot who doesn't verify your identity, everything fails in chain reaction, because everybody else believe the idiot.
Do we? Our SSN is not a unique number, and not just because the keyspace is too small for our population. (It's worse: some of the prefixes are geographically related.)
https://www.ssa.gov/employer/randomization.html https://www.ssa.gov/employer/randomizationfaqs.html
Even if what you say were true, handwaving this as unimportant because it only affects people over the age of ten seems a bit silly.
The post that I replied to is almost entirely incorrect as it relates to available SSN “keyspace” (misnomer), uniqueness, etc.—-for which geographic prefixes and group numbers are relevant.
I supplied direct sources, so no idea what your “even if what you say were true” skepticism is rooted in.
Freeze your credit. Burden shouldn’t fall on the consumer, but it’s easy and easy to lift when needed.
Identity Theft is actually just fraud. And the companies that allowed the fraud should be required to shoulder the burden of addressing that matter with the actual people who committed the fraud. No part of that burden should ever be placed on you, just because someone pretended to be you and commit a fraud.
It'll be really hard to convince people to give up the convenience and higher returns of online-only banks.
A better option would be using cryptographic digital signatures by an HSM (smart card) to verify ID for financial services.
Framing the action of defrauding a person as a downstream effect of being a victim of theft, is nothing short of institutionalised victim blaming. No, just no. The person was defrauded because of stolen identity and/or payment info documents. They were not a "victim of theft": they were a target of fraud.
Calling it theft is a sleight of hand to absolve banks, payment providers and businesses from their responsibilities.
Using a secret number to verify identity is absurd and hilarious.