Hacker News Reader

Comment by supernova87a | Hacker News Reader

I wonder if the following idea has occurred to anyone else?

We have more and more kinds of accounts, financial products, online services, etc. that would benefit from some kind of real in-person verification at points in the process (initial application, maintenance, changes to account) that are imperfectly done with credit checks, questions/answers, logins, etc.

We have Post Offices in nearly every corner of this country. How about turning them into a kind of value-added identity verification service where any company wanting/needing an identity verification could rely on the Post Office to accept someone in person to prove who they are (through fingerprint, document, etc) and be the 3rd party to make this proof easy?

Sure you would need to have normal fraud protections, etc. but I bet the act of having to come to a post office would make things very secure / reliable. And it would give the post office a new function. I heard of this being done in some other countries.

It seems like a way to avoid us all having to pay for fraud so frequently.

View on HN

Canada Post, the equivalent of the USPS in Canada, offers exactly this service [1]

I've used it for Know-Your-Client type stuff with banks, but it is theoretically open to most if not all businesses. Every time I've needed to interact with it, it's been a straightforward process as a consumer.

[1]: https://www.canadapost-postescanada.ca/cpc/en/business/posta...

Sagawa (a private courier in Japan) provides a similar service but at your doorstep. Basically the sender registers your info with them (mainly DoB) and upon delivery you have to provide an ID, which the driver checks that it matches with what's written on the envelope, then enters your DoB and other info and your ID number into a portable wireless POS device. Only if they match, you receive the package, and then I believe the info entered into the device gets relayed to the sender.

(Use your translation service of choice if desired.) https://www.sagawa-exp.co.jp/service/kakunin/

It would be amazing to see the current trust / code-signing industry fail and for something that integrates services like the one you linked to replace them.

I've always thought that a code-signing certificate tied to a natural person should be more valuable than one tied to a faceless corporation, but the industry is (poorly) built around selling high priced certificates to anyone with enough money to start a business.

Imagine being able to get a code signing certificate in a single afternoon by signing up, taking your ID to Canada Post, and downloading your certificate after the identity verification is submitted. That would be quite the difference from the current awful experience where someone in a foreign country guesses and makes judgement calls based on the documentation you snail mail to them.

Or we could just have a modern ID card that already has a cert embedded in it, and skip the whole go to the post office step. Most big companies and the US Federal government have already figured this out for their own employees.

Keep the post office option for the folks that don't have an ID, but for most people, this would be the most straightforward option.

This does work for certain things, but for some things you don’t just want proof of possession of a particular person’s ID card, you want to see that a particular person matches the document they are presenting in addition to verifying that the doc is real.

I'd have to imagine that's exceptionally rare though. It would be semi-solved with a second factor to unlock the card.

Wouldn't people just get socially engineered into giving up their code signing certificate? Some ads along the lines of "give us your code signing certificate and be entered into a raffle for an iPhone" would probably work. Stand in line to get some document you'll never use, maybe win a gadget, and a few days later your name is being used to spread malware.

Basically, I don't think a natural person is enough protection against malice. Something like "stick 1 million dollars into escrow, and if someone uses your cert to spread malware, we keep it" is a much stronger incentive. (Not what's done, of course.)

You need to cater for those people, they will be the bulk of your clients and also need the most support. So make resetting it possible but not easy.

Here in europe we have several countries with digital ID cards. You put your ID in a smartcard reader, you put in your pin, and you can get your identity verified in a web browser.

Belgium has an identity service based on this. Governmental OAuth. https://www.csam.be/en/about-csam.html | https://iamapps.belgium.be/sma/generalinfo

They publish their own eID reader (middleware) and browser extensions. https://eid.belgium.be/en

Even with an official Linux version. :) https://eid.belgium.be/en/linux-eid-software-installation

In Sweden we have "BankID" that could be card based, but almost everyone has it in their phone. It is issued by the banks (hence the name?) since they already has vetted your identity. BankID is used almost everywhere, from online banking to sign your employment contract or collect benefits when you're home to care for your sick child.

The post office used to issue normal identity cards, but today I only think it's the DMV equivalent and the police that does that.

Here in Czech Republic the CzechPoint system kinda does that:

https://www.ceskaposta.cz/en/sluzby/egovernment/czechpoint

Its usually situated on post offices or local government offices and makes it possible to get verified electronic signature that you can then use to prove your identity electronically. It can also access various government registries, etc.

