Slashdot Mirror


How To Stop Businesses Storing SSNs Indefinitely?

The Angry Mick writes "My wife and I recently moved, and during the course of providing change-of-address information to the many companies we do business with, I asked each if they were storing a full Social Security number in their databases, and if so, could they remove it or replace it with an alternate identifier. Neither the experience nor the results were particularly enjoyable. On the positive end of the spectrum, some companies were more than willing to make a change, even offering suggestions for a suitable alternate such as a driver's license number. In the middle were companies that made things a little more difficult, requiring several steps up the management tree before speaking to someone with some actual authority to address the issue. Then there was DirectTV. This company not only flatly refused to consider the suggestion, but also informed me that even if I were to discontinue service with them, they still intended to keep my full SSN on file indefinitely. There is no logical reason for them to do this, and I'm not keen on the idea of being left vulnerable to identity theft should they have experience any security breaches at any future point in my life. So, my questions to the Slashdot community are: Has anyone else tried getting your SSN replaced or removed in corporate databases, and what were your experiences? And short of Armageddon, is there any way to force a company to erase your SSNs after you cease doing business with them, or is this a job for a lawyer or regulatory body?"

98 of 505 comments (clear)

  1. Bad news. XD by BlueKitties · · Score: 3, Informative

    Some (financial) Point Of Sale software I designed uses SSNs to tell the difference between customers with identical names. If I change the SSN... it thinks you're a new customer. Well... this is something to think about.

    --
    "Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
    1. Re:Bad news. XD by dintech · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was wondering if there was anything equivalent to the Data Protection Act in the America:

      • Data may only be used for the specific purposes for which it was collected.
      • Data must not be disclosed to other parties without the consent of the individual whom it is about, unless there is legislation or other overriding legitimate reason to share the information (for example, the prevention or detection of crime). It is an offence for Other Parties to obtain this personal data without authorisation.
      • Individuals have a right of access to the information held about them, subject to certain exceptions (for example, information held for the prevention or detection of crime).
      • Personal information may be kept for no longer than is necessary and must be kept up to date.
      • Personal information may not be sent outside the European Economic Area unless the individual whom it is about has consented or adequate protection is in place, for example by the use of a prescribed form of contract to govern the transmission of the data.
      • Subject to some exceptions for organisations that only do very simple processing, and for domestic use, all entities that process personal information must register with the Information Commissioner's Office.
      • Entities holding personal information are required to have adequate security measures in place. Those include technical measures (such as firewalls) and organisational measures (such as staff training).
      • Subjects have the right to have factually incorrect information corrected (note: this does not extend to matters of opinion).
    2. Re:Bad news. XD by HogGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The SSN was never intended to be used this way. If it was your choice to use the SSN in ANY database, you should be beat, if it was somebody else, please identify them.

        It is this type of abuse and use of SSN numbers that has helped enabled identity fraud.

    3. Re:Bad news. XD by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, in America we use the free market system. Which means the system is free to market your data any way they want.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:Bad news. XD by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's Burn-Karma-Friday!

      In scary America: (Slight exaggeration)
      All data is now subordinated to Stopping Terrorists. All other uses are bonuses.
      Data must be disclosed upon request without the consent of the individual, unless legislation provides a reason not to share the data, AND no current executive order exists allowing the override of that legislation.
      Individuals have no right to access the info about them, subject to certain exceptions.
      Personal info must be kept longer than necessary, and may not be up to date.

      --
      My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
    5. Re:Bad news. XD by Sun.Jedi · · Score: 3, Informative

      There is not much. This excerpt, In general terms, in the U.S., whoever can be troubled to key in the data, is deemed to own the right to store and use it, even if the data were collected without permission, is particularly disturbing.

      Data may only be used for the specific purposes for which it was collected.

      While you may THINK the data was collected for either a sale, long term lease agreements (similar to cable service), or whatnot... the ACTUAL specific purpose was to track you and sell your information to "partners".

      Data must not be disclosed to other parties without the consent of the individual whom it is about

      This is where the "partners" come in ... See JCpenny and SBS for an example of 1 company using your information and giving it to a partner company.

