Slashdot Mirror
Background-Check Software Goes Retail
Makarand writes "According to this article in the Mercury News, ChoicePoint Inc.,
one of the nation's largest vendors of personal, financial and legal data is attempting to
mass market a
background-check software tool-kit which can be used to tap into ChoicePoint's online
databases. Choicepoint requires that you have a business license to run a small business to use this software.
However, as users of these services are rarely audited or asked to produce their business license, the purchaser can potentially
conduct criminal background checks, Social Security number identification and other checks on anyone for a small fee. Privacy advocates are cautioning that making background-check software a consumer product could
easily put personal information into the wrong hands."
The govt needs to do a better job of regulating personal data. I guess passing tax cuts for the wealthy is more important than protecting the privacy of individuals. Businesses get what they pay for, a system of government for the Business by the Business.
I wonder if this will ever change.
Privacy advocates are cautioning that making background-check software a consumer product could easily put personal information into the wrong hands.
I would argue this info IS ALREADY in the wrong hands and the commoditization of such info merely creates a balance by giving that same access to the little guy (or reasonably little guy).
Now, if you'll excuse me, I was just interacting with my pal, Bonzi Buddy...
I can understand that there are legitimate uses for this; I can see why a parent would like background checks on babysitters for my kids and such.
But the larger question is, what is this society coming to? Why are we becoming so paranoid about everything? Everyone wants their own privacy, but then they're willing to go and spy on other people to find out more about them...
I don't know. It's early on a Sunday... just throwing some thoughts out.
So now people who happen to find SS cards can actually find out whose SS it is. Here comes better identity theft!
I hope no-one realises this is a comb-over!
I'm as good as fired when my boss sees my childpr0n conviction!
Honestly, how many people lie to their employers? Kinda bugs me.
How does a business license make someone any more reputable? If the guy at the corner Likker-n-Lotto can buy this software, we may as well give it out for free on street corners. "Wrong hands" indeed.
.nosig
One of the scariest parts about this article is that it assumes that this kind of software usually puts private information into "right" hands. In a world where your personal socializing habits are grounds for failing a background check, it really blurs the concept of "the wrong hands."
Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
Knowledge of each of us is only valuable if distribution is limited. If everybody knows everything about everybody, lots of problems simply go away: people are suddenly no longer able to use irrelevant superficial criteria to make decisions if the expect to succeed. (Those naive zealots who continue to do so will fail when all the dirty, scummy, real people out there with actual skills get hired up by their competators.)
Everybody has to grow up in a world where this data is free.
Key point in the ideal being that the data has to be free. Cheap and ubiquitous is a good first step toward free.
Everybody always focusses on "no data collected" as the right answer for building a good world. "All data public," I think, makes an equally good, perhaps more mature, world.
There have for some time been a plethora of web-based services allowing you do exactly the same kind of background checking, with the same level of business license verification. (Or non-verification, depending on your point of view...)
This is really more of a packaging / marketing / merchandising issue, than a technical or even a legal issue.
In fact, since surfing the web is much easier than installing software, I wonder if this product will cause any increase in the occasions of misuse of background checking. Anyone who wants to do it but shouldn't be able to, already can take a crack at it via the web.
For starters, there's the sticker that seals the top of the box. `Business License Required,' it reads.
Whew, I feel sooo much better, I was thinking just anybody could get their package....sigh!
Or Does a sexual predator live in your neighborhood?
These databases are inevitable and likely to proliferate.
We all watched how "potential" employers used their access to the social security IDs from job applications submited to various job sites.
Imagine how much more effective and automated will be to impersonate someone having access to this wealth of information.
What happened to the Civil Rights?
Privacy advocates are cautioning that making background-check software a consumer product could easily put personal information into the wrong hands.
OK, what planet have these "privacy advocates" been living on? Could easily put? Hasn't personal information been in the wrong hands already for years now? Hell, forget buying software, all you've needed for YEARS has been $100 or so, and you can get your hands on whatever personal information you want on almost whoever you want, from any number of private investigation companies, online and offline.
Just a couple examples:
Background Check International's fee structure
Checkmate.com's fee structure
BackgroundFile background check software
Many many more, this was just the first few I found on a google search. Choice Point is just jumping on the gravy train. Whooptie do.
