We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps(royalmail.com)
royalmail.com
We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps
https://www.royalmail.com/sending/barcoded-stamps
104 comments
My guess is that one of the biggest motivations is to enable one-time address digitization. I'm only really familiar with USPS but my understanding is that the Royal Mail Mailmark system is largely similar to the USPS IMB system.
Bulk mailers have long been required to barcode mail with destination information to reduce the need to OCR addresses, which is a particularly complex and expensive part of the operation. Non-bulk mail actually gets barcoded by an inline printer in the sorting machine after the first time it is OCRd, to avoid the need to OCR it again later in handling. Well, that's the case in the US. From what I can tell Royal Mail doesn't currently do this, and so they're going to have to OCR the address repeatedly on all non-bulk items. At this point, putting a unique barcode on the stamp and then associating it with the destination in an online database is probably much cheaper for them to roll out than adding barcode printing to their sorting equipment.
And it provides counterfeiting and fraud resistance, along with the ability to add detailed tracking to letters very cheaply.
Bulk mailers have long been required to barcode mail with destination information to reduce the need to OCR addresses, which is a particularly complex and expensive part of the operation. Non-bulk mail actually gets barcoded by an inline printer in the sorting machine after the first time it is OCRd, to avoid the need to OCR it again later in handling. Well, that's the case in the US. From what I can tell Royal Mail doesn't currently do this, and so they're going to have to OCR the address repeatedly on all non-bulk items. At this point, putting a unique barcode on the stamp and then associating it with the destination in an online database is probably much cheaper for them to roll out than adding barcode printing to their sorting equipment.
And it provides counterfeiting and fraud resistance, along with the ability to add detailed tracking to letters very cheaply.
> Well, that's the case in the US. From what I can tell Royal Mail doesn't currently do this, and so they're going to have to OCR the address repeatedly on all non-bulk items.
Take a closer look at the bottom right hand edge of some non-bulk mail. Huh, those are some faint orange lines. What's going on? That's RM4SCC encoded data from the sorting machinery.
It's not "really" faint orange, that's a fluorescent ink, inside the machine under appropriate lighting rather than the faint orange these lines show up very nicely. They're encoding (2 bits per line) a unique identifier so the system can track every individual piece of mail for a few weeks, plus its Delivery Point destination.
[I would guess "faint orange" was chosen because it's unobtrusive, yet you can't honestly claim it's hiding]
After the initial OCR run, later machines just see "Oh, #238205724145, still headed for 18 Long Drive, AB12 34XZ" without needing OCR and then people at a higher level can ask e.g. why the fuck is there so much mail handled by this Glasgow sorting office and find that aha, some bozo has directed all the mail for Swansea via this office, what a buffoon, we'll fix that.
Probably if you're murder police, you could get Royal Mail to scan it and tell you this crucial envelope entered their system at about 12:30 on September 24th in Liverpool central office, and it was eventually given to a human to deliver at 08:47 last Tuesday, but I'd guess this is rarely useful and it's not something they will tell random members of the public. The Delivery Point is redundant if you're a human since the address is printed in human readable letters.
Take a closer look at the bottom right hand edge of some non-bulk mail. Huh, those are some faint orange lines. What's going on? That's RM4SCC encoded data from the sorting machinery.
It's not "really" faint orange, that's a fluorescent ink, inside the machine under appropriate lighting rather than the faint orange these lines show up very nicely. They're encoding (2 bits per line) a unique identifier so the system can track every individual piece of mail for a few weeks, plus its Delivery Point destination.
[I would guess "faint orange" was chosen because it's unobtrusive, yet you can't honestly claim it's hiding]
After the initial OCR run, later machines just see "Oh, #238205724145, still headed for 18 Long Drive, AB12 34XZ" without needing OCR and then people at a higher level can ask e.g. why the fuck is there so much mail handled by this Glasgow sorting office and find that aha, some bozo has directed all the mail for Swansea via this office, what a buffoon, we'll fix that.
Probably if you're murder police, you could get Royal Mail to scan it and tell you this crucial envelope entered their system at about 12:30 on September 24th in Liverpool central office, and it was eventually given to a human to deliver at 08:47 last Tuesday, but I'd guess this is rarely useful and it's not something they will tell random members of the public. The Delivery Point is redundant if you're a human since the address is printed in human readable letters.
> [I would guess "faint orange" was chosen because it's unobtrusive, yet you can't honestly claim it's hiding]
I imagine the fluorescent ink was chosen so it's easily readable on all background colors - well except orange fluorescent envelopes.
I imagine the fluorescent ink was chosen so it's easily readable on all background colors - well except orange fluorescent envelopes.
> except orange fluorescent envelopes
i said fluorescent orange was my favourite colour, they said i was 'anti social'
i said fluorescent orange was my favourite colour, they said i was 'anti social'
>And it provides counterfeiting and fraud resistance, along with the ability to add detailed tracking to letters very cheaply.
Yes, this is what I was curious about.
(For non-Americans' benefit: All USPS shipping is tracked with barcodes, except for stamped mail. USPS offering this would benefit merchants who would be able to ship very small/thin items in envelopes with tracking, and people in general who want to be able to follow their stamped letters' progress.)
Yes, this is what I was curious about.
