wildercb/PrivacyTextBooks1.2 · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 118
found that some SSNs could be guessed through reverse engineering using
public data and information from social media sites.38
Armed with your SSN, identity thieves can gain access to various
accounts, open new accounts in your name, and engage in fraudulent
transactions and attribute them to you. All this is possible because they
have, in essence, obtained your password—the SSN.
But what makes an SSN a worse password than, say, the password
“123”? Why is the SSN the worst password ever?
There are two reasons. First, the SSN is something that identity thieves
know is used as a password, and they can readily find a person’s SSN.
SSNs are often in various public documents and countless record systems.
Scores of data breaches have resulted in compromised SSNs, which are
peddled in underground online markets on the Dark Web. SSNs are also
sold legally by many companies. That’s right—it’s totally legal for
companies to sell people’s SSNs. At least with the password 123, others
don’t know that it is your password, and it’s more difficult to find out.
Second, SSNs are quite hard to change. The beauty of passwords that
you create is that if they are compromised, you can quickly change them
with very little effort. Not so with SSNs, which are a tremendous hassle to
change. Whenever there’s a data breach involving your SSN, you now have
a potentially life-long increased risk of identity theft because SSNs are so
difficult to change.
Why People Can’t Really Protect Themselves
Over and over again we hear the typical spiel about how people should take
advantage of credit monitoring, be alert, shred their documents, guard their
SSNs, and so on.39 A list of these tips are at the end of countless news
articles about data breaches. Reporters include these tips to give people
hope and some sense of power that they can do something to protect
themselves. Unfortunately, these tips provide false hope and an illusory
sense of control.
The most important thing people can do to protect themselves is to get
angry at their lawmakers for not passing the adequate laws. Without legal
change, data security isn’t likely to improve.
When many people hear about individuals being victimized by identity
theft, they might think: The victims must have done something wrong. I’m
safe because I’m careful with my data.
Some people take obsessive precautions to protect themselves, such as
refusing to provide their SSN to organizations that request them on various
forms or applications. But that is a losing battle. The law often requires
organizations to collect SSNs. For example, your employer must collect
your SSN. If you are hired as an independent contractor, tax law requires
that you provide a W-9 form with your SSN on it. You will need to provide
your SSN to open financial accounts or obtain loans or credit.
Suppose that somehow you manage to avoid giving out your SSN. You
eschew employment, bank accounts, credit cards, phone service, and more.
You move to a remote cabin in the woods without Internet or electricity.
Are you safe? Nope. Your SSN is still out there and still widely used and
available. There’s often nothing you can do to remove it from public
records or to stop it from being sold.
The Inadequacy of Credit Monitoring
When an organization has a data breach, it will often offer a year or two of
credit monitoring to any victim who wants it. Providing free credit
monitoring has become the norm. Even in breaches where credit monitoring
won’t be helpful or relevant, organizations offer it almost reflexively
because everyone has come to expect it.
Given how often credit monitoring is offered after data breaches, one
would think that it is a great cure for any harms or a vaccine against future
harms. But credit monitoring isn’t a cure or vaccine—it’s just a limited
diagnostic tool. Credit monitoring just tells you if something odd is going
on in your credit reports.
Consumer reporting agencies make huge profits by selling credit
monitoring. They entice people to shell out monthly subscription fees. In
essence, these companies are asking you to pay money to monitor the data
they have already collected about you without your consent and for their
own profit—the epitome of chutzpah. Think of it this way: Imagine I decide
to keep dangerous tigers in my backyard, right next to your house. I have a
rather flimsy fence. I offer to install a sensor that will alert you if my tigers
might enter your backyard—but only if you pay me a monthly fee. Should
you really be paying money for this? Shouldn’t this be my responsibility?
For example, Equifax sells a service it calls Equifax ID Patrol:
Help Better Protect Your Identity and Monitor the Credit You’ve
Worked Hard to Earn
✓3-Bureau credit file monitoring
✓Lock and unlock your Equifax credit report
✓Customize alerts to stay informed about unusual activities
There’s a monthly fee of $16.95.40 But many of the offered services are free
because the law requires them to be, such as the ability to lock and unlock
credit reports. The law entitles people to a free copy of their credit report
each year from all three consumer reporting agencies.
Jittery consumers purchase these services, thinking that they will be safe,
but these services don’t make people safe. They are not cures and they will
not stop identity theft.
If these services really do help prevent fraud in people’s records, then
they should be free. The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires
that consumer reporting agencies use reasonable procedures to ensure
maximum possible accuracy.41 If credit monitoring helps ensure that one’s
credit report is accurate and not polluted with fraudulent information, then
it should be required under the law’s mandate.
Credit monitoring hikes up the cost of data breaches. Organizations that
have a breach must buy it for people. Credit monitoring is a great revenue
source for consumer reporting agencies, but it is an added expense for
organizations having a breach that is often passed to consumers in the form
of higher prices. Data breaches would be cheaper if everyone already had
free credit monitoring. Sadly, however, this is not how courts or regulators
have interpreted the FCRA.
Irresponsible Issuers of Credit
Back in 1981, in the famous case involving an accident resulting from a
defect in a Ford Pinto, it came to light that Ford knew about the design
defect in the car but ignored it because it calculated that paying damages in
lawsuits would cost less than fixing the design flaw.

found that some SSNs could be guessed through reverse engineering using

public data and information from social media sites.38

Armed with your SSN, identity thieves can gain access to various

accounts, open new accounts in your name, and engage in fraudulent

transactions and attribute them to you. All this is possible because they

have, in essence, obtained your password—the SSN.

