2+2 for Global Compliance – Your Expectations are Unreasonable

Due to increasing data requirements and best practices encouraged by various government and financial directives (like the 4th Money Laundering Directive – 4MLD) concerning customer due diligence in the UK and European Union, GDC has had many requests to provide enhanced levels of electronic identity verification combined with Watch List/PEP and Sanctions checks to meet these compliance needs.

While some customers are satisfied to have input-data verified against a single authoritative data source, many others require checks to be verified against multiple authenticated, in-country data sources of varying data types.  This difference between the single and multi-source checks has come to be called 2+2 vs. 1+1 – electronic Identity Verification (eIDV).

The data elements available in the source may vary – for example, below you see two sources described: one Credit and one Government each with three elements to match.

However, the source is typically of a single type, which is not a fit for the new EU compliance regulations (See post on 4MLD).  The types of data source that can be matched for either a 1+1 or 2+2 are:


1+1 Identity Verification

GDC’s Worldview platform has been providing 1+1 electronic identity verification since its inception. Customers and partners typically work in the fraud or e-Commerce space mostly with high-volume transactional use cases.  Their goal is to reduce friction in a process (customer onboarding, sales, etc.), increase speed and efficiencies and cut cost.


Most of what is gained in a 1+1 is efficiency and cost savings but there are compliance and regulatory rules met with this 1+1 check.  In the example below, we check the input of name, DOB and address against a single credit source and we may receive either of the matches listed in the OR and achieve a pass.

2+2 Identity Verification

By definition, GDC sees a 2+2 request as matching 2 different definitions of input against 2 different data sources.  For GDC to fulfill a 2+2 request, we check to a minimum of 2 different sources.

Thus to accomplish a 2+2 request  GDC is sending to a single request to a data provider which controls multiple unique sources (for example, a single partner with both an Electoral Role sources or a Public Utility source) or to multiple “best available” providers in country with unique data sources.


As a rule GDC requires a match based on two input elements verified against two independent data sources. For example, a match could be made on COMPLETE NAME plus DOB in a credit data source (1) and  COMPLETE NAME plus ADDRESS in a government (2) data source.

So Why are Your Expectations Unreasonable?

The rules sound simple enough, so you are probably thinking to yourself, what do you mean we have unreasonable expectations?

Country/Source Coverage

Country and source type are the two most important considerations in assessing potential match rates, across the world, data sources and data privacy regulations vary greatly. What works well in the United States and the United Kingdom does not neccessarily work in France and Poland.
In our many conversations with prospects, customers, and partners, the 2+2 topic immediately moves to:“Our compliance officers require the same levels and inputs for all countries: 2+2 checks with credit and government sources for Countries XYZ and we need a match rate of 70% or higher.”
This approach is not country-specific, and creates a challenge when trying to apply the same mindset to countries around the world.  For example, while matching COMPLETE NAME+ADDRESS and COMPLETE NAME+DOB in the Unites States returns great results, matching both a Credit and Government source in France is not possible. It is, however, likely to produce a 50% or better match rate in Australia, where there are multiple credit and government sources to leverage.

Why is France a challenge? The French data sources are tightly controlled and not available for access – further France does not really have a credit bureau open for query. However, matching COMPLETE NAME and DOB in two different telco sources in France is possible.
What is the take-away? In thinking about data sources, there is a major difference between “unique and from independent sources”vs. “unique and from Credit or Government”. Furthermore, 2+2 may be achievable with COMPLETE NAME and ADDRESS in a “telecom/mobile” source in Spain and a “commercial” source in Spain, but with no credit and very little government data source access. Thus, you cannot expect to use all the same inputs in every country ALL over the world and achieve the same match rate results.

What are the options?

So, looking across the globe there are three elements you can control inside an electronic 2+2 identity verification to improve or optimize match and pass rates for your compliance use cases:
• Improve the quality of the input elements to match
• Tightening or loosening the rules on matching criteria
• Continue to add additional data sources to increase coverage and thus potential match rates

Improve the quality of the input elements to match upon

Data quality is a challenge in most organizations and if you are not able to produce input elements for matching in eIDV requests you will severely impact potential match rates. For example, GDC typically uses address verification, standardization and correction to enhance the quality of input address data and allow for more accurate matching on street/thoroughfare, house number, postal code and locality/city input elements.