(For non-Americans' benefit: All USPS shipping is tracked with barcodes, except for stamped mail. USPS offering this would benefit merchants who would be able to ship very small/thin items in envelopes with tracking, and people in general who want to be able to follow their stamped letters' progress.)
Above the FAQ:
> Our new barcoded stamps also enable you to watch and share exclusive Shaun the Sheep videos via the barcode itself, using the Royal Mail App.
Initially I thought operational efficiencies and fraud prevention were the likely reasons, but oh hey look there's a marketing angle too.
> Our new barcoded stamps also enable you to watch and share exclusive Shaun the Sheep videos via the barcode itself, using the Royal Mail App.
Initially I thought operational efficiencies and fraud prevention were the likely reasons, but oh hey look there's a marketing angle too.
"Counterfeit stamps are often sold in quantities of 55..."
I wonder why this is? Surely it would be relatively easy for a counterfeiter to sell them in quantities of 50 instead.
I wonder why this is? Surely it would be relatively easy for a counterfeiter to sell them in quantities of 50 instead.
It shows how useless eBay is in policing their own site.
Assuming (as reported) the stamps are produced in China and Turkey, it would be very easy for the counterfeit sellers in the UK to simply cut off 5 stamps from each sheet, removing this obvious signal to eBay.
Assuming (as reported) the stamps are produced in China and Turkey, it would be very easy for the counterfeit sellers in the UK to simply cut off 5 stamps from each sheet, removing this obvious signal to eBay.
If they're unique, and they better be, maybe that'll allow for tracking by default.
"Any person importing, distributing, selling or otherwise assisting in the sale of counterfeit stamps is committing offences of fraud and/or counterfeiting" [1]
I am surprised there are so many listed on eBay.
Just the two "sponsored" listings on eBay for the search "first class stamps" have already sold over £1000 of counterfeit stamps, and about £20 in fees for eBay.
[1] https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/...
I am surprised there are so many listed on eBay.
Just the two "sponsored" listings on eBay for the search "first class stamps" have already sold over £1000 of counterfeit stamps, and about £20 in fees for eBay.
[1] https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/...
The surprising part is that people go to such effort for such a low value commodity. Who is sending 1k worth of Christmas cards etc? Maybe small biz, but again the value added doesn’t seem to match the risk of getting your model train outfit raised by the postal inspector.
Maybe anarchists use these exclusively to avoid paying the man?
Maybe anarchists use these exclusively to avoid paying the man?
Just a random example: I’m involved a bit in the Magic: The Gathering resale market and I know plenty of unscrupulous sellers who would gladly buy fake stamps to send their merchandise if it would save them even a few cents on every sale. Postage adds up when you’re shipping hundreds or thousands of envelopes in a low margin, competitive market. And I imagine there are lots of other collectable and re-sale markets with similarly principled people.
I hear you and that is why I added the hypothetical small biz shipping model train parts. A visit by the postal inspector would really ruin a low margin biz.
Likewise, I suppose a postal service must weigh the cost/benefit of pursuing counterfeit stamps--it might not be costly enough compared to other forms of problems.
Likewise, I suppose a postal service must weigh the cost/benefit of pursuing counterfeit stamps--it might not be costly enough compared to other forms of problems.
In the US you can use stamps for Priority Mail packages; they're not just for letters! My dad does this when he sends packages because he can get (legitimate) bulk postage at odd denominations for less than face value. You can use more postage than will physically fit on the box; more postage can go into a shipping label pouch. I imagine the stamps get used up a lot faster when you're shipping packages with it.
A tip to anyone wanting to get into this: legitimate bulk postage is sold by the pound!
A tip to anyone wanting to get into this: legitimate bulk postage is sold by the pound!
Many small eBay sales are shipped as letters. Fake stamps would save you a fortune.
> I am surprised there are so many listed on eBay.
I'm not. They make money from it, just like Amazon makes money from the counterfeiters, scammers, and fraudulent sellers. Google has plenty of ads for fake stamps if you search for stamps - they're about the only ones you'll find ads for.
Someone will write an article that gets traction talking about the vibrant market for fake stamps on eBay and Google, and they'll issue the Standard Tech Apology, "We are so, so sorry you caught us doing this and we will try harder to avoid you catching us doing it in the future," they'll clamp down for a few months, and then will quietly ignore the rise in the profitable listings again after the attention dies down.
People selling fake products are great ad buyers. They have to bid high enough to be placed ahead of "organic" results and legitimate stuff, and if they get caught, you can keep their money per the terms and agreements and such.
I'm not. They make money from it, just like Amazon makes money from the counterfeiters, scammers, and fraudulent sellers. Google has plenty of ads for fake stamps if you search for stamps - they're about the only ones you'll find ads for.
Someone will write an article that gets traction talking about the vibrant market for fake stamps on eBay and Google, and they'll issue the Standard Tech Apology, "We are so, so sorry you caught us doing this and we will try harder to avoid you catching us doing it in the future," they'll clamp down for a few months, and then will quietly ignore the rise in the profitable listings again after the attention dies down.
People selling fake products are great ad buyers. They have to bid high enough to be placed ahead of "organic" results and legitimate stuff, and if they get caught, you can keep their money per the terms and agreements and such.
Did the recession chase away the crypto folks and blockchain evangelists? They usually would have crawled out of the woodwork by now promoting their favorite product.
