During past decades, after international tragedies have occurred governments have had to call for new mobility measurements, and COVID-19 does not seem to be an exception. Today the thoughts are aiming towards “Immunity passports” akin to currently used vaccination certificates which could verify an individual's serological status using tests to detect antibodies against SARS-CoV-2. Such determination could represent both potential benefits and unintended harms. The second ones, carry large ethical importance in terms of the guidelines that would be needed to determine the validity of the test according to duration and accuracy (which not only depends only on test accuracy but also on population infection prevalence) and also the centralized policies that would have to be created to make sure everyone can have access to testing. Fraud and a black market of counterfield certificates would also play a part in places without access to synchronized digital verification systems. However, an ‘immunity passport’ is not inherently discriminatory if founded on evidence-based risk stratification and if policy makers ensure that any stigma resulting from them will be mitigated and short term. Additionally, they could bring data tools for state’s optimization of support focus, prioritization of vaccine allocation and perhaps even new strategies to allow vulnerable patients to receive visits. Any scenario of this possible spread reductive strategy would require globally accepted test standards and compliance with International Health Regulations that would least restrict individual liberties at the time it contributes to minimize the threat of COVID-19.