INTERPOL I-Checkit

[mraleph]

Beside Refinitiv WorldCheck, compliance officers have INTERPOL I-Checkit tool for KYC

https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Border-management/I-Checkit
Apparently

I-Checkit enables carriers and financial institutions to submit customer identity documents information for screening against SLTD database (travel and identity documents) and documents associated with Red Notices. The data screened does not include names of individuals.

Combined with FATCA and CRS, it's a treasure trove of associated data - perhaps even intelligence.

The INTERPOL states that its I-Checkit performs queries against SLTD and RED notices databases which is counter-logical and counter-intuitive; for compliance officers, BLUE, GREEN, ORANGE and PURPLE notices are of more importance.

Does any service provider use I-Checkit? What's their impression and thoughts? What other members think about this?

 

[jafo]

enables carriers and financial institutions

I wonder what would happen if we, as people with businesses, emulated these "carriers & financial institutions" and started our own database to avoid their "members" too?

 

[mraleph]

I wonder what would happen if we, as people with businesses, emulated these "carriers & financial institutions" and started our own database to avoid their "members" too?

I believe that this is the first occasion that any international governmental organization is sharing data for reference with private for profit organizations under the ruse of AML compliance.

I-Checkit is IMO a dangerous precedent as it delegates statutory powers of the nation states to private legal persons.

Even though INTERPOL gave a statement about RED notices and SLTD databases, IMO they are offering an automatic data comparison thru other notices' databases as well.

With I-Checkit, an adversary can have high quality intelligence even without triggering CRS and FATCA reporting due to intricate INTERPOL logic.

Anybody?

 

[0xDEADBEEF]

I wonder what would happen if we, as people with businesses, emulated these "carriers & financial institutions" and started our own database to avoid their "members" too?

Something along the lines of "evading sanctions", "shady constructions" and "ties to Russia and/or organized crime". Because why else would someone not cooperate with the just and transparent 'system'.

With I-Checkit, an adversary can have high quality intelligence even without triggering CRS and FATCA reporting due to intricate INTERPOL logic.

In many legal systems, service providers submit most of the information and receive a simple approval or denial in return. This asymmetry ensures that potential adversaries receive minimal, non-descriptive information that is difficult to exploit. Especially law enforcement will never share any details about an individual or about any investigations. It's either a thumbs up or thumbs down that's reported back.

I believe that this is the first occasion that any international governmental organization is sharing data for reference with private for profit organizations under the ruse of AML compliance.

I’ve worked for organizations with ties to defense and other sensitive sectors. In these cases, candidates are screened by military or secret services. Essentially, you provide them with a list of the tasks this person will perform, and they report back on whether their background check aligns with trustworthiness in those areas. Employers will never know the exact details of what disqualified a candidate. So this approach is not really new and already used by a lot of (for profit) organizations. If you have been traveling or if you have been sending express shipments for the past decade, you have already be ran against all these databases multiple times.

Lawful intercepts present a more significant concern. These requests, sanctioned by the judiciary, are often non-descriptive and come with a legal mandate. In these cases, they receive mountains of data that can be used against you. This has been exploited numerous times by either compromising law enforcement accounts or by impersonating them.

It’s really important to keep your ‘real’ identity spotless. If your reputation is clean, reports will usually work out in your favor. But once your reputation is damaged in the system, everything becomes a pain in the future. So, if you’re working in a gray area, make sure to use a solution to avoid yourself from ending up on some list.

 

[mraleph]

In many legal systems, service providers submit most of the information and receive a simple approval or denial in return. This asymmetry ensures that potential adversaries receive minimal, non-descriptive information that is difficult to exploit. Especially law enforcement will never share any details about an individual or about any investigations. It's either a thumbs up or thumbs down that's reported back.