We could even cut out the middle man and allow the USPS to offer banking services, the way it did for nearly 50 years[1]! The original implementation didn't include checking or savings accounts, but it looks like they're slowly looking into that[2].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Postal_Savings_S...

[2]: https://federalnewsnetwork.com/agency-oversight/2021/10/usps...

>We have Post Offices in nearly every corner of this country. How about turning them into a kind of value-added identity verification

When I opened a bank account (n26) in Germany this is how they verified my identity (along with a brief video call) as a foreigner so the idea has merit.

It's called PostIdent, it'd a wonderful service.

Aren't you describing a notary public? A person registered with the government who asserts with their stamp that documentation and IDs are verifiable in person?

There are already standard ways of doing brick and mortar identity verification, and in somewhat surveillance-resisting ways even! The most common is "notarization" - a state-deputized "notary" verifies that you are who you say you are, and then endorses your signed document with a special stamp and a signature. Another common one used for financial transactions is a "medallion stamp", wherein not only do they verify your identity, but the institution doing the medallion stamp also takes on the risk for a fraudulent transaction.

Both are generally available for free by being a customer of your local small bank or credit union. These could be easily adopted by web companies for password resets, account withdrawals above self-set limits, etc.

Yes, but notarization feels like a much more cumbersome process, designed for more like "once in a lifetime" transactions (house purchase, will, etc). It also feels more like a proof, only needed if a transaction is disputed in court etc, it can be investigated back to the source.

I mean the every day kind of verification that fuels our daily transactions and benefits from instantaneous info being transmitted back and forth, to easily get a credit card approved for example.

The cumbersome part of notarization is having to physically go to the bank, which would be the same for the post office. The performance of showing up in person, and showing a physical hard-to-forge ID, is exactly what drastically raises the bar for an attacker.

Doing this instantaneously implies skipping the heavyweight process. Which I assume means doing something like a one time (or periodic) cumbersome in-person process, and then repeating a quicker online process. Any private company could create such a system right now, bootstrapping off the notarization framework to do the heavy lifting.

But credit cards and other traditional financial institutions don't actually care about identity in such a strong sense. The standard process for setting up online access for a new account at a brick and mortar bank involves leaving the bank, going to their website from home, and entering your not-particularly-private information to sign up. That could be easily modified to setting up initial access credentials right in the bank if they wanted to, but the traditional financial system is pretty forgiving for the most part.

So we're really talking about custodians of new bearer instruments (eg cryptocurrency), which are more like cash. Hence my reference to these new holding companies being the ones that should be integrating notarization into their exceptional account access methods. Of course they could also just insist on the use of real security tokens, require a second one for backup purposes, and simply not use SMS at all.

FWIW another more convenient way of doing brick and mortar verification is to snail mail out a letter with a code on it to the address of record. It obviously doesn't have super security properties (anyone can steal mail), but it's much better than electronic-only non-verification and much nicer than surveillance database verification.

@hellbannedguy:

Yes from what I know, you technically do not need to get a will notarized. But getting it notarized makes it a "self proving will", which will be easily accepted by a court. If you don't do the notarization at the time, your poor executor will likely need to hunt down the witnesses and get them to sign affidavits.

There's a number of KYC services where you're basically asked to be filmed and a person in a call centre looks at it and decides whether it's really you.

When I went looking at them they were boasting with using AI, and then in the meeting it turned out it was mostly farmed out to someone in India.

You misread. They're using Al, he's in Chennai and on call 24/7.

The term you're looking for is "Notary". There are plenty of them around, and they're required to execute high-dollar contracts like buying a house or wills.

Every state has its own requirements to become a notary(with one requirement being posting a $10k bond or purchasing insurance, so you have something to lose if you make an egregious mistake).

You can require counterparties notarize any documents you'd like, and reject anyone who declines. And you can do this without needing to change the law to increase the scope of responsibility of the USPS. It's illegal for the USPS to offer notary services, although they're often located near notaries: UPS Stores usually offer it.

I'd just observe that we saw the opposite happening with COVID. Based on a couple experiences of my own I was chatting with a friend who runs gift-giving strategy for a major university. I made the comment that a lot of things that just had to be done in person with notaries etc. suddenly apparently didn't have to be any longer and she agreed.

While it's doubtless sometimes necessary, I'm generally a fan of not having to go into an office for money transfers and so forth. It's also worth remembering that this sort of thing may (normally) be pretty low overhead for a lot of us but isn't for e.g. people who aren't very mobile.