Tightening or loosening the rules on matching criteria

After the quality of the input data the next piece that can be considered is the actual definition of a match and a pass. This is a good bit of what has been hinted at in the title around expectations. The most common place we see for making rules less stringent is in name matching. In many countries matching on a given/first name can be a supreme challenge, but many of these same countries will allow for higher match rates on first initial, sur/last name, full address and even date of birth. Matching first initial+last name or even a fuzzy match or distance match in place of the often-mandated exact match will sometimes drastically improve match rates.

Continue to add additional data sources to increase coverage and thus potential match rates

The final piece of the puzzle is the data sources themselves. If you are using two data sources and each cover 35% of the population your best result is 70%, but is more than likely closer to 30%. This does not consider the 2+2 rules that might require an exact match on first and last name when only 1 of the 2 sources has a first/given name available. The GDC approach is to recognize that the best match rates for 2+2 really require as many sources, that do not duplicate, as possible. These sources need to be different but ultimately 6 data sources (telco, government, credit, utility, postal, and consumer) – will produce a higher 2+2 match rate than just 2 of the data sources. Simply put, you are covering more of the adult population and thus have a better chance to match and pass.

To conclude – reasonable expectation to great expectations

When interpreting and crafting the compliance rules, such as for Customer Due Diligence, for your organization be aware and willing to utilize the data sources available within the required country, and country sensibilities and privacy regulations. Each will potentially be different. Be certain to provide the highest quality input data possible and let data quality work for your eIDV efforts not against them. Don’t be limited to 2 data sources in a 2+2 match but leverage as many as possible to get the job done. Lastly, don’t let your compliance rules hand-cuff your success with eIDV in a country – use what is available, how best it can be used to achieve success.

money laundering

4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive Prescribes Electronic Identity Verification for Customer Due Diligence

The 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (4MLD) came into force as an upgrade/replacement of the 3MLD (3rd Anti-Money Laundering Directive) on June 26th, 2017 with a clear goal of expanding the risk based approach established with 3MLD.  Further 4MLD expanded the requirements and general principles in the European Union which government the necessary checks required to meet money laundering and compliance guidelines.   

The overall focus for 4MLD is listed in the table below: 

Key 4MLD Focus areas of increased requirements:
Increased focus on risk based approach Required not just for Financial org. anymore
Focus on Tax Crimes Expanded Customer due diligence
Third country equivalence Politically Exposed Persons
Cross-border wire transfers Beneficial ownership

The 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (4MLD) came into force as an upgrade/replacement of the 3MLD (3rd Anti-Money Laundering Directive) on June 26th, 2017 with a clear goal of expanding the risk based approach established with 3MLD.  Further 4MLD expanded the requirements and general principles in the European Union which government the necessary checks required to meet money laundering and compliance guidelines.   

The overall focus for 4MLD is listed in the table below: 

(17)  Accurate identification and verification of data of natural and legal persons is essential for fighting money laundering or terrorist financing. Latest technical developments in the digitalisation of transactions and payments enable a secure remote or electronic identification.

It is this section that lays the ground work for eIDV’s requirement to meet CCD and 4MLD requirements.  Stay tuned to our next blog post where we break down the 2+2 rule set which meet the regulatory requirements for customer due diligence and discuss how your compliance team has unreasonable expectations for electronic Identity Verification. 

Colombia Identity Verification

Shared Visions – Identity Verification in Latin America

One of the best parts of my job at GDC is meeting founders of data services companies around the world. In many cases these founders have created unique identity focused solutions targeted for use within their local markets. Their customers are banks, insurance firms and in some cases the government. In some cases I will find entrepreneurs who have begun to look at expansion to other countries that are proximate to their home country. In every case when I sit down with founders and share our global mission they start off with a skeptical view but then quickly become very interested in how we have been able to achieve the progress made thus far. Most importantly they want to find a way to participate in making our global vision a reality. The most recent example of this was during a sourcing trip to Colombia.

Our goal was to meet with a number of possible data sources to help significantly improve our ability to provide Colombian identity verification within a 2+2 compliance framework. We spent three days meeting with various providers to get a sense of what was available and whether we could find local partners with the right alignment. One provider stood out from the rest because of the vision of the founder.

