Slashdot Mirror


Website Posts Partial SSNs of Politicians in Protest

John3 writes "The Foundation for Taxpayer & Consumer Rights has posted partial Social Security numbers for several California politicians to protest their vote against pending privacy legislation. According to a San Francisco Chronicle story, the SSNs were purchased on the Internet for $26." Now there's an effective way of showing the problems of the status quo.

17 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. Change their minds? by Gr33nNight · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This was done after the bill was passed....how could posting the SSN after the fact change anything?

  2. Why only partial? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Just post the whole thing. It's not like it matters. Bill Gates' social security number is 539-60-5125. So what?

    1. Re:Why only partial? by TomGroves · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If it doesn't matter, why don't you post yours instead of Gates's?

    2. Re:Why only partial? by violent.ed · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Any financial institution which uses it as such does so at their own risk.

      Incorrect, they do it at YOUR risk.

      --
      - You're not paranoid, they really are after you.
  3. Trading Card by Jad+LaFields · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Gray Davis trading card, "Privacy Series". Mint condition. Best offer.

    I love it when political groups pull off silly stunts to make a point. Politics grows more and more entertaining and less helpful everyday.

    --
    [SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
  4. Transparency vs secrecy by 1010011010 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Either transparency or secrecy is acceptable -- as long as both the citizenry and the government have the same thing.

    --
    Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    1. Re:Transparency vs secrecy by clenhart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Huh?

      A transparent government is necessary for the people to control it. How else do we evaluate how our "employees" are doing?

      The privacy of individuals is critical to dissent.

      It does not have to be the same.

      It's sad that people are throwing away their freedoms.

  5. Valid Point, but.. by johnnick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Had they done it before the vote, or gone to each Assembly-person and demonstrated the capability before the vote, that would've been legitimate lobbying. This is just petty and serves to make the Assembly-people less likely to listen to this group in the future.

    John

    --
    "The plural of anecdote is not data."
    1. Re:Valid Point, but.. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Had they done it before the vote, or gone to each Assembly-person and demonstrated the capability before the vote, that would've been legitimate lobbying. This is just petty and serves to make the Assembly-people less likely to listen to this group in the future.

      I respectfully disagree. This is a perfectly valid way to express dissatisfaction with the decision of these lawmakers.

      "Really assemblyman? This privacy measure isn't needed? Will your position be the same when it's YOUR information instead of ours?"

      I agree 100% with these guys.

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  6. Whoop deedoo by KingArthur10 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you really want to find someone's social security number, you can do it a million ways. Every business they work for has it on record, the credit beuru has it, your D/L has it tied in for police. All anyone really has to do is do a credit check on you, claiming to be a possible employer and such. I am not afraid of my SSN being released. Yeah, someone could really screw with my life, but then, I could sue the heck out of whatever company released it. Anything in life either has to have a SSN or a Birth Cirtificate anymore. Why not just implant babies with chips and call it a day? ;-)

    --
    I came, I saw, She conquered.
  7. "vote our conscience" hahahaha by konichiwa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    from the sfgate article:

    "We should be free to vote our conscience and not be threatened or harassed if we choose to vote contrary to people who are lobbying for special legislation," said Assemblyman Ed Chavez, D-La Puente, one of the lawmakers whose partial number was published.

    What a crock. I wonder how much money he takes from special interest and lobby groups that pay him to "vote his conscience."

    Politicians = soul merchants

    --
    Never argue with an idiot, he'll just lower you to his level and beat you with experience.
  8. politicians should stop complaining by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You dont give us privacy and then you demand privacy . Well that doesnt sound like a good *explitive deleted* deal?
    If you dont like having your SSN number spread around the internet then perhaps you should pass legislation to protect everyone (of course instead will end up with legislation that only protects politions and those who have a lot more than $26 to line there pockets).

  9. Release more than just the first 4 numbers. by Lord+Kano · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thousands of people who were born in the same part of the country as me the same year I was have the same first 4 numbers.

    All that can be deduced from that info is an approximate region of birth and possibly age.

    Perhaps these guys should release one extra number per week until they get the privacy laws corrected.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
  10. Re:can anyone... by silentbozo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because they all use SS# as a primary key in their databases.

    Which of course, is a stupid thing to do, since the SS# is NOT GUARANTEED TO BE UNIQUE. In other words, the financial industry would rather pay millions to hire lobbyists and lawyers, than pay the millions to fix lazy programming and procedures, UNLESS threated with dire legal consequences (for example, Y2K liabilities.)

    Not to mention they all sell your personal info, trade it amongst themselves, and view any legislation that would crimp that practice as a threat to one of their core businesses. Mind you, this industry really only exists in the US - this country is one of the few places in the world where you can open a bank account and apply for a credit card/loan without ever showing your face in person.

    This is the same kind of thinking that lets credit fraud happen - they rather just change your card number and cover the charge (shafting the merchant who got defrauded in the process) than actually tracking down the bastard who stole your card/identity. As far as the banks are concerned, it's a cost of doing business. The banks/credit bureaus are not interested in prosecuting the criminals who steal identities because it doesn't hurt them the slightest bit - they pass all the costs to the merchants. And if you get screwed in the process? Well too bad for you.

    Now, why is it that medical data is now better protected than your other personal info? We need a version of HIPPA(sp?) for the financial industry, TODAY.

  11. Re:SSN: Public or Confidential Information? by lnoble · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You're completely dead on. I hate it whenever employers, financial institutions or ngo/go's ask for it. Before the IRS started using it as an ID your were not required to give it to anyone except the Social Security Agency. Because the IRS started using it, employers and just about every financial institution there is needed to use it as well. 98% of the organizations that I 'need to' give my number to have nothing to do with social security.

    Why doesn't the IRS/money people make their own number, dividing up the risk of the almost inevitable possibility of its theft. This would dramatically reduce the risk of falling victim to social security fraud.

    Some resources:
    SSN/Privacy FAQ's (cpsr.org)
    General Privacy info

  12. Re:SSN makes you life easier. by d2ksla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The difference in Europe (at least Sweden) is that the SSN is like a username instead of a password (like the US SSN is).

    Want to get a credit card? You need to show up at the bank with a picture ID.

  13. Re:SSN makes you life easier. by ctr2sprt · · Score: 4, Insightful
    We have a fundamentally different view of governments. Americans view government as a necessary evil. The only real difference of opinion among us is how much is actually necessary. I don't think there's an American alive that likes our government, trusts it to do the right thing, or feels it should be as big as it is. This isn't a new thing, either; the Founders built our government feeling exactly the same way.

    You think of government as a way of helping people. We think of government as a way of taking away people's rights. Obviously we want some rights to be restricted - like the right to kill someone and take his stuff - so we suffer ourselves to be goverened. But we all firmly believe that smaller governments are intrinsically better than large ones.

    It's also a factor that, in a strange way, most Europeans are more jaded about politics than Americans. Oh, we think our politicians are corrupt liars too, but we have hope that they can change. It seems like most Europeans have just accepted that their representatives are crooks and have given up on actual democracy. Well, we're nearing that point, so perhaps we're not so different after all.