It is a good idea, that is why Australia Post have done just this: https://auspost.com.au/business/identity/voi-solutions-for-c...

Last I looked many years ago it was quite an expensive service. Good for high-value one-off things but not really what GP is talking about.

Unfortunately, the U.S. gov has gone in the direction of using a shady private company ID.me [0] to provide this service. Starting 2022, the IRS is using ID.me to authenticate login to the irs.gov website. Same with California DMV. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ID.me.

Millions of American citizen will be forced to provide their info to this private company. Authentication involves you providing your cell phone number, then uploading a photograph of your drivers license or passport with that phone and then allowing ID.me to scan your face using the same phone camera.

You may think if the IRS and DMV are using this company it must be a serious identity service vetted by homeland security and what not. I did some digging around.

ID.me has a shopping site where you can shop for deals on sunglasses, sneakers and food kits [1] https://shop.id.me/. They use .me which is the top-level domain for Montenegro.

There is one hackernews thread about this company filled with clearly fake reviews made by accounts created the day the post appeared [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13831921

What could go wrong ?

It’s worse than that. Id.me originally started by providing verification for group discounts. Fair enough needs to verify to provide a discount and facilitate commerce.

They’ve now used those groups as a stepping stone to verify the public. They want everyone.

Id.me’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service state that they will not sell your data. Good, but they absolutely can and will sell your demographic cohort. With the buyers being their integration clients (brands) and data brokers.

Hopefully they use differential privacy techniques. Doubtful. It quickly has become a government mandated (irs.gov) Facebook style audience mining network. That’s why Google invested in them and had a seat on their board.

They were damn good to hook wink the IRS and VA on that one.

https://californiaglobe.com/articles/monetizing-data-the-edd...

> How about turning them into a kind of value-added identity verification service where any company wanting/needing an identity verification could rely on the Post Office to accept someone in person to prove who they are (through fingerprint, document, etc) and be the 3rd party to make this proof easy?

Consider how you would like the Post Office to verify your identity and then ask why someone else, e.g. the person you're trying to prove your identity to, couldn't do the exact same thing.

One advantage of an ID is that it's a physical token, so they can't just guess your password, they'd need to physically have it. Unless they can forge one, so you'd really want to use some kind of cryptography. You've just reinvented a YubiKey.

The actual problem isn't that we don't know how to solve this. It's that people prefer insecurity to minor inconveniences. Especially when the liability is on someone else.

cough national id scheme, anyone? Thinking of E-Estonia here.

I lived in the Netherlands and admired how they offer a SSO service called DigiD for most—if not all—national and municipal services: personal tax, business tax, healthcare, pension, water, garbage, police and many other service portals. Yes, there is a nice online police portal where you can digitally file a police report, get a declaration for insurance, and ask questions.

You also get a digital inbox—Berichtenbox—to organize and centralize all communications from those agencies.

It is difficult to overstate how much life is made better when the government is well-organized and that organization is exposed to you through good UX. I'm now back in the US, it's been 2+ weeks since my renewed passport was supposed to have been mailed to me, and no one at the State Department knows anything.

Not having to depend on phone numbers would be so good, especially for citizen mobility.

It's long, long overdue. That said a national ID scheme has long been opposed by a vocal part of the Christian population in the states. It's association with the new testament's prophesy of the mark of the beast prevents many lawmakers from pushing forward a proposal, especially since 65% of Americans in 2019 identified as having a belief in some variety of Christianity[0].

The obvious reality here is that in the wake of no proper national identification system, social security numbers have been used instead. It's not a question of whether or not we have a national ID, it's really just a question of whether we have a functional one or an inadequate one. Nonetheless politicians would likely be committing suicide with their constituents in some districts if they were to support a push towards a better system.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States#....

>social security numbers have been used instead

Historically that was sort of the case. I'd argue today that we mostly rely on state-issued IDs (especially but not necessarily driver's licenses) which are now overlaid with RealID requirements.

As a practical matter it's probably indistinguishable from what a federally-issued ID would be and I'm mostly content with not adding any more layers of identity verification than are really necessary. I'd probably oppose a push for a broadly required federal ID--although I have a passport (and a global entry card).

Some states allow use of SSNs for drivers license numbers.

It’s generally decreased over time though.

>RealID requirements

This doesn't invalidate your point, but man it irritates me how many states have chosen to retain a noncompliant ID tier in order to avoid eating costs or raising fees. At least my state offers a full EDL so there's some added value, but it's absurd that the 'default' local ID isn't adequate for domestic air travel.