I’ve worked for organizations with ties to defense and other sensitive sectors. In these cases, candidates are screened by military or secret services. Essentially, you provide them with a list of the tasks this person will perform, and they report back on whether their background check aligns with trustworthiness in those areas. Employers will never know the exact details of what disqualified a candidate. So this approach is not really new and already used by a lot of (for profit) organizations. If you have been traveling or if you have been sending express shipments for the past decade, you have already be ran against all these databases multiple times.

There is a significant difference in purpose and scope between legitimate investigation and candidate's vetting process for security and defence positions on one side and the AML compliance process where international police organization's databases are checked by private for profit legal persons on the other.

The asymmetry in question is about any INTERPOL member government - via NCB - receiving issued notice feedback when person is identified and its data compared against notices' databases.

Hence, the problem isn't with a service provider per se - as by allowing private persons access to I-Checkit is effectively augmenting governmental intelligence capabilities under the AML screening ruse - force multiplier.

This is different compared to FATCA and CRS - and other reporting mechanisms including bilateral ones - as a person will be reported to notice issuing country thru INTERPOL even if business relationship isn't established, financial transaction occured or taxable event happened.

Something along the lines of "evading sanctions", "shady constructions" and "ties to Russia and/or organized crime". Because why else would someone not cooperate with the just and transparent 'system'.

You described reasons for issuing BLUE, GREEN, ORANGE and PURPLE and special notices - not a RED one. The problem is that sanctions against Russian Federation and Belarus are multilateral and bilateral but not issued by OUN SC and can't be put thru INTERPOL.

My assumption - an educated guess - is while private persons are performing queries thru I-Checkit, all INTERPOL databases are queried and issuing NCB is receiving a feedback due to intricate logic how INTERPOL functions. That is not in line with privacy laws - laugh at them, but they still exist for a purpose.

 

[peter taradash]

Personal experience? A lawyer friend of mine wanted to get essentially a criminal clearance for his client. This client was a businessman who had been sued many times in many countries (Just like Donald Trump). Some cases he lost involved charges of criminal fraud.
He was not sure if his past record was crystal clear with Interpol.
After filing a request for a status report and a criminal clearance he waited almost a year. The lawyer finally got an official answer by hard-copy letter, to the effect that "Interpol has no negative information on subject." It was pretty vague, but at least the client felt he would not be stopped at any borders because of any Interpol notices of any color.
"Especially law enforcement will never share any details about an individual or about any investigations. It's either a thumbs up or thumbs down that's reported back." This is a correct statement!

I believe that this is the first occasion that any international governmental organization is sharing data for reference with private for profit organizations under the ruse of AML compliance.

I-Checkit is IMO a dangerous precedent as it delegates statutory powers of the nation states to private legal persons.

Even though INTERPOL gave a statement about RED notices and SLTD databases, IMO they are offering an automatic data comparison thru other notices' databases as well.

With I-Checkit, an adversary can have high quality intelligence even without triggering CRS and FATCA reporting due to intricate INTERPOL logic.

Anybody?

 

[JackAlabama]

Beside Refinitiv WorldCheck, compliance officers have INTERPOL I-Checkit tool for KYC

https://www.interpol.int/en/How-we-work/Border-management/I-Checkit
Apparently

I-Checkit enables carriers and financial institutions to submit customer identity documents information for screening against SLTD database (travel and identity documents) and documents associated with Red Notices. The data screened does not include names of individuals.

Combined with FATCA and CRS, it's a treasure trove of associated data - perhaps even intelligence.

The INTERPOL states that its I-Checkit performs queries against SLTD and RED notices databases which is counter-logical and counter-intuitive; for compliance officers, BLUE, GREEN, ORANGE and PURPLE notices are of more importance.

Does any service provider use I-Checkit? What's their impression and thoughts? What other members think about this?

They will also google your name, which is often revealing way more than any structured and maintained database ever could.

 

[mraleph]

I do agree with all of your comments.

Though, my concern isn't with feedback from the INTERPOL to financial institutions - but from INTERPOL to NCB. And, that feedback isn't non-descriptive but an actual intelligence.