What they are doing is offering a service for a fee, a service they know many people will buy. They are also passing the responsibility onto the user to "be honest that they are using the information for legit cause." Plus they make you fax some form and have a company employee verify the data. I'm sorry but I'm sure they will have a minimum wage or slightly better person to "verify" these requests. It just seems like a company even though is legally correct it putting the burden of proof to the user, are just making a bad decision for all consumers. Like many will say, this will make it allot easier to track people down, get some revenge, and do worse things.
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
It is usually fairly trivial to find out interesting information about someone, especially if you have something like a person's job application in front of them. While all the information there is self voulenteered, it is likely to be at least substantially correct. This contains a plethora of potential leads. It is even easier if you do not contrain yourself to bounds of law and misrepresent yourself on the phone.
You simply call up their previous/current employers, their surnames if the surname is unusual, and their neighbors. One blabby former/current coworker or relation will tell you lots of what you want to know. A proverbial little old lady who lives across the street can If you have access to credit reports, there is also additional fun stuff in there. Credit reports vary in accuracy and completeness, the information there needs verification but there are plenty of good leads there.
Don't forget your public records, like tax assessors, VCIS for bankruptcy filings, and my personal favorite resource: research desks at libraries if you are dealing with a geographic area for which you are not familiar. Research desk librarians usually live for answering odd questions for random people and are usually pretty cool people to boot.
-- benton.
A lot of businesses already require your tax history before they will consider hiring you...
Some even do ongoing investigations, and know who your friends are...
( speaking form experience here.. it shocked me when I discovered they were doing it.. )
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Oh heck, this can be abused in the "right hands" too. So you need a "business license" to get this? Easily obtained.
And lets say you are a manager someplace that has access to this information, and your college aged daughter has a new boyfriend? Easy enough to check up on him, isn't it. Oh, and it isn't abuse of the system because it's to protect your little girl.
As long as you are using the company equipment, have a neighbor you don't like? Easy enough to find out more about who he really is, too. And it's just to protect your family.
The "Two IDs" sketch of "Amazon Women on the Moon" and that brokerage commercial where the guy is freaked out by his blind date knowing everything about him are not far away from reality now.
-- I Am Not A Terrorist.
Sure, maybe they have good intentions, but really??? I am 21 yrs old and have a Federal Tax ID to run a business (obtained for free through the IRS) and I can obtain a legitamite business license for around $50. So another words, I could use my FREE Tax ID and cheap business license to get this software and run background checks on anybody I want?? All I need is a social?? And a "forged" application of some sort (in case of an audit, I can "prove" they applied). Gee, save me some time researching on the internet. /me doesn't exist. You don't know me..
I'm a ghost... no really, I am. I love my privacy so LEAVE ME ALONE!! Take this software out of production.
The difficulty here is that the effort to get "public" information is part of how we have traditionally shielded our personal privacy.
To wit, if you live in LA and I live in Seattle, if there's a ton of information "public" about you in an LA courthouse, it's very hard for me to get at it. It may be legal for me to get at it, but it is harder. If you piss me off with a comment in a Usenet newsgroup, I can't easily start drilling into your life.
But if I can surf the web or run a program from my home and dig up information on you, it's far easier for me to harass you from afar.
There are valid arguments on both side of the issue. Yes, public information should be equally accessible to all. Yes, easy accessibility makes it easier for unscrupulous characters to get leverage on you from afar. Ever been stalked?
The way I see it, this is ultimately a good thing. Right now, most people are totally unaware of how much info is out there about them, because it's not trivial for any random person to get. What they don't realize is that almost anyone could get this type of info if they wanted.
In the long run, this should make people realize what information about someone cannot be trusted as actually identifying that person... then maybe fewer people will think that their mother's maiden name is a good way to restrict access to important things like their utility accounts.
Who do you think benefits when businesses benefit? No one? The big giant millionaire man hell-bent on creating conspiracies to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The people who work for that business benefit. The investors in that business benefit. As has been mentioned previously here on /., most stock of large corporations is held in pension funds, IRAs, 401(K) Plans, and from shares in mutual hunds held by individual investors. The owner/CEO of a business/corporation isn't the only one who benefits when a business/corporation does well.