Daniel is one of Colombia’s pre-eminent tech entrepreneurs. He’s built a 100+ employee company that manages varying aspects of digital data and cyber security for the Colombian government. The data his company works with is the de-facto source data for Colombian consumer and business ID. This is Daniel’s third company and he is very clearly a knowledge base for all things identity in Colombia. He has a vision for growing a strong business throughout Latin America.

The conversation started on a familiar path. I spent time talking about GDC, what we do, how we do it and what we look for in data partners. Daniel spent time describing his business and what they were focused on in the market. He described how he helps to manage the core data provided by the government to deliver identity based services to the market. As I was listening I realized we had found a key source provider. At the end of his piece he directly states I’ve studied what you do and we would like to explore using your platform for your services in other countries. In that moment the conversation flipped from my focus on data sourcing to looking at his company as more of a bi-directional partnership which is the goal of the “Consortium” aspect of GDC. We saw value in Daniel’s ability to provide Colombian identity verification through his API and he saw value in our ability to provide identity verification for Mexico, Argentina and other countries through our API.

Our meeting ran over the 60 minutes we had mutually allotted for. We spoke of the challenges in the Colombian market, the need for identity verification to counteract fraud and the compliance requirements (4AML and GDPR) of banks and other financial service institutions that created a framework for identity verification in other countries.  We continued the communications via email and we will begin sharing technical details with each other after the holidays. Within a few months we will have his service up and running within our Worldview platform. We will continue to shape the offering utilizing feedback from our Latin American customers. This process will produce the best results and service for Colombia identity verification globally. Alongside our solutions for Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and over 40 additional countries we will continue to expand our coverage globally.

Whether it is Ricardo in Brazil, or Mariana in Argentina or Daniel in Colombia, the story is the same. Shared visions of how identity verification can help enable consumers and businesses transaction globally. Each provider brings their data and local expertise and together we help solve problems globally. Founders working together to achieve a common goal.

Shared Visions - Colombia Identity Verification

Shared Visions – Colombia           Identity Verification


Best Practices for Improved Accuracy in Electronic Identity Verification in Argentina and Brazil

I spent the past week visiting data partners in South America. It was a good week of sharing information about the needs of the market such as 2+2 Compliance checking and KYB (Know Your Business). Trips like this always provide us with additional learnings about how solutions work best and what are the best practices for getting the best match rates in countries like Brazil, Argentina, Chile and Columbia. In this posting I will cover a few things learned regarding Brazil and Argentina.

I started the trip in Brazil. While meeting with one of our key data providers we discussed The Maria Problem and how it can skew results. I wrote about the Maria Problem in the past when discussing Portuguese Identity Verification. It was not a surprise to learn that the same problem exists in Brazil given their cultural and language ties. The problem simply stated is that most women in Brazil have a first name as Maria. Many women don’t use the Maria in most applications and forms rather they use their second name to differentiate themselves. Most Brazilian (and Latin American) names consist of four names. A surname, a second surname a maternal name and a paternal name. In most data entry responses you will find that a second surname along with either the paternal and/or maternal name are used in combination. Doing a matching exercise on this type of information will yield varied results which is why it is either important to know how to tune your rules to compare on the combinations of first and second surname to try and achieve a match. Our local provider knows this problem and his systems are coding to address this as data passes through his system.

Argentina was the next stop on the trip. A new learning there relates more to data hygiene to produce a better match. In particular to Buenos Aries (the largest city in the country) the zip code in the past was a four digit number. Recently they have added and additional four digit alpha code onto the four digits to make the information more accurate due to the growth and density of the city. Most government databases now use the eight digit code versus the four digit code so, when na address is used as part of a identity check, it is likely that it wont validate against a government database without the address having gone through a hygiene process that enriches the additional four digit alpha code. Our local provider does this as part of their standard data normalization process and this yields a better match result.

In both countries a great deal of time was spent making sure that our data providers could provide a 2+2 check at a high impact match rate. While data hygiene is part of this equation having good data sources that are Government, Credit or Commercial is also important. The most important is to know how your input data will be best compared with the data sources. Simple things like the above will significantly impact the results of your electronic identity check.