There are several threads about OPSEC and other anti-privacy topics

https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...revented-from-sharing-photos-and-links.45163/
https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...llance-with-a-wink-and-a-wifi-password.44950/
https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...en-its-closed-and-how-do-you-set-it-up.45037/
where discussion is feverish and different threat models are presented.

With the INTERPOL modi operandi, member government can profile not only its citizens but others as well by putting appropriate notice via NCB and receive actionable intelligence about persons financial activities.

 

[wellington]

I do agree with all of your comments.

Though, my concern isn't with feedback from the INTERPOL to financial institutions - but from INTERPOL to NCB. And, that feedback isn't non-descriptive but an actual intelligence.

There are several threads about OPSEC and other anti-privacy topics

https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...revented-from-sharing-photos-and-links.45163/
https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...llance-with-a-wink-and-a-wifi-password.44950/
https://www.offshorecorptalk.com/th...en-its-closed-and-how-do-you-set-it-up.45037/
where discussion is feverish and different threat models are presented.

With the INTERPOL modi operandi, member government can profile not only its citizens but others as well by putting appropriate notice via NCB and receive actionable intelligence about persons financial activities.

Will be used more often as governments get desperate

Also non OECD countries are getting thin on the ground

I’d imagine you’ll start seeing international unexplained wealth orders for non resident citizens in the future

Naturally they come with international seizure requests quite easily (civil forfeitures) without due process

 

[peter taradash]

Banks in every country are now demanding more old documents & asking more & more personal questions -- even about transactions 30-50 years ago. I suppose they are being suffocated with government requests to know more about their customers than the customers know about themselves. It looks like banks can now get more and more instant info from even more sources ---like Interpol.
The bigger question is how to get yourself off the information highway.
Obviously, not posting info or pics of yourself on social media is a good idea.
I wish there was a way not to use any banks at all. Crypto helps, but keeping your cash in crypto is still not a way to divorce yourself from the system. Why? Because you still need a bank to transfer BTC, ETH, etc. into spendable local money... Does anyone out there have any ideas on how to reduce dependence on banks?

 

[wellington]

Banks in every country are now demanding more old documents & asking more & more personal questions -- even about transactions 30-50 years ago. I suppose they are being suffocated with government requests to know more about their customers than the customers know about themselves. It looks like banks can now get more and more instant info from even more sources ---like Interpol.
The bigger question is how to get yourself off the information highway.
Obviously, not posting info or pics of yourself on social media is a good idea.
I wish there was a way not to use any banks at all. Crypto helps, but keeping your cash in crypto is still not a way to divorce yourself from the system. Why? Because you still need a bank to transfer BTC, ETH, etc. into spendable local money... Does anyone out there have any ideas on how to reduce dependence on banks?

Go off-grid unless you need to be on-grid, only use banking for pass-through transactions.

 

[peter taradash]

Go off-grid unless you need to be on-grid, only use banking for pass-through transactions.

I agree, except that to open even a small transit account, they want your life story, financial history & tax info in great detail. And I'm guessing, if you pass a substantial amount (over $10,000) in say crypto profits thru that bank, it will be essentially public record. Why?Because it's reported to every county you have ever lived in or been a legal resident of -- plus your passport country. And there is plenty of info leakage. Peter

 

[wellington]

I agree, except that to open even a small transit account, they want your life story, financial history & tax info in great detail. And I'm guessing, if you pass a substantial amount (over $10,000) in say crypto profits thru that bank, it will be essentially public record. Why?Because it's reported to every county you have ever lived in or been a legal resident of -- plus your passport country. And there is plenty of info leakage. Peter