Is it to stop counterfeiting? It could literally just be so that stamps can be scanned automatically to check whether they are the right denomination, which squares up with "facilitate operational efficiencies". Is "added security features" really less clear than "prevent fraud"?
The barcode would only be useful to prevent counterfeiting if each stamp had a unique barcode that could be invalidated once used, but the linked page doesn't say whether or not that is the case.
The barcode would only be useful to prevent counterfeiting if each stamp had a unique barcode that could be invalidated once used, but the linked page doesn't say whether or not that is the case.
> to check whether they are the right denomination
This is a trivial problem compared to handwriting OCR going on in some post offices in the world, and does not require barcodes.
This is a trivial problem compared to handwriting OCR going on in some post offices in the world, and does not require barcodes.
It is possible that the lower CPU time scanning barcodes vs scanning color images and detecting the stamp is a big enough optimization to be worth it at scale.
The old stamps already had machine readable UV markers to mark their money value.
Translation: Keeping with our effort to turn this country into more of a Panopticon, and aligned with our belief that no two parties should be able to communicate privately, we hate that you can send mail mostly anonymously, and this gives us a bit more power to surveil you by making stamps unique.
I’m so sick of all this baseless negativity tbh. It almost ruins the site when any discussion about anything devolves in to “this is how the man is gonna take ur freedoms”.
> we hate that you can send mail mostly anonymously
At best 50% of the parties to the letter are known, at worst 100%. And that is with the mail sealed.
> communicate privately
There is a piece of paper between them and the contents, and they have been handed the literal envelope to deliver. That isnt much security, and not much privacy.
At best 50% of the parties to the letter are known, at worst 100%. And that is with the mail sealed.
> communicate privately
There is a piece of paper between them and the contents, and they have been handed the literal envelope to deliver. That isnt much security, and not much privacy.
If you're going to make this claim, at least give a reasonable explanation as to how this deanonymisation works. Otherwise your comment is no better than "they're putting microchips in the vaccines" junk.
A simple scenario that comes to mind is that given a letter, it's now easier to tie it back to the stamp's point of sale. "Who purchased this stamp?" is a very hard question to answer in their current (essentially fungible) form. Adding barcodes makes this much easier.
This assumes that stamps are scanned when sold, to tie their barcodes to the purchaser. That may happen. It may not. But clearly the more scans a stamp gets increases the tracking resolution for a given piece of mail both after AND before mailing. This "before mailing" part is new and opens the door for a much higher level of surveillance.
This assumes that stamps are scanned when sold, to tie their barcodes to the purchaser. That may happen. It may not. But clearly the more scans a stamp gets increases the tracking resolution for a given piece of mail both after AND before mailing. This "before mailing" part is new and opens the door for a much higher level of surveillance.
Indeed it assumes the stamps are scanned upon sale. Otherwise, at best, what you obtain is "where was this stamp sold", which is completely non-identifying.
But if you think about it for more than ~10 seconds, you remember that stamps are sold in packs of 4-8 at least. They're also often sold in sheets of 50+. All this makes individual scans painful.
So you want to play the devil's advocate and make more assumptions; say, for example, "every stamp could trace back to its original pack, so only one of them needs to be scanned". But if that's the point of this panopticon move, then why put the barcode on the stamp, rather than … the pack itself?
Because you know what always gets scanned? The product's barcode. If I wanted to track people who buy stamps, I would create unique EAN13-compatible barcodes for every single pack sold, always start them with the same number space + some digits for actual different products, and voila, somewhat backwards-compatible, unique tracking on all those stamps without having to deploy a barcode on every single stamp, implement a swap-out scheme, etc.
Of course, maybe someone at GCHQ is reading my comment and thinking "fuck, why did we spend so much money on this scheme again?", but somehow I doubt it.
But if you think about it for more than ~10 seconds, you remember that stamps are sold in packs of 4-8 at least. They're also often sold in sheets of 50+. All this makes individual scans painful.
So you want to play the devil's advocate and make more assumptions; say, for example, "every stamp could trace back to its original pack, so only one of them needs to be scanned". But if that's the point of this panopticon move, then why put the barcode on the stamp, rather than … the pack itself?
Because you know what always gets scanned? The product's barcode. If I wanted to track people who buy stamps, I would create unique EAN13-compatible barcodes for every single pack sold, always start them with the same number space + some digits for actual different products, and voila, somewhat backwards-compatible, unique tracking on all those stamps without having to deploy a barcode on every single stamp, implement a swap-out scheme, etc.
Of course, maybe someone at GCHQ is reading my comment and thinking "fuck, why did we spend so much money on this scheme again?", but somehow I doubt it.
That doesn't make sense. What use would scanning the pack be, if the stamps themselves are not associated to the pack?
If anything all the stamps would have two ID in the barcode. One linked to the sales location (always the same) and one as a counter for the individual stamps. That would avoid having to scan every single one.
If anything all the stamps would have two ID in the barcode. One linked to the sales location (always the same) and one as a counter for the individual stamps. That would avoid having to scan every single one.
Then you need to connect the barcode reader of every post office, supermarket and dodgy corner store to the GCHQ mainframe and voila - no more crime.
Instead of issuing every post office, supermarket and dodgy corner store a new barcode reader which can scan the stamps themselves in order to prove the point of the original person complaining of a panopticon?
I think you missed the part where I’m making the argument against this being even sort of practical as a surveillance tool.
