Re: Printer which can copy driver's license on one side and car registration card on another

On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 01:43:32 -0600, VanguardLH <[email protected]> wrote:

>~misfit~ <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Storing on-line isn't the best idea in my opinion. These are copies of
>> documents that can be used to prove identification so should be kept
>> very securely.
>
>No matter where you store the file, it is someone else's personal and
>private data, so you should encrypt it.  Once encrypted, who is going to
>see it if the file is on a CD/DVD, USB HDD, USB flash drive, or online?
>Um, just how is this user going to secure a scanned and printed copy of
>their customers' driver license?  In a file behind the front desk that
>anyone can access?  A paper hardcopy is hardly secure.  No way to
>encrypt that.  Anyone can access a paper copy: unscrupulous employees,
>anyone wandering behind the front desk (even when it is closed you can
>just hop over the desk), and I've yet to see the front desk using
>lockable filing drawers or have good locks on them (a large square shaft
>screwdriver and crescent wrench will make short work of those crappy
>locks, anyway, and the employees know where is the key).
>
>The OP didn't say where is the hotel.  I've heard some EU states are
>obligated to send a record of your presence to the police.  See
>http://www.privacysurgeon.org/blog/incision/how-europes-hotels-became-spies-for-law-enfocement-agencies-and-the-nsa/.
>Ain't the EU oh-so wonderful.  Happens in my country, too, but I'm not
>sure they scan or take a pic of my driver license.  I have seen them
>write down the ID number on the registration card.
>
>Also of note is that is may be illegal to copy and retain a driver
>license at its original size (something to do with providing a source
>for forging the ID).  So, the printed copy has to get enlarged, which
>means the OP will still need to use the cheaper choice of 8.5x11" paper.
>
>> For the same reason I don't think it's wise to take a pic "with your
>> smartphone" (a lot of which automatically back up to 'the cloud'). 
>
>Of the smartphones that I've owned, all of them have the option to NOT
>copy photos to some cloud storage.  In fact, as I recall, I had to
>lookup the setting to enable auto cloud sync with the phone.  I don't
>auto-upload any pics taken with my phone.  I don't want to waste the
>storage quota in my online account on what are likely trivial or
>transitory photos.  If I want to save the photos off my phone, I use
>Bluetooth or a USB cable to my desktop PC.
>
>> Not just that but they're prone to damage or loss. 
>
>Not if the phone were only used for taking pics.  Just because it's a
>phone doesn't mean you have to use it that way.  Doesn't take much
>quality for a camera to snap a photo of a driver license.  You can get
>discarded working cell phones with cameras for cheap at the Goodwill.
>Or dig out the old one you stuffed in a drawer when you moved to a new
>phone.
>
>If you don't have a data plan and the wifi radio is disabled, how are
>photos getting off that phone?  No one will have access to them except
>whomever can access the phone, just like whomever can access your filing
>drawer, or your desktop PC, or whatever else you use.
>
>> If pics rather than scans are to be used then I would suggest a
>> dedicated camera for the job.
>
>Some desk jockey fumbling around to fish a camera out of a drawer to
>take a pic of your driver license is just as likely as to drop a phone.
>One advantage I see is you can get some rather boob-level point-n-shoot
>camera, so the desk jockey doesn't have to figure out how to take a
>photo.  The OP is unclear just how big is his friend's hotel.  Rather
>than spending money on a digital camera, his friend probably already has
>a smartphone.  After all, the focus is on pinching pennies as hard as
>possible.  If the OP cannot afford a sheet of 8.5x11" paper per print of
>a driver license, how is the OP going to afford getting any camera?
>
>It's possible the OP has an old digital camera collecting dust in a
>drawer that he could use to take snapshots of driver licenses.  More
>likely is the OP has a smart phone with a camera.  The OP still has to
>get the info to the police, so how secure is that process?
>
>Since the idea is to get the task done as cheaply as possible, I don't
>see using paper and ink is the best choice, especially if this info is
>to get transferred to the police.  First see what the OP has for digital
>storage.  Does the scanner save to a file instead of printer?  If so,
>there are lots of ways to encrypt that data.  Does the OP have a spare
>cell phone with camera?  Well, without a data plan or wifi enabled,
>those pics aren't going anywhere except via Bluetooth or USB cable.
>Maybe the OP does have a spare digital camera.  In either case, the
>point was to replace scanner, paper, and ink with a camera whether it be
>a dedicated camera or one in a smart phone.
>
>Not sure why the OP even has to scan the driver license or take photos
>of it.  Customers fill out a registration card, or the desk jockey does
>it, and they simply transcribe the driver ID info to the card (and then
>somehow get a copy to the police since that would be the only reason for
>the OP's declaration of "legally required").
>
>What seems incongruous is the OP is looking for the cheapest way to
>record driver ID info, but the OP also says the hotel is down due to
>COVID.  If the hotel is down, no one is staying there, so no need to
>record driver IDs.  We respondents might've gotten had.

I know at the local brothel one has to present a licence to enter, and
this is scanned into a machine, similar to a supermarket checkout
scanner.   At some nightclubs too.  The scan is kept "for 30days" to
track miscreants and diseases.

Of course I never visit these places.