From Russia with Love – How Do Russians Acquire an Identity? – Part 2

In part 1 of our series, we remember that the Lektor decoder was so valuable to MI6 that they tried to get their hands on it.  It was in fact part of a trap in which a cipher clerk, Tatiana, and Bond would steal the decoder. After it was stolen, SPECTRE came after them in an assassination attempt to get the Lektor and sell it back to the Soviets.

Just like the Lektor is highly valuable and sought after, so are Russian passports, the physical proof one is who they say they are.  Now let’s look at the importance and requirements for Russians to maintain and prove their identity.

Once a Russian citizen reaches the age of fourteen, the citizen then is required by law to carry an internal passport which is issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Russian Federation. These passports are only issued to Russian citizens. These passports are very similar to travel documents issued to Russian citizens; however, the internal passport will have no Latin lettering anywhere in the passport – it is only meant to be used within the Russian Federation and is not a valid document to travel outside of the country. Inside of the internal passport, Russians have all of the necessary information which follows them through the rest of their lives. Passports are meant to be updated at all important life events.

The first page of the document states the name, sex, date and place of birth of the citizen. Following this, there are pages which document required information about each Russian citizen. Russian citizens are required to register themselves in the place that the live. This registration is maintained within the internal passport. After the age of 18, males are required to serve military service or receive a deferment for study – this information is also included in the internal passport. If a citizen is married, the registration of their marriage is located within the passport. If a citizen has children under the age of fourteen, their identities are registered within their parenrussia-nesting-2ts’ passports. Within the internal passport, citizens also keep their driver’s license and any other documents required within the Russian Federation – these would vary based on the person’s profession, age, or special talents.

On the eighteenth page of the internal passport, information is found about the citizen’s blood type and tax identification number.

Internal passports must be renewed at certain points in the life of a citizen in the Russian Federation. The first required renewal is at age twenty. After that, the passport must be renewed again at age forty-five. After the age of forty-five, the internal passport is good for the rest of the life of the citizen

Citizens of the Russian Federation who serve in the armed forces are given additional information in their passport that register their military service history as well as the place of their service.

Citizens of the Russian Federation who enroll in higher education usually enroll at the age of seventeen or eighteen, after their graduation from secondary school. Upon enrolling in a institute of higher learning, a student is issued another form of identification meant to be used in conjunction with their internal passport – this is called a “Student Ticket” or студенческий билет. This document is meant to be used on campus for student privileges around facilities on campus such as libraries, sports facilities, and cafeterias. Most universities in Russia operate on a closed-campus system; in order to enter the dormitories, students are usually given a separate piece of identification called a “Permission” пропуск which must be displayed with the Stufrom russia with lovedent Ticket in order to enter dormitories or classroom buildings on campus. The Student Ticket is also used by university students around town to receive student discounts on services like public transportation or for discounted entry into museums and movie theatres. Each year of a student’s studies, the Student Ticket is updated to show the year that the student is enrolled. This is done by the leader of the department affixing his or her signature and a stamp from the university on one page of the Student Ticket. The other page of the Student Ticket gives a photo of the person and their name.

Russians who travel outside of the Russian Federation are required to have an international or external passport for travel. This passport is very similar to the internal passport in every sense, except that the internal passport does not use biometric information and the internal passport does not have any Latin lettering. The biometric information in the external passport includes fingerprint, handwriting sample, height, weight, eye color and voice. The international passport includes a firstrussia-map-1 page which states the citizen’s name in Cyrillic and Latin lettering as well as the place and date of birth, sex, and passport number – which is different from the internal passport number. These passports are issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and are also overseen by the Federal Immigration Service. Russian citizens must renew external passports every ten years. The rest of the passport’s pages are blank for visas to foreign nations. Currently, only twenty-eight percent of Russians have an external passport according to

As you can see from the past two posts, Russian identity is complex, even more complex in the digital age.  Let the Global Data Consortium’s Worldview platform be your Lekto decoder to know your customers.



From Russia with Love – How Do Russians Acquire an Identity? – Part 1

The 1963 James Bond action thriller, “From Russia with Love”, starring Sean Connery, see Bond willingly falls into an assassination ploy involving a naive Russian beauty in order to retrieve a Soviet encryption device that was stolen by SPECTRE.  The Lektor decoder, at it was called, was a highLektor decoderly sought after decoding machine, used by Soviet Intelligence to de-compile coded and highly sensitive documents.