I think you missed the part where I’m making the argument against this being even sort of practical as a surveillance tool.
To give a real world example: Imagine if America had a system like this in place when the Zodiac killer was active in California. A prolific writer of letters to the press, all of Zodiac's barcode-stamped envelopes would open up new potential leads in answering questions like "when was this stamp manufactured" and "where was this stamp originally sold".
I imagine if this system was in place, then they likely wouldn't have written letters to start with.
While I actually do appreciate the importance of postal anonymity, the Zodiac Killer is maybe not the best example to select.
Yeah, I prefer talking about the many illegal drugs you can fit into a stamped envelope.
```
"Who purchased this stamp?" is a very hard question to answer in their current (essentially fungible) form. Adding barcodes makes this much easier.
```
so reselling stamps is not an option ?
"Who purchased this stamp?" is a very hard question to answer in their current (essentially fungible) form. Adding barcodes makes this much easier.
```
so reselling stamps is not an option ?
Seems like there’s an easy work around, you just buy some special issue stamps celebrating British birds or children’s TV characters or whatnot, that don’t have barcodes.
That works while you are still able to buy them for cash, assuming there is no facial recognition on the security camera watching the exchange.
> This card was used to buy this stamp and we have this face on camera doing it.
> This card was used to buy this stamp and we have this face on camera doing it.
How will the mail become less anonymous by adding a random unique number to it? It's not like you need an ID to buy stamps.
If you buy stamps from the Royal Mail directly online, perhaps they would keep a register of who bought which stamps.
If you buy stamps from a shop, perhaps a register is kept of which stamps were given to which shops.
I don't know how likely any of this is, but it can definitely make stamp purchases more traceable than without the barcodes.
If you buy stamps from a shop, perhaps a register is kept of which stamps were given to which shops.
I don't know how likely any of this is, but it can definitely make stamp purchases more traceable than without the barcodes.
> It's not like you need an ID to buy stamps
In the coming cashless society, you won't be able to buy anything whatsoever without it being tied to your ID.
In the coming cashless society, you won't be able to buy anything whatsoever without it being tied to your ID.
There are so many features royal mail could add to letter/parcel delivery that users might want to pay for, and would cost them nothing. Eg.
* See what mail is headed your way. They could have email/text/app notifications of mail that's headed towards you, including a picture of the outside of the parcel and estimated delivery dates/times.
* The ability for the receiver to pay to prioritize incoming mail. Sometimes you're sent something with slow second class mail, but then realise you really need it urgently, so could pay to 'upgrade' to express service.
* Auto upgrade all mail headed to you if you buy stuff online and hate businesses that send stuff with cheap shipping.
* Perhaps an x-ray service so you can see inside parcels - would be handy for businesses that do returns who need to check the real goods are headed their way.
* Super express services. Pay £500 and we'll dispatch an employee direct to your address with the parcel, and it'll take the driving time plus 10 minutes. Operationally it's only the same as the employee going home sick midday.
* One off redirect services. 'I'm at work today, send my parcel there'.
* Allow adding delay. 'Im on holiday, don't deliver any mail for me this week, I don't want someone breaking into my house to steal it'.
* Allow binning a letter before it even arrives - for spam and junkmail. Maybe have automated spam filters which can be enabled (and binned items can be held for a while before being actually destroyed in case of classification error).
* Allow understanding names of people at your address - eg. "Return to sender any mail addressed to Fred Smith, he no longer lives at my house"
* Notifications that the postman is 5 minutes away and has something too large for a regular letterbox. That means the postman won't have to wait so long after ringing the doorbell.
* "Letter to email" service. If you ask, they open the envelope and scan and email you a pdf of the contents. Then you get the info faster, and is also helpful for people away from home, businesses that need a mailing address but have no employees to deal with mail, etc.
All of these services would be free/cheap to implement, and each could be a chargable service that earns the company money.
* See what mail is headed your way. They could have email/text/app notifications of mail that's headed towards you, including a picture of the outside of the parcel and estimated delivery dates/times.
* The ability for the receiver to pay to prioritize incoming mail. Sometimes you're sent something with slow second class mail, but then realise you really need it urgently, so could pay to 'upgrade' to express service.
* Auto upgrade all mail headed to you if you buy stuff online and hate businesses that send stuff with cheap shipping.
* Perhaps an x-ray service so you can see inside parcels - would be handy for businesses that do returns who need to check the real goods are headed their way.
* Super express services. Pay £500 and we'll dispatch an employee direct to your address with the parcel, and it'll take the driving time plus 10 minutes. Operationally it's only the same as the employee going home sick midday.
* One off redirect services. 'I'm at work today, send my parcel there'.
* Allow adding delay. 'Im on holiday, don't deliver any mail for me this week, I don't want someone breaking into my house to steal it'.
* Allow binning a letter before it even arrives - for spam and junkmail. Maybe have automated spam filters which can be enabled (and binned items can be held for a while before being actually destroyed in case of classification error).
* Allow understanding names of people at your address - eg. "Return to sender any mail addressed to Fred Smith, he no longer lives at my house"
* Notifications that the postman is 5 minutes away and has something too large for a regular letterbox. That means the postman won't have to wait so long after ringing the doorbell.
