I was flipping through the Liberty Times (the sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) the other day and was surprised to see that someone had used a copy of a Class 2 land deed to obtain someone else’s personal information to commit fraud.
It appears that anyone could apply to access someone’s personal details, including addresses and banking information.
At the end of the article, the reporter took care to create a small glossary, where they recommended that people go to their local land bureau office and apply to have their land and property holdings information withheld from public access.
After reading the article, I headed straight to the land bureau office to inquire how to make my personal information private.
I had to take an original form of personal identification and my seal. When I got to the office, I saw a horde of people waiting to be served.
Even with the kindness and diligence of volunteers and office workers, I was stuck there for quite some time.
I waited ages for my number to be called and was immediately asked to provide a photocopy of my identification and to sign an application form. It is absurd that one has to go through so much inconvenience just to apply to protect one’s private information.
I suddenly realized that much of the land bureau data was tied to the openness or restrictiveness of the system’s design. Frankly, the level of security is weaker than the security settings for a Facebook account.
With fraud rampant, many operations that deal with personal information should prioritize the protection of users.
Bank account booklets are pretty valuable to scammers and crime rings. They are a hot commodity to be included in a criminal’s toolbox, yet the holder does not even need to present any identification if they want to walk into a bank to ask for a new one.
Bank tellers should be asking to see the person’s health insurance card at a bare minimum.
Several literary award organizations ask competition participants to provide a copy of some form of personal identification.
The organizers of the Lin Rong San Foundation of Culture and Social Welfare Literary Award do not initially require identification, but other award organizations do. The identification documentation is mostly used for tax reporting purposes.
With hundreds of participants and only a handful receiving an award in the end, organizers end up collecting many photocopies of identification cards. Should any unscrupulous person use them, it could result in a massive breach of personal data, which could lead to a heap of litigation.
Why would an entrant in these award competitions need to present identification before they have even won anything?
In many organizations, divisions at all levels are required to collect personal information from the public for the sake of providing services. If the goal is to simplify everything as much as possible, the onus should be on verifying that the service applicant is who they say they are and whether they are aiming to commit a crime.
If no one’s identity is verified in person, or if there is no reasonable suspicion, then what is the point of collecting all that personal data?
The postal service is an amazingly efficient organization when it comes to performing checks. I went last week to cancel a deposit, and my account had only a couple thousand or so New Taiwan dollars in it.
The worker behind the counter asked me what I was planning to do with the money. When I answered that I was not withdrawing any cash, the expression on their face softened.
Fortunately, Taiwan has a dream team of low-level employees, such as bank tellers, police officers, government office workers and all sorts of volunteers to help maintain social order.
In addition to giving my thanks, the government ought to create a law or change the process so that people do not need to bury themselves alive in useless paperwork just to stop fraud.
Jimmy Hsu is a farmer.
Translated by Tim Smith
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of