/. for anyone who makes a lot of money. We have a progressive tax system in the U.S., meaning proportionally if you make more money, you pay more in taxes on the theory that it's less of a burden for the richer person to pay more to help support the poorer person. Why is it evil and conspiratorial if the government decides to give some money back to the people who are paying most of it (I think it was a stupid idea but that doesn't make it evil)
Now I'm not going to argue that Bush's tax cut was a good idea (it wasn't, IMHO) or that Bush is good for the economy (he's not, IMHO) or am I going to argue against your initial statement (that the govt should do a better job of regulating personal data). I am going to say however that you made an insightful comment (govt should do a...) and followed it up w/ crud about how it's wasting it's time trying to help the wealthy - a completely separate argument.
I get very angry at all the hatred I see on
How accurate is this information? This is an important consideration. I could see a use for this in gunshops, for example. It'd probably be a lot faster than making a call to NICS, and cut down on government expenses for staffing NICS. But what if the information is wrong or incomplete? Likewise with employment.
Fred
"A fool and his freedom are soon parted"
-RMS
Choicepoint requires that you have a business license to run a small business to use this software. However, as users of these services are rarely audited or asked to produce their business license, the purchaser can potentially conduct criminal background checks, Social Security number identification and other checks on anyone for a small fee.
What's so magic about a "licensed business", that limiting the data to them would do anything useful?
Crooks license businesses all the time, as do pathologically-lying psychopathic scumbags that manage to stay barely within the law.
Look at a used-car lot some time. Or nearly ANY sales organization. Or the executive suite of any corporation. Or middle-management at a job near you.
And tightening up the requirements for business licenses, or enforcing business-license requirements for disclosure of the data, will do no good and much harm. The crooks, who do their crookery for a living, will still have the time and incentive to hop through any hoops set up, or to skate around them. (As by setting up a business to sell the info under-the-table to their hands-on bretheren.)
Increasing the threshold for access, while still leaving it available to "licensed businesses", just further increases the subjugation of the general population. Why should any seller on E-Bay have less access to credit information on his potential customers (whom he has NEVER seen) than your local five-and-dime? Why should you be unable to check what the company is saying about YOU when asked by a "licensed business", and have to TRUST them to keep your data correct, and to give you the same info they give paying customers if you ask for a check?
The problem is not that it's "too easy" to "fake" being a "licensed business".
The problem is that the information is available to businesses AT ALL.
Privacy advocates are cautioning that making background-check software a consumer product could easily put personal information into the wrong hands.
That's just another aspect of the general empowerment of both the little guy and the big guy by the technological revolution.
Invasion of privacy has had limited impact before automation because it was so costly that it could only be applied rarely and selectively - typically only by government. Now it's cheap. So perhaps we need to protect it explicitly when we could mostly let it slide before, largely protected, like sheep, by fading into a large visually-identical crowd.
But if it needs protecting it needs EQUAL protection from ALL players (including government). Making it available only to "licensed businesses", thus giving it to the crooks while keeping it from the honest individuals and raising the cost-of-entry and/or risk-of-entry for small businesses, just won't cut it.
If it's public record, anybody should be able to see it. If it's not, nobody should. Then focus on defining and enforcing THAT.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The point is you do have to get up and go there. It brings the cost up. You have to track down all the diverse physical locations the data is kept and visit them to gleen the info. You are less likely to go through that without a legit need versus just sitting at home and getting the scoop on all you're neighbors, co-workers, etc. with a couple of clicks.
Choicepoint requires that you have a business license to run a small business to use this software. However, as users of these services are rarely audited or asked to produce their business license, the purchaser can potentially conduct criminal background checks, Social Security number identification and other checks on anyone for a small fee.
So, why can't they use their uber-database to see if a potential customer has a business license???
If their software is so dense as to miss obvious publicly available information like that, then I wouldn't worry.
Weaselmancer
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Mmm, makes me wish I was the coder...
Hate me!
Court records are public info, marriage certificates are public info, and many business transactions result in a public record. Really, your enitre life is published, it's just in so many disorganized places that it's hard for anybody to put it all together.