* "Letter to email" service. If you ask, they open the envelope and scan and email you a pdf of the contents. Then you get the info faster, and is also helpful for people away from home, businesses that need a mailing address but have no employees to deal with mail, etc.
All of these services would be free/cheap to implement, and each could be a chargable service that earns the company money.
Two of these already exist:
> Allow adding delay. 'Im on holiday, don't deliver any mail for me this week, I don't want someone breaking into my house to steal it'.
"Royal Mail Keepsafe" - https://www.royalmail.com/receiving/keepsafe
> Super express services
"Royal Mail Sameday" - https://www.royalmail.com/sending/uk/sameday
> Allow adding delay. 'Im on holiday, don't deliver any mail for me this week, I don't want someone breaking into my house to steal it'.
"Royal Mail Keepsafe" - https://www.royalmail.com/receiving/keepsafe
> Super express services
"Royal Mail Sameday" - https://www.royalmail.com/sending/uk/sameday
> Perhaps an x-ray service so you can see inside parcels - would be handy for businesses that do returns who need to check the real goods are headed their way.
Funny story: In a previous job I led a team developing the UK Post Office's self-service kiosks. Because of that work, another national post office in Asia contacted my company to investigate a similar kiosk. One of their requests -- I swear this is real -- was a "snake detector." Apparently, mailing snakes out of the country to be sold as pets is a real problem. We never quite sorted out the best way to accomplish that.
Funny story: In a previous job I led a team developing the UK Post Office's self-service kiosks. Because of that work, another national post office in Asia contacted my company to investigate a similar kiosk. One of their requests -- I swear this is real -- was a "snake detector." Apparently, mailing snakes out of the country to be sold as pets is a real problem. We never quite sorted out the best way to accomplish that.
Brilliant. If I was looking to hire an ideas guy I would have you.
I suspect part of the downfall of postal mail services worldwide is lack of them having an ideas guy on staff...
Postal mail services have a massive advantage when expanding into so many fields of business - (eg. ecommerce, anything that involves having a network of people who travel every street every day). Yet none have capitalized on it.
Postal mail services have a massive advantage when expanding into so many fields of business - (eg. ecommerce, anything that involves having a network of people who travel every street every day). Yet none have capitalized on it.
In America, much of the downfall is due to Congress prohibiting innovation. Or fouling things up, such as requiring USPS to fund all retirement expenses 75 years into the future. Which is why - on paper - it looks like the USPS is bleeding money; it has to pre-fund pensions for people who have not been born yet. My theory is that there will be an attempt to privatize the post office (selling it to some campaign contributor for $1) while carefully ignoring the $56B pension fund that Congress required.
The U.S. also has an additional problem where it doesn’t really agree on what USPS is supposed to be.
Half the country believes it should be a public service and therefore it should serve everyone even if they’re unprofitable subsidized by government money.
The remaining half believes it should be a self sustaining service that can compete with the likes of UPS and FedEx. However, they’re unwilling to accept the necessary destruction of mailing routes this would require (its hard to see how shipping letters to any non urban core would be profitable and/or how shipping prices wouldn’t rise to far above what FedEx/UPS charge today, for all the services, because of the next group).
The final, but probably most powerful, group are private logistics companies that absolutely love the fact that they can offload their unprofitable routes and services onto USPS. USPS becoming a self sustaining service would mean that all the end-user costs would rise for FedEx/UPS as well, since they will no longer be able to offload the most expensive parts of their service to USPS anymore.
Half the country believes it should be a public service and therefore it should serve everyone even if they’re unprofitable subsidized by government money.
The remaining half believes it should be a self sustaining service that can compete with the likes of UPS and FedEx. However, they’re unwilling to accept the necessary destruction of mailing routes this would require (its hard to see how shipping letters to any non urban core would be profitable and/or how shipping prices wouldn’t rise to far above what FedEx/UPS charge today, for all the services, because of the next group).
The final, but probably most powerful, group are private logistics companies that absolutely love the fact that they can offload their unprofitable routes and services onto USPS. USPS becoming a self sustaining service would mean that all the end-user costs would rise for FedEx/UPS as well, since they will no longer be able to offload the most expensive parts of their service to USPS anymore.
Now I think about it, there's a bunch of ideas there that don't involve delivering stuff.
If you have 1000 pieces of installed hardware spread around the country in urban areas, you should be able to pay the postal company to take a picture every week so you know nothing's been vandalized.
If you have 1000 pieces of installed hardware spread around the country in urban areas, you should be able to pay the postal company to take a picture every week so you know nothing's been vandalized.
> Can I take my stamps to the Post Office to swap them out?
> No — you can't swap your non-barcoded stamps out at a Post Office. You will need to pick up a 'Swap Out' form and send in your non-barcoded stamps to Royal Mail (free post address on the form). Print one off our web site; contact Customer Experience and we'll post one out to you; pick one up from your local Delivery Offices' Customer Service Point.
> Please note swap out forms are not available at Post Offices.
Post offices are an independent business from royal mail. So they generally want to be paid for every service they offer, and I guess royal mail doesn't want to pay the fee.
Also, this swapout is in part to eliminate fraudulent stamps. The post office won't have the necessary high tech equipment to separate the real stamps from the (very good) fakes.
Also, this swapout is in part to eliminate fraudulent stamps. The post office won't have the necessary high tech equipment to separate the real stamps from the (very good) fakes.
