Ĩesky | english

/!\ NOTE this is not a policy track document but a guide referenced by AssuranceHandbook2. Its name should be changed to perhaps Assurance/IdCheckingPractice and it should have its status clarified in AssuranceHandbook2 as a "practice" authorised by the Handbook. or something.... /!\

Practice on ID Checking

The mimimum requirements are exactly that. They cannot be waived by the assurer.

The example scenarios should give you some guidelines about the amount of points to award. Since guidelines can never cover every possible situation, the assurer may deviate from this suggestions based on her/his own judgement.

Minimum requirements

The Assurance must not be completed if one of these is not met.

Example scenarios

The assumed standard situation is

For help in Assurance there is a mechanism named: Categorisation. Presented documents can be categorized into 3 groups, where the "Primary Documents" category is to select the best presented govermental photo ID. If you've presented with more then one govermental photo ID doc, you can select the ID doc with the most security features into Category "Primary documents" and the others to "Secondary Documents". If you'll presented only one govermental photo ID, thats than the "Primary Document". If you cannot categorize at least one govermental photo ID to "primary document" you cannot continue with the Assurance. So the categorisation is also a weighten on documents, a prioritization.

Presented documents should be categorized into

This categorisation can be read as a helping mechanism. The count of variations is too high, to list them all. So the question if you were presented with only one red German drivers license as a govermental photo ID can be answered simple:

So reading this, the process of categorisation is a flaw process regarding the documents you've get presented. Assurance Policy and AssuranceHandbook doesn't offer the categorisation into "Primary" and "Secondary documents" so this is to read as a helping mechanism for ID docs prioritization only. The definition of "Primary Documents" isn't that strictly burned as the definition of "in a government-issued photo identity document (ID)" in Assurance Policy. The thing is that the convention of the assurers was quite variable in the old days and there were some very dogmatic people and a lot of world travellers who could see the problems with the dogma. Another avenue in variations is the subsidiary policies under AP which could conceivably vary the practice of one govt.-issued photo Id. Hence, that old thought-experiment about the Catholic Church Papa. Hence, the Assurance Statement goes some distance to detune or soften the need for pure identity documents ... as long as we can reliably get the guy to Arbitration, the precise Name and Documents matter less.

See also AcceptableDocuments

Assurance/PracticeOnIdChecking (last edited 2015-04-08 19:45:20 by AlesKastner)