1) Crypto to Fiat (physical/digital) is easy enough either privacy focused or non-privacy focused for day-to-day living.
2) Plenty of countries that are emerging economies, wreaked with internal strife/issues that enable one to reside within and enjoy some of the non-surveillance living the West appears set on setting on its citizens.
3) Plenty of countries falling different sides of the geopolitical divide providing arbitraging possibilities, all the time Russia/China survives the West doesn't have eminent say on all countries, when they collapse/loose if they do, then Humanity as a whole will be enslaved into the Western apparatus.
4) Alternative Citizenships are easy enough to obtain either via wealth or time.
5) Banking (CRS) as i understand is reported on value at end of year opposed to pass through (first bank account i gamed the system by moving funds from x-y-x-y-x constantly over time to increase the credit limit for unsecured overdraft - worked a treat - - I moved it from 500-17,000 GBP - house back then was about 30,000 GBP - i guess that's why they don't do every transactional reporting because they don't have insight into all the private banking, shadow banking, consumer banking, commercial banking, corporate accounts, digital accounts, emi's etc internal records etc but can on-demand but basically they can't algorithmically deduct as funds are moved around in circles etc and in the normal day-to-day living bank keeping (i.e deposit from income in to main, 80% moved to savings, xyz moved back over time to cover bills as they come in) funds ewould show higher values than actually routed through so they opt for a period and a value -> which leaves a lot of opportunity.
6) Tax Residence Locations with Territorial Tax
7) Perpetual Traveler without main location of Tax


Then factor in corporate etc, basically except the US, Canada, Australia, Europe most states recognise they don't have the authority over a non-resident citizen and their private life outside of their birth/citizen nation where they are NOT tax resident in any form (another advantage to specific citizenships etc) - expect that to change for Western nations over the next 5-15 yrs and be ready to relinquish citizenship (You can always regain it easily enough if the mind/reason suits by going the traditional route with a head-start) - ergo treat a citizenship like a raincoat [f**k the flag, anthem, king, etc].

 

[JackAlabama]

I agree, except that to open even a small transit account, they want your life story, financial history & tax info in great detail. And I'm guessing, if you pass a substantial amount (over $10,000) in say crypto profits thru that bank, it will be essentially public record. Why?Because it's reported to every county you have ever lived in or been a legal resident of -- plus your passport country. And there is plenty of info leakage. Peter

nah its not that dire yet. Also not for a mere 10k...

1) Crypto to Fiat (physical/digital) is easy enough either privacy focused or non-privacy focused for day-to-day living.
2) Plenty of countries that are emerging economies, wreaked with internal strife/issues that enable one to reside within and enjoy some of the non-surveillance living the West appears set on setting on its citizens.
3) Plenty of countries falling different sides of the geopolitical divide providing arbitraging possibilities, all the time Russia/China survives the West doesn't have eminent say on all countries, when they collapse/loose if they do, then Humanity as a whole will be enslaved into the Western apparatus.
4) Alternative Citizenships are easy enough to obtain either via wealth or time.
5) Banking (CRS) as i understand is reported on value at end of year opposed to pass through (first bank account i gamed the system by moving funds from x-y-x-y-x constantly over time to increase the credit limit for unsecured overdraft - worked a treat - - I moved it from 500-17,000 GBP - house back then was about 30,000 GBP - i guess that's why they don't do every transactional reporting because they don't have insight into all the private banking, shadow banking, consumer banking, commercial banking, corporate accounts, digital accounts, emi's etc internal records etc but can on-demand but basically they can't algorithmically deduct as funds are moved around in circles etc and in the normal day-to-day living bank keeping (i.e deposit from income in to main, 80% moved to savings, xyz moved back over time to cover bills as they come in) funds ewould show higher values than actually routed through so they opt for a period and a value -> which leaves a lot of opportunity.
6) Tax Residence Locations with Territorial Tax
7) Perpetual Traveler without main location of Tax


Then factor in corporate etc, basically except the US, Canada, Australia, Europe most states recognise they don't have the authority over a non-resident citizen and their private life outside of their birth/citizen nation where they are NOT tax resident in any form (another advantage to specific citizenships etc) - expect that to change for Western nations over the next 5-15 yrs and be ready to relinquish citizenship (You can always regain it easily enough if the mind/reason suits by going the traditional route with a head-start) - ergo treat a citizenship like a raincoat [f**k the flag, anthem, king, etc].

good stuff right here