Field Notes
Why Site Codes Beat Full Addresses in Backup Registers
Using coded identifiers protects privacy while still giving authorised readers a clear map of duplicate locations.
14 November 2025
When a duplicate-backup location register lists full street addresses beside descriptions of sealed seed envelopes, the document itself becomes a target. A coded system — Site A, Site B, Site C — with a separate sealed appendix mapping codes to addresses solves a practical problem we encounter weekly in Changwon.
The Risk of Over-Detail
Executors often photocopy estate folders and share them among siblings, solicitors, and bank officers. If your register states “paper backup, 14 Seongnam-ro, apartment 904,” every recipient now knows exactly where to look. Codes break that link while preserving utility for people holding the appendix.
How We Assign Codes
Codes reflect no geographic hint. Site M-7 and Site K-2 carry no relation to city names or postal districts. The appendix, stored separately — typically with the primary executor or in a solicitor’s file — contains the mapping. Authorised viewers named in the register may request appendix access under the conditions you define.
Verification Without Exposure
During verification visits we reference codes aloud in audit entries: “Site M-7 opened, seal intact, resealed 14 November 2025.” Anyone reading the audit trail understands an event occurred without learning the address unless they already hold appendix access.
When Full Addresses Belong in the Register
Rare cases involve single-site holders or corporate safes where the address is already public company information. Even then we recommend limiting address detail to what a successor strictly needs.
Starting Simple
If you maintain your own list today, replace addresses with codes before sharing it outside your household. Note the appendix location on the cover sheet. That single step aligns informal notes with the structure professional registers use.