It is stupid. Many things that were once trivial to do in a post office now have extra hurdles.
Not stupid, it was very profitable for some of the Conservative Party MPs and their buddies who allowed it to be privatised.
Since privatisation, the Post Office is a separate company to Royal Mail.
While the Post Office does sell a lot of Royal Mail products, there are some that the Post Office has deemed unprofitable, and as such, the Post Office has nothing to do with.
While the Post Office does sell a lot of Royal Mail products, there are some that the Post Office has deemed unprofitable, and as such, the Post Office has nothing to do with.
"Why are you adding barcodes to stamps?"
"The move is part of the Company’s extensive and ongoing modernisation drive and will allow the unique barcodes to facilitate operational efficiencies, enable the introduction of added security features and pave the way for innovative services for customers."
Answer my question without answering my question.
"The move is part of the Company’s extensive and ongoing modernisation drive and will allow the unique barcodes to facilitate operational efficiencies, enable the introduction of added security features and pave the way for innovative services for customers."
Answer my question without answering my question.
It’s pretty clear. It’s primarily to prevent fraud. The security feature is the letters can now be scanned and the number can be checked on an online system to check it is a valid stamp which has not been used before.
The second part seems to suggest they could add extra functions on like letting you track letter delivery as you would a parcel.
The second part seems to suggest they could add extra functions on like letting you track letter delivery as you would a parcel.
For those who are curious, these are 2DID Datamatrix codes, also used in the semiconductor industry extensively to mark wafers and chips. If you pick up an Intel CPU, its going to have a couple of tiny datamatrix codes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Matrix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Matrix
If anyone was curious why Data Matrix instead of QR Code this article goes into detail:
https://www.laserax.com/blog/data-matrix-vs-qr-codes
Looks like Data Matrix has higher error correction (per size) and better data density (at every size). QR Code has a higher theoretical storage capacity, larger maximum size, and multi-byte data support (rather than limited to alphanumeric), none of which applies to this use case though. It also looks like that Data Matrix may work with a lower contrast than QR Code. Both can be read from any angle.
Honestly, purely from a technical standpoint, the biggest arguments for QR Codes is their popularity/adoption, and things like that you can stylize the code itself.
Maybe I need to do more research, but on the face of it Data Matrix looks like it is technically superior.
https://www.laserax.com/blog/data-matrix-vs-qr-codes
Looks like Data Matrix has higher error correction (per size) and better data density (at every size). QR Code has a higher theoretical storage capacity, larger maximum size, and multi-byte data support (rather than limited to alphanumeric), none of which applies to this use case though. It also looks like that Data Matrix may work with a lower contrast than QR Code. Both can be read from any angle.
Honestly, purely from a technical standpoint, the biggest arguments for QR Codes is their popularity/adoption, and things like that you can stylize the code itself.
Maybe I need to do more research, but on the face of it Data Matrix looks like it is technically superior.
Yea we used Cognex cameras to read millions of chips, trays, heat sinks, carriers, wafers, etc. Datamatrix is industrial grade. Cognex also has proprietary decoding algorithms which would detect the faintest and half damaged codes.
I think the only relevant thing about any kind of scannable code is reliability. QR Codes are widely used and seem to work fine with just about any smart phone. So, they are good enough. Maybe Data Matrix is slightly easier to scan. But it's not really a problem with QR Codes.
But AFAIK you can't do non-square QR codes. Plus, at small sizes, you lose a lot of space for the alignment marks.
If that matters to you, then yes that's a limitation. However, big qr codes are easier to scan. Making them smaller requires higher resolution scanning devices and more careful aiming of the device. So, it's not necessarily that big of a deal. The alignment marks are scaled along with the qr code. So, they don't use more space for smaller codes. The shape limitation is more of an esthetic thing. I don't think people care that much.
Data Matrix may be technically superior but if memory serves it's encumbered by multiple patents.
To the HN crowd... This is the risk of any kind of token that has no expiration date.
If whatever security measures you have in place ever get broken (watermarks, holograms, digital signatures, etc), then you have a big problem.
And no security feature available today will be secure forever.
So your company or government should never issue digital or real tokens that last forever.
If whatever security measures you have in place ever get broken (watermarks, holograms, digital signatures, etc), then you have a big problem.
And no security feature available today will be secure forever.
So your company or government should never issue digital or real tokens that last forever.
Not in the FAQ:
"If this is so important, why don't these changes apply to special stamps?"
and
"You're designing new stamps, but you're putting the Late Queen on them, not the new King?"
"If this is so important, why don't these changes apply to special stamps?"
and
"You're designing new stamps, but you're putting the Late Queen on them, not the new King?"
Fraud levels on special stamps are still low. And because lots of people have collections if special stamps and would baulk if they all became unusable. Don't worry, they'll add barcodes on those too when fraud switches to them.
Royal mail is a slow company... They'll take a long time to update the design.
Royal mail is a slow company... They'll take a long time to update the design.
Also not in the FAQ:
"I'm 90 years old and I don't know what 'download an app' or 'fill the form online' even mean. Provided you don't swap stamps at the post office, what you suggest me to do?"
But these won't even read this online-only announcement, so I guess ... screw them.
"I'm 90 years old and I don't know what 'download an app' or 'fill the form online' even mean. Provided you don't swap stamps at the post office, what you suggest me to do?"
