Slashdot Mirror
Who Wants To Be An Oregonian?
Anonymous Coward writes "TheOregonian.com is reporting that an identity theft ring was caught with ownership of a set of CD's which contained records on every registered driver (~2.5 million people) in the State of Oregon. With all the calls for identity smart cards, federal databases, and better connections among existing state databases, this story should provide a real warning for the abuse such systems invite...by both criminals and the government itself...the records are actually for sale to 'approved' companies like news organizations and banks. The full story can be read here on yahoo as well."
The US should take a peak out to other countries in the world. There are solutions out there that works. People are so hung up on the negative sides, that they don't see anything positive. I rather see better suggestions and improvements, than just "don't do it, you are taking my freedom!".
The US isn't that terribly free either, the goverment is doing all sorts of things in the dark, which they have no good reason to do in the dark. The unions are weak and individual can easily be taken advantage of by the large corporations.
All in all, see the opportinities to improve. Think of it is a huge mainframe with old bad software that needs to be improved to handle the load...
But most of this is probably irrelevant. It's overwhelmingly likely that the records which were stolen were not obtained via sophisticating cracking techniques but were probably swiped by a semi-saavy employee who needs access to the records to do his job. The point is that these systems should be completely closed for maximum security. Even if a maliciously minded employee wanted to do so, he shouldn't be able to walk out with the data on a Zip disk.
Talk all you want about the need for better computer security but to ignore the human side of the equation is to ignore the bulk of the problem.
BEN
I have a crappy retail job while I'm going to college and I have access to thousands of people's addresses, credit card numbers, phone numbers, full names, etc. Go to a mall dumpster and you'll find credit card receipts for hundreds of people. The girl ringing up your cargo shorts at Old Navy has access to your information just as easily as these "hackers" and "identity thieves."
Just because there are centralized databases with this stuff now doesn't mean anything, besides people can get 2 million of them at a time. What is someone going to do with 2 million records instead of just 20?
People steal no matter what. Computers don't make that easier or more effective.
These days, whenever some asshole cuts me off on the road, I'm always tempted to write down the license number and look it up on my DMV CD. It has everything -- SSN, Address, DOB, vehicle information, etc...
Why such a thing was ever published, and why it was decided that the general public should have access to it, I don't know. Don't get the impression that these people acquired this CD through some diabolical means -- in 1997, you could walk right in to the DMV and request a copy. For free, I believe...
Under the measure, retailers would have to provide identity theft victims with copies of all fraudulent records, and credit agencies would have to block bad credit information on their reports if they were the result of identity theft.
It all sounds very fair, but how easy would _that_ be? Given bureacratic middlemen and a lot of other things, I'm sure this would not be as easy as it sounds.
Plus what about the trouble with insurance. I'm certain that not many insurance companies would be ready to provide the victim with a proper profile, esp. after such an incident. In fact, I had a friend who had experienced something similar (not identity theft, but someone had interchanged her insurance profile) and even though it was _not_ her fault, most insurance companies are reluctant to give her anything that they feel would land them in trouble.
Sad that things like this ought to happen, only shows that we may not be ready, after all, for full automation.
Otoh, Oregon is the only state which has had the gonads to challenge the DoJ about their interrogations. Seems they do watch out for privacy at some level, in Oregon.
Of course, once information gets out in to the open, there's no putting it back in the bottle. Sometimes that's a good thing when it makes MS patch their bugware, but clearly there can be problems too -- as this case shows. I think open government is vital to effective democracy, and anything that potentially limits the openness of government should be carefully scrutinized, but I also believe a line must be drawn somewhere when personal information is involved.
In government institutions, this becomes a question of how open "open government" can really be. It's not a theoretical concern; some local governments have been considering placing all their records online. So how much should they scrub out of these? What constitutes personal information that should be protected?
Credible participation in our democracy is rarely done behind a veil of anonymity. That's why we declare campaign contributions in the public record, why letters to the editor in newspapers aren't typically published unless signed, and even why Anonymous Coward postings on Slashdot don't receive an automatic +1 moderation. The underlying assumption is that if you aren't willing to identify yourself, then whatever you have to say must not be that important.
(Of course, in extreme cases, anonymity is important and protected; if you fear for your safety, or fear you would be unduly harassed by identifying yourself, anonymous participation in government is vital. But that's not usually the case with generic public records.)
How, then, do you balance open government with the potential for abuse of government records? How should the method of distributing information affect the content of the information being distributed? That is, should you be able to get copies of data with more personal information when you have to request it in person (and in the process having your own name added to the public record), one record at a time, versus download it off the web or from a CD?
The real perversity, however, is that companies can frequently buy this personal information for their own use. If you get junk mail, there's a good chance the company sending it to you got your address from a database compiled by your state's department of motor vehicles; in Oregon you have to opt out of having your personal information sold.
In a sense, I'm more concerned about corporations having free run of my personal information than governments. Corporations are not democratic bodies, their records are not open to public review, and I simply have to trust that they will do the right thing -- a trust that may be undermined by their profit motive. Open government, on the other hand, lets me participate in the fate of my information -- even if I have to identify myself to do so.
Greetings,
:-)
A few comments about your posting...
1) What is wrong with not being allowed to pump your own gas. If you want them to speed up, get out of your car and make like you are about to pump it yourself.
2) The kicker check is not a refund of government underspend, but a refund of excess taxes. If the actual tax income is greater than the projected tax income by about 2% (or more) then the excess is refunded. It has nothing to do with how much or how little the government spends.
3) Yup... Down with Bill Sizemore...
4) November 1 not October 1, and in Eastern Oregon they are absolutely essential. Try driving from Troutdale to La Grande without studded tires today (we're in the middle of a severe storm). School Teachers in La Grande have been to known to use snowmobiles and cross country skis to get to school in the winter. Of course in the Portland Area if there is even a quarter inch of snow, schools have a snow day, cause people in Western Oregon seem to be immigrants from warmer states who don't know how to drive in snow.
5) What a great idea, stop people developing on prime farmland. It works for me, and frankly having comparing population densities between Portland and Western Europe, you have nothing to complain about as far as crowding goes. Try building houses that are larger than one floor, and don't have a yard larger than the house. Build up, not out!
Finally, my third generation Oregonian wife respectfully says that if you don't like Oregon that much, why don't you just go home, she'd rather see the fields than the people and traffic. And she used to live in the Beaverton area when there WERE fields there (a 25 acre farm which is now an evil sub division.)
Zwack
-- Under/Overrated is meta-moderation, and therefore is Redundant.