There are non-trivial documentation requirements for RealID though. I had to go back in a second time. If someone has no need to fly it’s probably reasonable to offer them a lower bar.

There's a surprising number of people who do not possess a birth certificate document. Their parents lost it, it got thrown out during an eviction, etc, etc. I've witnessed people at DMV stations who brought in their original birth certificates, but the embossed notary stamp had flattened over the years. It takes time and money to get a replacement. If the non-enhanced IDs didn't exist, these people couldn't get a state id card.

I have a passport so it's sort of academic, but I'm not sure if I could lay my hands on my birth certificate. I'd certainly have to look through some file cabinets to see if I could find it and who knows if it's an original or not.

For people without a passport, it's extremely easy to have lost a birth certificate at some point over the years. And I honestly have no idea how easy or hard getting a new one issued is from some potentially far away city or town.

>it irritates me how many states have chosen to retain a noncompliant ID tier in order to avoid eating costs or raising fees

That's not why. States like California have dragged their feet for a decade with RealID compliance because they want to keep IDs for people in the US illegally indistinguishable from those for citizens, permanent residents, and others here legally.

That's interesting, I can imagine why certain groups would want that but not really why the state itself would want it; and if they would, why can't they just explicitly pass a law granting those people whatever rights they want to grant.

Can you elaborate on this for us non-USA people?

I don't understand why people think religion is the main reason to oppose this.

The main reason to oppose this is that if you had a low friction government ID system, surveillance capitalism would then require you to present your ID to do anything whatsoever and all privacy would disappear forever.

But we already have that? If you pay with a credit card, have an address on file, or use a state-issued ID (drivers license), I don't see how that would be worse.

Credit cards are already a privacy catastrophe for anything where you have to pay money, but people will push back if you demand one for anything where you're not supposed to be paying anything because people are rightly wary of being charged when they ought not to be. Anyone who gives their credit card number for a "free trial" learns that the hard way and then becomes appropriately cynical.

A state-issued ID generally doesn't work over the internet, which is good. Some of them can be read electronically in person, which is already being abused to a limited extent and should be gotten rid of.

Which is the general response to your concern: "This is already a problem" means we need to go the other way and address that so that doesn't happen anymore, not intensify the problem and set it in concrete so it can never be fixed.

Centralized identity is a design flaw. Your bank needs to know if you're authorized to withdraw from your account, which is why you have a bank card. Your email provider needs to know if you're allowed to access your email account, which is why you have an email password. Your apartment building needs to know if you're authorized to enter, which is why you have an access card. What we don't need, and should not have, is a single primary key binding all of these things together so it can be correlated in a single database.

As someone who campaigned against UK ID cards 20 years ago, we failed to realise that the ID requirements could be imposed without providing the ID scheme.

Since then the UK has imposed ID (technically "proof of right of residence", but that kind of has to be ID) on having a bank account, having a job, and both buying and renting houses. All without having a coherent ID scheme other than passport or driving license.

We already have phone numbers for a low friction ID system used for surveillance.

People can reasonably get multiple phone numbers. A good countermeasure against this would make this easier and less expensive for people to do, e.g. you buy one phone plan and the phone company gives you two phone numbers, either of which you can change at your leisure. Then you give one to your friends and the other to your enemies, and change the second one every time you encounter a new enemy.

IMHO the difference is that the status quo (a high friction non-universal government ID system + almost universal private "ID"/tracking systems) has all the same disadvantages anyway, but simply fails to realize the possible benefits.

What possible benefits actually are there, compared to non-centralized identity systems we already have? The only thing you get from a centralized identity system is the bad thing -- it allows surveillance bureaucracies to correlate separate authentication tokens with each other.

This means that each and every institution has to verify identities "from scratch" which they are not really capable of. Bootstrapping trustworthy verification of identity that is useful for commerce (e.g. where you can practically collect debts/credit and prevent creating fake identities so that you know who you're dealing with, can reach them for contract enforcement if needed, and can ban people you don't want to deal with) is really hard, so everyone is essentially delegating it to someone else - webstores to credit card issuers, all kinds of institutions to social security numbers, some to phone numbers, and everyone is doing that poorly and failing at making it secure since there is no solid foundation for any of it, resulting in the extremely costly identity theft problem (in USA it's like $50bn per year?) and in cases like this, where companies have to rely on "phone numbers" and ridiculous "security" questions like mother's maiden name - because they don't have anything better to use.