But these won't even read this online-only announcement, so I guess ... screw them.
We got a form through our letterbox with our post yesterday -- I'm assuming that the OP also got one, and that's why we're seeing the news here today.
I would expect them to make more money selling special stamps to collectors (who then quickly make them disappear without ever using them) than they make by delivering mail. Better not disturb a business line like that.
Pretty sure this page was originally published in early 2022, well before Elizabeth’s demise. No doubt Charlie will be appearing on the next batch.
[deleted]
The new stamps have been available for purchase since February.
What is a good tool for decoding these barcodes? Neither zbar nor zxing-cpp seem to be able to decode the DataMatrix image on Wikipedia.
What did the error correction report -- is it valid on a byte level? They might use a new highlevel encoding, but I doubt it, and they are certainly not re-inventing the error correction level. This stuff is hard math and there is no value in re-inventing that.
The higher level might be encrypted to prevent fraud, but that would show as valid on the error correction level.
Other than that, my first guess is that the image shown there is not an actual data matrix code but a fake image made for the web site.
On a second thought, they might have used a simple pseudo-encryption (read: security through obscurity) on a lower level, such as flipping the inner pixels. But then again, this means you cannot use standard tools for anything, so I doubt it.
The higher level might be encrypted to prevent fraud, but that would show as valid on the error correction level.
Other than that, my first guess is that the image shown there is not an actual data matrix code but a fake image made for the web site.
On a second thought, they might have used a simple pseudo-encryption (read: security through obscurity) on a lower level, such as flipping the inner pixels. But then again, this means you cannot use standard tools for anything, so I doubt it.
Trying to decode the DataMatrix image on Wikipedia just says no barcode found.
The german post did this last year for the physical stamps - the electronic stamps already had a code. This way, you get some tracking, but the only advtange is that you can see when your letter was automatically processed in a center, the postpeople don't scan normal letters
I see a barcode without bars but ok
They are small, square bars of equal width and height, arranged in a pleasingly grid-like grid. Thank you.
Does anybody know which standard they're using? It's not either of the common 2D codes, namely QR Code or PDF417, and while it looks a bit like Data Matrix, AFAIK those are always square.
It appears to be 2D Mailmark Type 29
https://www.royalmail.com/sites/default/files/Royal-Mail-Mai...
https://www.royalmail.com/sites/default/files/Royal-Mail-Mai...
It is Data Matrix, Mailmark is basically a logical standard on top of Data Matrix ECC200. Data Matrix allows the blocks to be arranged in multiple layouts, square or rectangular.
Yes, it is accurate to say that all Mailmark barcodes are Data Matrix, but not all Data Matrix are Mailmark. In the document I linked they explain the specifics of the logical standard you mention.
The US Postal Service also uses a DataMatrix on some of their stamps, but not all. I just looked up an official specification document for the USPS codes, but couldn't find it. I did find this page dedicated to postal barcodes. It looks like the USPS ones may more accurately be called IBI Lite?
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/United_States_Postage_Meter_St...
Can anyone chime in with the security measures present on non-barcoded stamps? I have a Global Forever Stamp on the desk in front of me, and there's nothing that is visible to the naked-eye.
While we're on the subject of barcodes and shipping, check out MaxiCode! I've scanned hundreds of thousands of those little bulls-eyes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaxiCode
The US Postal Service also uses a DataMatrix on some of their stamps, but not all. I just looked up an official specification document for the USPS codes, but couldn't find it. I did find this page dedicated to postal barcodes. It looks like the USPS ones may more accurately be called IBI Lite?
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/United_States_Postage_Meter_St...
Can anyone chime in with the security measures present on non-barcoded stamps? I have a Global Forever Stamp on the desk in front of me, and there's nothing that is visible to the naked-eye.
While we're on the subject of barcodes and shipping, check out MaxiCode! I've scanned hundreds of thousands of those little bulls-eyes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MaxiCode
I can't 100% swear to it but I think the postage meter standards in the US are completely owned by the postage meter vendor (Pitney Bowes) and not specified by USPS. These aren't actually "stamps" proper but meter tape. The meter vendor is on the hook to furnish the validation equipment to USPS, so it's all a closed ecosystem to them.
USPS seems to be lax on postage issues... at least some years ago there was some reporting that they very rarely actually scan (and thus mark as used) meter stamps and so you can get away with using them multiple times in practice. I think this is just because of not wanting to spend the money to install the meter validation equipment on sorting machines, since they already have the IMB to use for routing. I suspect they just don't see a lot of actual issues with counterfeiting
Pitney Bowes is much of what I call the "postal industrial complex" - large aspects of USPS technology are completely contracted to Pitney Bowes and a few other companies like Endicia. Pretty much every form of "electronic postage" in the US, including purchased directly from USPS, is managed by Pitney Bowes or Endicia, not USPS (Post Offices used to use an Endicia product for shipping postage, not sure if they still do).
USPS seems to be lax on postage issues... at least some years ago there was some reporting that they very rarely actually scan (and thus mark as used) meter stamps and so you can get away with using them multiple times in practice. I think this is just because of not wanting to spend the money to install the meter validation equipment on sorting machines, since they already have the IMB to use for routing. I suspect they just don't see a lot of actual issues with counterfeiting
Pitney Bowes is much of what I call the "postal industrial complex" - large aspects of USPS technology are completely contracted to Pitney Bowes and a few other companies like Endicia. Pretty much every form of "electronic postage" in the US, including purchased directly from USPS, is managed by Pitney Bowes or Endicia, not USPS (Post Offices used to use an Endicia product for shipping postage, not sure if they still do).
