[bloomingeek]

We were in our local Target store yesterday. My wife purchased some OTC cough syrup, the self check out register wanted an employee for confirmation she was the proper age. (We're in our sixty's.) Instead of just looking at her driver's license, he used his handheld device to scan the license! I would never allow this, myself.

[john_strinlai]

>Instead of just looking at her driver's license, he used his handheld device to scan the license!

depending on what is in the cough syrup, they arent using the scanner to verify age. they are tracking who makes the purchase, so if a bunch of meth or whatever gets cooked up, they have a list of suspects.

[TYPE_FASTER]

Yes. Federal law requires retailers of drugs containing pseudoephedrine, ephedrine, and phenlypropanolamine to record the buyer's name and address and keep the records for two years (https://www.fda.gov/drugs/information-drug-class/legal-requi...).

While there is no federal law restricting the sale of medications containing Dextromethorphan, a common cough suppressant, US states have started regulating sales of these medications (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dextromethorphan_regulation_by...). It looks like most of the time, it's an 18yrs and up age restriction.

My guess would be that it's easier for company policy to always scan the ID, even for age verification, instead of having different policies depending on what is being purchased.

[jtokoph]

In California, the pharmacy computer queries some state database to log the purchase and get approval. If you buy too much too quickly your purchase will be blocked.

My closest pharmacy “loses its connection to the system” frequently which results in them being unable to sell me the medicine. The computer will refuse to ring it up.

[schiffern]

Plot twist, for employee safety the store policy is to always say "lost connection, sorry" when the system detects suspicious purchasing patterns.

[petre]

Sure, a 60 year old is going to cook meth from a bottle of cough syrup.

[tomwheeler]

In my state, you can buy products with pseudoephedrine over the counter, but the law requires you to show ID to the pharmacist who then logs your name and address. There is absolutely nothing in the law that requires scanning or storing the customer's ID, and I don't know why anyone would agree to let them do it.

[john_strinlai]

>[...] but the law requires you to show ID to the pharmacist who then logs your name and address. There is absolutely nothing in the law that requires scanning or storing the customer's ID, and I don't know why anyone would agree to let them do it.

there is very little difference except one is manual input and one is automated input. so, i am not quite sure i am understanding your objection to one and not the other. either your are ok with your information being recorded, or you arent -- the "how it is entered into the recording system" part seems immaterial to me.

[tomwheeler]

At least where I live, the only information they log when looking at my ID is my name and address. Scanning my ID gives them additional information, which increases the vulnerability.

I don't trust them to store it securely nor to avoid the temptation to use that information for other purposes. The only countermeasure is to prevent them from having that information in the first place.

[john_strinlai]

what other information are you concerned about, present on your id, which is not trivially obtainable by already having your name and address? your height and whether you need glasses is hardly sensitive information (and already available to them -- they record the premises and have your time of purchase).

i dont trust them to store it securely either. my objection is to being okay with your information being placed into a database when that information is manually input, but not okay with it being scanned in. if you arent okay with one method, i dont understand why you would be okay with the other.

we are in agreement that the fact that some random company has to store my information at all is sucky.

[tomwheeler]

I'd say the two most important are the date of birth and document ID (e.g., driver's license number). Both are required by the AAMVA 2D barcode standard used for driver's license in the US and both are extremely valuable for identity theft.

Furthermore, the driver's license number is a primary key that could used to join records created by the scan with records in other datasets, potentially giving the company much more information about the customer than they ever realized or agreed to provide.

[Teever]

There's a major difference -- one involved providing a copy of your ID to a 3rd party and the other does not.

I don't want my identity stolen after I bought some cough syrupe because some dirt-bag third party ID management company that was contracted by a pharmacy didn't do their job.

[john_strinlai]

>There's a major difference -- one involved providing a copy of your ID to a 3rd party and the other does not.

they arent scanning as in photocopying. they are scanning the barcode to get the name/address information

the 3rd party (pharmacy, in this case) gets and keeps the information in both scenarios.

>dirt-bag third party ID management company

this isnt online age-verification stuff. the pharmacy itself is typically the one storing the information, and querying it against a government database.

[polothesecond]

Nowadays you need ID to buy dextromethorphan cough syrups even. Being sick got a lot more miserable when I learned Id have to interact with the doordasher to get my remedies delivered.

[c22]

I've found using a passport card for ID instead of a driver's license to have several advantages, including that most places seem to be unable to scan it.

[ProllyInfamous]

Not only does a US Passport card NOT scan, it also does not contain your address. Added bonus that it is not scanable.

[chrisjj]

But will those places accept it unscanned? I imagine there's a staff trust issue here.

[ProllyInfamous]

Yes, but sometimes requires manager override.

When that doesn't work for me, I simply say "I just won't purchase it, then" — and then it get$ $canned.

[SoftTalker]

Target scans IDs for any purchase that requires them (e.g. alcohol).

Charitably, I guess they want to be able to prove in any kind of audit or claim that they are selling alcohol to minors that they are checking IDs for such purchases.

Uncharitably, it all goes into their customer profile database.

[butlike]

So only ever buy condoms and duct tape from Target. Got it.

[MrFots]

No. Buy nothing from them. Keep up the boycott.

[butlike]

Fair point and good reminder