Privacy and anonymity are not the same; there are many domains where anonymity is reasonable and default, but also many domains where it is not; in those someone can respect privacy and at the same time refuse to deal with anonymous partners, and it's an entirely reasonable choice that they should be able to make not only in theory but in practice - having an effective, secure mechanism for a person to verify their identity to someone else.

Proper identities are a key basis for trust - without them you can do one-off immediate barters (perhaps many times), but prolonged relationships, various forms of credit and "credit-like-effects", accumulation of reputation are highly beneficial for society; and from the perspective of incentives it's worth noting that the harder it is to "get away with" betraying trust and start from zero, the less incentive there is to defect and more incentive to cooperate; there's a good reason why the game theory iterated Prisoner's dilemma (which relies on preserving identities) gets so much better average results for everyone than non-iterated or fully anonymized Prisoner's dilemma.

My National ID is valid for 10 years, but certificates expire 3 years after issue. Can only renew face to face, but I’m approx 30hours of flight time away from home, lol.

But I agree - NFC passports are already kinda doing that, but there isn’t enough services that support it.

This is the US we are talking about. Must be against the constitution and government is bad. Better to live in perpetual fraud.

People will always live in perpetual fraud, it's only a matter of degree.

That's part of the reason why I like having my money with an RIA that I have a relationship with: I can't make big withdrawals on the account without verifying with several people. That's a sigh of relief.

I think there is a need for authentication, especially among people that are in and out of poverty.

The catch-22 is that you can't get a job without an address, and you can't get an address without a job, so you cannot be authenticated by means available to most people! Hard to bootstrap yourself when you can't prove you exist. Having some kind of authentication that doesn't require an easily lost-or-stolen asset (ID card, birth certificate) would be helpful, as long as it is voluntary!

Many people have addresses without having a job. Kids, stay-at-home partners, roommates, college students, retirees, and likely others.

I'm talking about homeless people: You can't have an address if you don't have a job because you can't pay rent. Unless you live in a city with adequate public housing. Duh.

In some regions, particularly in Africa, there is no door to door delivery of mail; for example, in Kenya. Renting a PO box has traditionally been the only way to receive mail in such countries. Another use case is when the mail box at your doorstep is not very secure, you rent a po box in the post office and mail is delivered to that po box instead of your address.

I don't know about other countries, but here in Australia post offices are open Monday-Friday, 9-5 (with the exception of some smaller ones being open until noon on a Saturday) and there are massive queues around lunchtime.

And that's assuming there is a post office near you (or you have a car), and you're able-bodied enough to get there independently.

I can say from personal experience that I have point blank refused to pick up Signature on Delivery (ie, the sender instructed the postal service not to leave the package on the porch) items from the post office in the past and demanded a refund from the seller. I'd do the same if I was asked to go down there to verify an account for Uber or whatever.

You may not like AusPost, but, the actually do offer the suggested service. [0] (As well as being somewhere you can apply for Police Checks and other identity services.)

[0] https://auspost.com.au/business/identity/voi-solutions-for-c...

I mean sure, you can, but it's ridiculously inconvenient.

If an online service like eBay, Facebook or Uber required this level of verification, people would (rightly) tell them to piss off and use a competing service instead.

> If an online service like eBay, Facebook or Uber required this level of verification, people would (rightly) tell them to piss off and use a competing service instead.

Well, we'll see once the government forces through the "anti-troll" bill that does require a similar level of verification, next year.

[0] https://www.theregister.com/2021/11/29/australia_troll_bill/

Interesting. Could kill two birds with one stone.

Japan Post provides this service, except the postman goes to your door and asks for ID and verifies it on the spot. It's very easy, and an extremely cheap way for services to verify identities (it's just +100JPY on the regular postal fare)

This seems like like it would only work in a country like Japan where the mail carrier would be on time. What if you're not home when they arrive? In the US they'd give you a 4 hour window and then show up 2 hours after the end of it.

They leave a notice that you received a verified letter, then you go the post office.

It's a good idea. The flaw is in thinking USPS is even slightly interested in innovating. They're not.

But then we also have a notary public system, which is already in the business of verifying identification for official purposes. That could do it too.

>thinking USPS is even slightly interested in innovating

Or, you know, it's hard to innovate when you're in organizational crisis mode trying to prefund 50 years of retirement while not being allowed to market-rate your core service...

> The flaw is in thinking USPS is even slightly interested in innovating. They're not.