What an incredibly well made document.
The Data Matrix spec allows certain rectangular sizes, they are just not used often.
More of a squarescode.
Seems very quick deprecation? If they urgently need the barcode why support picture stamps without it. If the don't then supporting both for a year will dramatically reduce the amount of swapping they need to do.
They have already been supporting both for a while.
Presumably they would like to go 100% to the new workflow in their sorting centres. A longer swap period means more expensive equipment sat there doing nothing or longer period of time supporting two different workflows.
Also the distribution of stamps held; people who post a lot - 0 swaps needed. People who hoard - have multiple years supply. People who dont post often at all but have stamps sat around - 10 years supply assuming you can find where that 10 pack of stamps is.
6-12 months to restock all outlets and have companies wind down their supplies of old stamps, and a good amount of time to test the new workflow on an increasing volume, while still being able to back off if the system blows up.
Presumably they would like to go 100% to the new workflow in their sorting centres. A longer swap period means more expensive equipment sat there doing nothing or longer period of time supporting two different workflows.
Also the distribution of stamps held; people who post a lot - 0 swaps needed. People who hoard - have multiple years supply. People who dont post often at all but have stamps sat around - 10 years supply assuming you can find where that 10 pack of stamps is.
6-12 months to restock all outlets and have companies wind down their supplies of old stamps, and a good amount of time to test the new workflow on an increasing volume, while still being able to back off if the system blows up.
There are huge amounts of fake regular stamps being sold on e.g. eBay. I guess the damage those cause, is higher than the costs of the swapping.
The new stamps were introduced in February this year, and the old ones expire at the end of January next year.
That makes much more sense; "We’re adding barcodes to our regular stamps" is not a super clear way of saying "We added barcodes to our stamps over 7 months ago". I guess not having bought stamps in that time dose mean I am not really the target market.
I think it's more interesting asking for a (large) Qr code who encode:
- sender data
- recipient data (POSSIBLY GPS etc included)
- paid fees
Aside of any human-readable information. That's might simplify shipping process much and allow quicker operation between different countries address formats having a "QR generators platform" who take care of the differences up front. For instance generating proper human-readable addresses for both sender and recipient locations according to local postal service rules.
- sender data
- recipient data (POSSIBLY GPS etc included)
- paid fees
Aside of any human-readable information. That's might simplify shipping process much and allow quicker operation between different countries address formats having a "QR generators platform" who take care of the differences up front. For instance generating proper human-readable addresses for both sender and recipient locations according to local postal service rules.
German mail system got rid of the need for stamps a while ago. Using this ever since. You can buy a stamp via app and the stamp is just a code you write with pen on the letter. Link unfortunately in German: https://www.paketda.de/frankieren/mobile-briefmarke.html
Swiss post has a similar thing, you can buy a stamp (on the form of a 9-letter code) via SMS. Never used but seems it works. No barcodes for regular stamps for now, but datamatrix barcodes are used since more than 15 years for bulk mail and print-at-home stamps.
In NL you can just buy a 9 letter code, write it on your envelope, and you’re fine.
No need for any stamps
In the stamp world this must be significant news no? Or has some other country already implemented this?
The swap out thing is a bit weird and clunky -- I mean, who's paying attention to this. Gonna have to be a major PR campaign about it.
The swap out thing is a bit weird and clunky -- I mean, who's paying attention to this. Gonna have to be a major PR campaign about it.
While there's currently no den date for the swap, I'm pretty sure there will be one in a few years and then all stamps from stamp collections world wide will be worthless.
European countries did the same when the Euro came and they made a ton of money by being able to devaluate all stamp collections...
(you have to consider that stamp collection was a huge thing but now is no longer so that when stamp collectors die many collections enter the market...)
European countries did the same when the Euro came and they made a ton of money by being able to devaluate all stamp collections...
(you have to consider that stamp collection was a huge thing but now is no longer so that when stamp collectors die many collections enter the market...)
This is stupid, many stamps in a stamp collections won't be able to be used to actually send any post anyway. Do you have any source to your claims?
What information is being encoded in the QR code? Any details on the size of the barcode payload?
If the picture is an actual code used (BTW it's a data matrix, not QR, you can tell by the solid L / dotted L outline): The code has 48x16 pixels. Subtract the outlines (solid) / timers (dotted), that's 44x14 = 616 bits. IIRC error correction takes around 1/4 of that, leaving 462 bits or 57 ASCII characters.
Then in the FAQ
I wish companies would be honest in the plain language, and avoid phrases like "facilitate operational efficiencies".
"The barcodes will prevent fraud" would be fine.
(People sell counterfeit or used stamps on eBay. The first result is [2], on sale for £9.99 with a face value of £80. Royal Mail's own site even says "Counterfeit stamps are often sold in quantities of 55..." [3]. Obviously eBay have a "policy" against this, and obviously they don't enforce it [4].)
[2] https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/284986420186
[3] https://personal.help.royalmail.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/...
[4] https://www.ebay.co.uk/help/policies/prohibited-restricted-i...