However, that's where technology comes in. Once all of those databases are converted from paper to bits, and then the tables are brought together and cross-linked, you can get a very scary pile of information just by having a name and address, or a social security number alone.
And really, the laws to regulate the use of such a database don't exist because, well, it hasn't really been fully done yet. But it seems like we keep getting closer and closer to the day where such a system will fully have the kinks knocked out and be availalbe to anybody who can pay for it...
Wow, spoken like someone who doesn't have kids. Between my wife and I we watch our son 90+% of the time but there are times when we are both working where we need a baby sitter, or we want to go out together to enjoy a little bit of "us" time without our son. Luckily for us we live within ~10 miles of both sets of grandparents and so finding a reliable, trustworthy babysitter isn't a problem but I can definitly sympathise with people who don't have the luxury.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Why is being a business a more valid reason to have access to this data than being an individual? Oh I forgot, business is the new "law" in the USA...
From Inside Republican America: A blacklist burning for Bush:
From Firm in Florida election fiasco earns millions from files on foreigners: Simply put: ChoicePoint is evil. Welcome to Bush & Ashcroft's Amerika."And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
Users of this software should have to pass a background check before they can use it. See how they like it. Having a business license doesn't prove anything as in most areas anyone that pays the fee can get one.
Given that ChoicePoint is the same sleazy outfit that conspired with the Bush family and the GOP to corrupt Florida's election results in 2000 (see this article and others), it's too late to keep it out of the wrong hands, and also explains why they have no qualms about irresponsibly allowing any (other) crook to get their hands on it. Pathetic.
Every Credit Card, every Bank Account, just about everything that has to do with your finances.
"How could that be bad?" you ask?. Easy.
Get into trouble (Credit rates delayed, Credit Card cancelled, Wrong Information entered into their system [it happened]) and BINGO, now more money from the bank.
In fact, no more Bankaccount. Yes, they can deny you the right to have a Bankaccount based upon a statement from the people at the "SCHUFA".
And it just takes 3 years to get records cleared from the statements.
Still not bad enough? You have to sign a statement for having you information and personal data transmitted to SCHUFA everytime you want something like...a telephone or change your ISP. Guess what happens if you get a negative report? Right.
And last, they invented a scoring system...based upon statistical data.
Living in a bad neighburhood? Negative Points in the soring system.
Had an accident some time ago, maybe even your fault? More negative points.
So the they assess you, and can deny a credit for example, just because you live in the wrong area.
You see, this is happening all over the world, and I don't think anyone can or will stop it. It'll get much worse before it might get better.
Cheers Jens
One simple solution to all of this: Whenever someone is researched by a third party like this, why can't it be mandatory that the researcher be positively identified, and the target of research must be notified of the research within 1-2 months unless a court decides that there's criminal activity worthy of suppressing these details?
Many municipalities, including mine, don't require businesses to be licensed. What's to keep any customer who buys the package from saying he's from such a place?
IMO, one of the most valuable pieces of information available in the future will be personal information associated with static IP addresses. I suspect many entities are busy compiling "IP databases" and this would be a product that could be of great use to both businesses and individuals who might want to identify users on their web sites, people on IM/IRC systems, or the senders of pseudo-anonymous e-mail.
Even a single company like Amazon.com likely has a huge database of IP addresses associated with detailed customer information (imagine if an information broker started consolidating this information across many sites). Due to the almost non-existant privacy laws in this respect, Amazon, or anyone could sell this information. You get an e-mail from someone you don't like? With their IP address you can get their name, address, phone number, etc. Anyone who wants to gather a mailing list of people who have visited their web site can run a cross-reference of the web logs against these sorts of databases. As more people move to DSL and cable, with static IPs, a database of this nature becomes the missing link to make most Internet activity un-anonymous.
I would rather have EVERYONE check each other than only large corporations (or wealthy elites) have the capability.
;), I can get this information).
NOTE: Everything I say is only about things that can be accessed by any wealthy individual or a corporation. I am TOTALLY AGAINST some entity, say the government, collecting new information. Everything I speak of is with regards to existing "personal information". I am not in favour of letting people spy on each other with totally private information (eg. your medical records).