Decrypting a Russian name can be highly complex and sought after as well, especially in the electronic identity space.  Let’s examine exactly how and what is in a Russian name – one of the verifiable attributes of a digital identity.

A Russian begins to acquire an identity before he or she is ever born. The first element of a Russian’s identity is his or her name – two parts of the name are determined before the Russian is even born. First there is the family name (фамилия) which is taken from the father. At marriage, Russian women take their husband’s last name. The last name, if it is a Russian last name, is changed to show gender. Russian male last names ending in -skij (ский) will change to -skaya (ская) for a woman. Russian last names ending in a consonant for men will add an a or ya (а/я) to show the female version of the name. If a family name is not Russian (Jewish, Estonian, German, Latvian, etc.) then the last name will not changeThe second part of a Russian’s name determined before birth is the middle name or patronymic (отчество) this name is also derived from the father and translates as son of or daughter of. All Russians who share the same father will have the same patronymic, again changed to show gender. This name is derived from the father’s name with the addition of a suffix -ovich/evich (ович/евич) for sons and –ovna/evna (овна/евна) for girls.

The first name that a Russian gets is chosen entirely by the parents or family and can show particular traditions within a family. For example, if a family is very religious, they may choose to name their child after the saint for that day on the Russian Orthodox calendar. Russians may also name the child after significant family members, writers, people of renown in Russian culture, or after favorite russian nesting doll musicians. Some Russians who are more western choose to give their children more European names like Rutger or Margarita. From the first name, many diminutive or nicknames can be formed. These are usually only used within family or friend groups. Male and female names that have the same roots will form the same diminutives. For example, a man named Evgenij (Евгений) and a woman named Evgeniya (Евгения) will both have the same basic diminutive of Zhenya (Женя). This name can then be further diminutivized by adding further suffixes and creating names like Zhenochka (Женочка).

The Global Data Consortium’s Worldview platform has one of the most unique and privileged access solutions to identify Russian individuals.  As with the Lektor decoder, it can be one of the most sought after solutions to help fight fraud in the international digital world.

Be on the lookout for Part 2 of our series – How Do Russians Acquire an Identity?


Singapore: “Chili Crab” or ID?

The island nation of Singapore is known for many things.  Specifically, it is a “melting pot” of sorts including a mixture of cultures, languages, alphabets and nationalities. The city state is known for its cuisine, especially for its famous dish, the “chili crab.” Just like the food, the people are a fusion of all who come to reside there – Chinese, Indonesian, Malaysian and the list goes on.  One thing is for certain, the needs for identity verification are as dynamic and diverse as the cultures.  For those of you looking for the best places for “chili crab” in Singapore you can look here.

Chili Crab

Chili Crab

First, let’s take the Singapore national ID card.  The ID card represents the melding of peoples in the way it represents individual’s identity attributes.  Document validation, to verify identity, will tell you accurately that the format is correct (but not necessarily verified).  When a National ID/Passport scan or image is sent to the Document Validation provider they perform an automated analysis checking the validity of the information on the document ensuring the information makes sense and goes together, and that none of the images or data is forged. A Document Validation service provider may check the following data points:

  • Full Name
  • Nationality
  • Date of Birth
  • Photo
  • Gender
  • Document Expiration Date
  • Passport MRZ (Machine Readable Zone – two 44 character rows that convey the data on the Passport)
  • In the case of Singapore, the national ID includes elements very like a passport given the nature of the multicultural country.
  • Full Name – English then Native
  • Race – Example Chinese
  • Birth Date
  • Country of Birth – China, Singapore

Document Validation providers may also check characteristics of a document to ensure it has not been forged or altered.   This can include checking the background print, micro text, whether the document photo has been replaced, whether the fonts used are consistent and correct, and other authenticity checks.  These checks generally require manual review and often supplement automatic checks of the document data points.

However, verifying the data associated with a National ID against trusted sources is a different matter. For example, let’s look at one of the elements on the National Registration Identity Card – race. Surprisingly, Singapore allows TWO RACES in accordance with their race diversity disclosures.  



This is called “double-barreling” which applies to all babies born as of January 1st, 2011.  The ID card represents the melding of peoples in the way it represents race.