But what makes an SSN a worse password than, say, the password

“123”? Why is the SSN the worst password ever?

There are two reasons. First, the SSN is something that identity thieves

know is used as a password, and they can readily find a person’s SSN.

SSNs are often in various public documents and countless record systems.

Scores of data breaches have resulted in compromised SSNs, which are

peddled in underground online markets on the Dark Web. SSNs are also

sold legally by many companies. That’s right—it’s totally legal for

companies to sell people’s SSNs. At least with the password 123, others

don’t know that it is your password, and it’s more difficult to find out.

Second, SSNs are quite hard to change. The beauty of passwords that

you create is that if they are compromised, you can quickly change them

with very little effort. Not so with SSNs, which are a tremendous hassle to

change. Whenever there’s a data breach involving your SSN, you now have

a potentially life-long increased risk of identity theft because SSNs are so

difficult to change.

Why People Can’t Really Protect Themselves

Over and over again we hear the typical spiel about how people should take

advantage of credit monitoring, be alert, shred their documents, guard their

SSNs, and so on.39 A list of these tips are at the end of countless news

articles about data breaches. Reporters include these tips to give people

hope and some sense of power that they can do something to protect

themselves. Unfortunately, these tips provide false hope and an illusory

sense of control.

The most important thing people can do to protect themselves is to get

angry at their lawmakers for not passing the adequate laws. Without legal

change, data security isn’t likely to improve.

When many people hear about individuals being victimized by identity

theft, they might think: The victims must have done something wrong. I’m

safe because I’m careful with my data.

Some people take obsessive precautions to protect themselves, such as

refusing to provide their SSN to organizations that request them on various

forms or applications. But that is a losing battle. The law often requires

organizations to collect SSNs. For example, your employer must collect

your SSN. If you are hired as an independent contractor, tax law requires

that you provide a W-9 form with your SSN on it. You will need to provide

your SSN to open financial accounts or obtain loans or credit.

Suppose that somehow you manage to avoid giving out your SSN. You

eschew employment, bank accounts, credit cards, phone service, and more.

You move to a remote cabin in the woods without Internet or electricity.

Are you safe? Nope. Your SSN is still out there and still widely used and

available. There’s often nothing you can do to remove it from public

records or to stop it from being sold.

The Inadequacy of Credit Monitoring

When an organization has a data breach, it will often offer a year or two of

credit monitoring to any victim who wants it. Providing free credit

monitoring has become the norm. Even in breaches where credit monitoring

won’t be helpful or relevant, organizations offer it almost reflexively

because everyone has come to expect it.

Given how often credit monitoring is offered after data breaches, one

would think that it is a great cure for any harms or a vaccine against future

harms. But credit monitoring isn’t a cure or vaccine—it’s just a limited

diagnostic tool. Credit monitoring just tells you if something odd is going

on in your credit reports.

Consumer reporting agencies make huge profits by selling credit

monitoring. They entice people to shell out monthly subscription fees. In

essence, these companies are asking you to pay money to monitor the data

they have already collected about you without your consent and for their

own profit—the epitome of chutzpah. Think of it this way: Imagine I decide

to keep dangerous tigers in my backyard, right next to your house. I have a

rather flimsy fence. I offer to install a sensor that will alert you if my tigers

might enter your backyard—but only if you pay me a monthly fee. Should

you really be paying money for this? Shouldn’t this be my responsibility?

For example, Equifax sells a service it calls Equifax ID Patrol:

Help Better Protect Your Identity and Monitor the Credit You’ve

Worked Hard to Earn

✓3-Bureau credit file monitoring

✓Lock and unlock your Equifax credit report

✓Customize alerts to stay informed about unusual activities

There’s a monthly fee of $16.95.40 But many of the offered services are free

because the law requires them to be, such as the ability to lock and unlock

credit reports. The law entitles people to a free copy of their credit report

each year from all three consumer reporting agencies.

Jittery consumers purchase these services, thinking that they will be safe,

but these services don’t make people safe. They are not cures and they will

not stop identity theft.

If these services really do help prevent fraud in people’s records, then

they should be free. The federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires

that consumer reporting agencies use reasonable procedures to ensure

maximum possible accuracy.41 If credit monitoring helps ensure that one’s

credit report is accurate and not polluted with fraudulent information, then

it should be required under the law’s mandate.

Credit monitoring hikes up the cost of data breaches. Organizations that

have a breach must buy it for people. Credit monitoring is a great revenue

source for consumer reporting agencies, but it is an added expense for

organizations having a breach that is often passed to consumers in the form

of higher prices. Data breaches would be cheaper if everyone already had

free credit monitoring. Sadly, however, this is not how courts or regulators

have interpreted the FCRA.

Irresponsible Issuers of Credit

Back in 1981, in the famous case involving an accident resulting from a

defect in a Ford Pinto, it came to light that Ford knew about the design

defect in the car but ignored it because it calculated that paying damages in

lawsuits would cost less than fixing the design flaw.