Right now, large corporations and welathy elites (usually by hiring private "specialists") can check someone's SIN (Social Insurance Number) number and things like that. Basically any corporation can do this. In contrast, the typical citizen cannot do these things. This is very unfair for the average person. If I start a bogus business, I can check someone's SIN number but if I don't have a business I can't. What sort of lunacy is this? Obviously no one has said anything about this issue because the clueless masses have no idea what is going on.
By lowering the cost for doing these things, the average person can start spying on each other. This sounds bad on the surface but it is good (no, this isn't some Orweillian double-think at work). The best world is when you have absolute privacy or no privacy!!! Anything in between can be manipulated (usually by so-called "authorities" who are just a bunch of elites).
If someone can spy on me, or access my "personal information*" then I want to spy on them in return. This is only fair!!!!!!!!
I realize that what I said sounds dumb... but think about it.
Sivaram Velauthapillai (* Note that so-called personal information is not very personal since anyone (businesses, wealthy people, etc) can access them. Your SIN number, for example, is NOT private. You might think it is safe but it's not. If I was rich, or had contacts, or ran the country
Sivaram Velauthapillai
Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places
Gamer: One copy of bloodkiller IV
Clerk: Sorry, we have to run a background check and there is a three day waiting period
Gamer: Well what can I get now?
Clerk: Fuzzy Bunnies III The cutening or the gold cart simulator.
Gamer: Nuts
JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
When a dog kills someone, they are put down, no trial, no rights. When a human kills someone they are (ideally)arrested put to trial and convicted, then punished (killed or imprisoned). When a gang kills someone, the police try the individuals that did it, and the rest keep going. When a corporation kills people they are often sued, pay some money and keep going. Businesses are not treated like groups of people; legally speaking (in the US) they are treated as individuals, removing their employees from liability of their actions. If they were treated like a group of people, I would call them that, but they aren't and so we must deal with them differently. I don't want their money, but I want them to lose some power and allow other people an equal say in how their lives should be run.
America is such a paradise where only one parent is required to work to support the family.
However most people are not willing for this lifestyle. It means you buy used a car, and keep it running (one, not three or four). It means the kids share a bedroom, girls in one, boys in the other. (Note, compare this to the 1800s where one room cabins smaller than those bedrooms sometimes slept families of 10) It means eating out is a rare celebration, with most meals cooked at home, and even then cheap meals. It means that you never go to the movies, and watch broadcast TV on your free TV from someone who upgraded, and if you can't see the bottom third of the TV because it is broken too bad. It means you books come from the library. It means your clothing is cheap, and not in style.
Note that this is not living in poverty. There is plenty of good food (and healthier than what passes for food at most resteraunts). There are warm clothes, and they don't have holes in them.
As for if it is better? Well that is complex, but if you are not willing to live the above you should not have kids. Love is important for raising kids, somehow you need to keep them out of trouble, while teaching them how to make their own decisions. And a million other things. How you do it is up to the parents, there are thousands of different ways that work. Living on one income can be done, but you can turn out good kids one two if you must. I think it is easier on one income, but either way there are hardships.
However, as users of these services are rarely audited or asked to produce their business license, the purchaser can potentially conduct criminal background checks, Social Security number identification and other checks on anyone for a small fee.
This has been available for years. You can already do a combined credit check, criminal history check, and background check (including known aliases, current address, past addresses and cohabitors, marriages, divorces, etc.) for under $100 from sites like USSearch.com. All they ask for is your credit card number -- they don't care if you're a business owner, stalker, or what have you.
Now I'm guessing from the no saliry and bank account that you are a minor, and don't have any assets. That's great. However for those of us that DO it can be a major problem. If you got my bank account number, SSN, address, vital stastics and such, you could rip me off for quite a bit of money. You could actually do this with much less, just my check card number and experation date would do it.
This is the real concern. Sorry to shatter any illusions you may have had but the finincal world, at least for normal people, does not invlove 5 keys, 3 passwords, a retenal scan and a secret handshake. Some information and numbers is more or less all you need.
As Calvin Coolidge stated, "The business of America is business." The American government and the press have ALWAYS catered to the business class.
Debunking the "59 Deceits"