Here’s how it works.  Your race must be a logical combo of your mom’s and dad’s races. e.g. Malay-German or Malay-Caucasian. The race in front is regarded as the dominant one e.g. in the above example, “Malay” is the dominant race.  All siblings from the same parents must have the same race, if the kid gets married to someone else of mixed parentage, only the dominant race counts for both.

Next, let’s examine the card and how it represents the melding of peoples in the way it represents names. If you are of origin in another country – perhaps China, but have a Latin English name you will see both the English name and the Chinese name listed on the card in the order – English to Chinese. In other cases, the name may only be the traditional Chinese name, and it can vary and exposes a challenge of using only document verification.  

Name and race are two examples of the challenges of validating identity using document checks without electronic identity verification.

 The best solution is to combine document validation/authentication (Doc check) and electronic identity verification (eIDV).  This both checks the characteristics of the document and the accuracy of the data on it.  Combining Doc check with eIDV check for countries like Singapore will allow you to accurately and correctly verify one’s identity.  


SPOTLIGHT: 4th Money Laundering Directive (4MLD)

Last year, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) published Anti-Money Laundering (AML) regulations for corporate entities such as banks to comply.  Of these Final Rules, these entities must comply with AML compliance with ongoing customer due diligence (“CDD”) that includes creating a customer risk profile and updating customer information somewhat continually (based on risk).

As Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) best practices and regulations continue to evolve on a global scale, one of specific focus is known as the Fourth Money Laundering Directive (4ML).  The European Union’s directive seeks to remove any ambiguities in previous legislation and improve enforcement consistencies.  At its core, the directive involves using a risk-based approach, combined with online mlmonitoring, beneficial ownership, Customer Due Diligence (CDD), Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs), and Third-Party Equivalence.

The directive has specific guidance where entities will be required to show that they have taken appropriate steps and considered various factors (e.g. customer, product, geography and channel) risks mitigating the threat of AML & CFT (counter terrorizing financing).   Further information is given about ongoing monitoring of customers with up-to-date records related to their risk assessment and continual due-diligence.

Focusing specifically on customer due diligence, further guidance has been given recently that impose requirements on “covered financial institutions” – which include banks, broker-dealers, mutual funds, and futures commission merchants and introducing brokers in commodities – to identify the beneficial owners who own or control certain legal entity customers at the time a new account is opened.  Here are the highlights regarding customer due diligence:

  • Customer Due Diligence for New Accounts – Applies when an account is opened by a new or existing “legal entity customer” – including a corporation, limited liability company, or other entity that is created by the filing of a public document with a Secretary of State or similar office, a general partnership, and any similar entity formed under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction that opens an account.  This also requires identity verification.
  • Ongoing Due Diligence Requirements for Existing Accounts – requirement to identify and verify the beneficial owner(s) of certain legal entities that open new accounts, the Customer Due Diligence Rules formalized the requirement that covered financial institutions incorporate ongoing customer due diligence obligations in their AML compliance programs.  One specific procedure related to Identity Management is Conducting ongoing monitoring to identify and report suspicious transactions and to maintain and update customer information (which includes information regarding the beneficial owners of legal entity customers).

Worldview and 4MLD – Customer Due Diligence – 2×2

With the developments in the market, the Worldview platform has features to help comply with customer due diligence guidelines.  Because the recent updates include verifying the identities of individuals when the person is not present – like an online purchase or confirming an individual’s identity to sell on an online marketplace, it is best to use multi, high quality data sources to do that.  This 2×2 process includes verifying an identity from two distinct and quality data sources – to help with ongoing risk assessments and monitoring of individuals – not just domestically, but globally.

The Worldview Platform provides 2×2 verification in two unique ways.  The first is our waterfall approach which is a step approach to utilizing data sources that allows for the best result to be returned based on match/no match criteria at each step of the waterfall.  The other is the shotgun approach which broadcasts calls to multiple data sources at once and returns a set of match results.  63

Both approaches allow Worldview customers to access KYC data from best of breed, in-country sources through one single API.  In real-time, and ongoing fashion, customers can constantly monitor the individual constituents of their risk profiling efforts with the expansion messages and codes that Worldview has always provided.

Worldview currently offers 2×2 verification for the following set of countries:  AU, NZ, FR, ES, UK, DE, IT, CH, PL, AT, NL, SE, FI, NO, DK, BR and MX.