If the political system stops public sector organisations innovating, they won't innovate. See, for example, BT in the UK, who were looking into investing in fibre optic rollout in the 80s and 90s until Thatcher snuffed that idea out and we're only now starting to get fibre to the premises rolled out in significant numbers.

https://www.techradar.com/uk/news/world-of-tech/how-the-uk-l...

> It's a good idea. The flaw is in thinking USPS is even slightly interested in innovating. They're not.

That's because it has been a target of right-wing attack for decades starting with the republican-led 2006 bill that effectively bankrupted it overnight by requiring a massive 50 years of health benefits to be funded.[1]

So when you have a service (not a business) that is constantly being picked apart and hamstrung from completing its most basic functions, you can't possibly blame them for not innovating. Well you can, but it is not in good faith.

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/apr/15/afl-cio/wi...

Democrats have had opportunities to "rectify" this, including complete control of the Presidency and Congress the very next terms (2007-11 Congress and 2009-17 Presidency) as well as at present. Ask yourself why they didn't... and don't.

I was going to say that this was done in New Zealand, but either the post office stopped doing it or I miss remembered. https://www.realme.govt.nz/how-apply/ now it seems that the Drivers license centers are the only place to get photo verified.

https://old.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/muc3ze/tifu_by_accide...

Possible in some places!

In many European countries the post office also offers banking services.

the USPS could be doing this and so much more for citizens.

But lawmakers in this country are allergic to having the government manage anything

Meanwhile the USPS instead funds itself by being an open channel for wasteful junk mail.

Making money while doing something actually useful? Not my government, not when there's a tiny sliver of profit to be funneled to wealthy special interests!

> But lawmakers in this country are allergic to having the government manage anything

Congress has slowly been fucking the USPS to death at the behest of FedEx, UPS, et al lobbyists.

Here's my Senator on the subject of postal banking:

> “You would have to work very hard to come up with a worse idea than having the government become a national bank executed through the post office,” [Sen. Pat Toomey, a Pennsylvania Republican] said. “Even if the U.S. Postal Service was the most competent, professional and best-run organization on the planet, they should not be in the business of banking.

> “We have banks,” Toomey continued. “The idea that the government is going to do a better job is just laughable.”

What a moron.

https://www.oleantimesherald.com/news/gop-senators-oppose-id...

What's even funnier is that we actually used to have Postal Banking back in the 20th century.

But like other things during the 'Regeanomics era', it was cut, along with forcing the USPS to pay pensions 10 years in advance. The context does help to explain the reason why our USPS Grumman vans are well over their service life, and no where near retirement yet.

>forcing the USPS to pay pensions 10 years in advance

This is false, as the factcheck.org reference posted above in this thread makes clear.

Remind me why we need a post office again.

I thought about this too. My iteration of the idea is to have the USPS office to install a cert on a citizen's phone (upon verification in person) and make sure a cert is associated with one person only. This will allow easy and reliable online voting.

Taking this a step further, I'd love for them to be able to issue some sort of smart card that I could then utilize when signing up for other accounts that still wanted verification, but were okay with a slightly lower assurance.

Italy: spid. In person id verification at any post office, use the app thereafter.

All European online banks can verify your identity with a video call in 5min. They check your info, your ID documents, that you are indeed the one holding these documents, and the security features of these documents.

Going through some processes on DMV and USCIS recently I noticed both of them were using Id.me

Seems like a private company providing services to these gov agencies on authentication. Seems like a better solution than showing up at the post office.

That’s actually fascinating, because this official login solution exists, and it seems very nice: login.gov. It’s from the GSA which seems to be doing some good work.

I wonder how id.me differs, and how we haven’t centralized on one solution yet

Over 200 federal agency web properties have adopted login.gov. Social Security Administration recently adopted them as their primary identity provider (and appears to be phasing out id.me but I’m waiting on some ground truth to confirm that). Something is up with IRS as to why they went with with id.me, and someone has submitted FOIA requests to get more context.

You record video message for example and state unemployment office can verify it against DL photo

What you describe does exist, but not via the post office. For example when I started a new job I had to go to a tiny store that does fax, copy, postal, notary and similar services and have them physically verify my employment eligibility documents. Several similar providers exist all over the city (including FedEx, UPS, banks and more).

This is such a high barrier to entry, however, that people will simply not do it for something that isn't absolutely critical. Online services compete with each other to be as frictionless as possible, whereas this is the exact opposite of that.

New Zealand Post does this: https://www.realme.govt.nz/

I'm all for it if they execute it well enough to make a profit.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com