      Personal information may be kept for no longer than is necessary and must be kept up to date.

      Too bad its not supposed to be deleted if it can't be confirmed in given period of time. Also, SSNs don't expire, so you get off thier list if you die. Yay.

    6. Re:Bad news. XD by Eskarel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And what would you suggest as an alternative? The SSN is the only unique number that a US citizen has, and every US citizen has one. Sometimes you need a PK which actually identifies someone, not just one which identifies the record in your database.

      The problem with SSN's and identity theft is verifying that an SSN belongs to a person not the SSN itself, if you replace the SSN with someone other number which is sufficiently unique as to identify you as an individual it's sufficiently unique for someone to be able to use it to steal your identity.

      I don't know what the solution to identity theft is, but no one knowing your SSN is not likely to be it. I think most likely the solution is penalties for companies and government departments who take inadequate steps to identify people and/or increasing the documentary requirements for certain kinds of identification. There might have to be some sort of central identification system for on-line purchases, who knows.

    7. Re:Bad news. XD by dnahelicase · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Do you think they actually delete your SSN anyway? I can see two things happening: 1) customer service tells you "yes, we can do that" and doesn't do anything or 2) somebody makes a note to change your SSN to XXX and then enters it in a system that keeps a change log that stores SSN to XXX. Unless they have a system for specifying different rules for SSN's, I think all customer information change would probably show up at least in a change log. Of course, I imagine most cust serv reps just tell you what you want to hear while you are on the phone with them.

    8. Re:Bad news. XD by umghhh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      unless of course it is a tax office (or some other god like institution) that has a free ride and does not even need a court order to invide your privacy and all this of course for your own good.

    9. Re:Bad news. XD by DrLang21 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why would need a PK that does more than identify a record if you have a field that can be searched in that record that identifies the person? Moreover, why not just issue your own account numbers?

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    10. Re:Bad news. XD by mrjb · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And what would you suggest as an alternative?

      As primary key, a UUID makes more sense than a number such as an SSN which can change (yes it can- I'm down to my third by now). No need to make that UUID public or even let people know what it is; you *can* look people up by (a combination of ) other bits of information. If someone doesn't want to provide their SSN, you can use their Full Name+Date of Birth for searching - this combination will usually render very few collisions.
      Technical solutions aside, I'm with the GP- places that have no business knowing your SSN shouldn't.

      --
      Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
    11. Re:Bad news. XD by NickGnome · · Score: 5, Informative
      "There must be a way for an individual to prevent information about him that was obtained for one purpose from being used or made available for other purposes without his consent."--- Elliot Richardson 1973 summarizing _Records, Computers, & the Rights of Citizens_ (quoted in Legislative History PL 93-579, Privacy Act of 1974, _Congressional Record_ vol 120, Senate Report #93-1183 pg 6924)

      In practice, as you say, even the weak constitutional and statutory protections of privacy are most often ignored.

      http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/408.html

      http://www.usdoj.gov/04foia/privstat.htm

      http://www.cavebear.com/nsf-dns/pa_history.htm

      http://www.cavebear.com/nsf-dns/5usc552a.htm

      http://www.cms.hhs.gov/privacyact/patraining.asp

      http://www.cms.hhs.gov/privacyact/pa.pdf

      http://www.so.doe.gov/documents/privactof1974.pdf

      http://www.epic.org/privacy/laws/privacy_act.html

      https://www.cnet.navy.mil/privacyact1974.pdf

      http://library.lp.findlaw.com/articles/file/00007/004477/title/subject/topic/constitutional%20law_freedom%20of%20information/filename/constitutionallaw_1_88

      http://library.lp.findlaw.com/articles/file/00007/004477/title/subject/topic/constitutional%20law_freedom%20of%20information/filename/constitutionallaw_1_88

      http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/privacy/ssn/ssn.faq.html

      http://www.cpsr.org/program/natlID/natlIDfaq.html

    12. Re:Bad news. XD by Eskarel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well for credit checks for one, which is one of the things they do with it. It can be useful for medical records too. Government benefits. Taxation, criminal records. Knowing who you are(and more importantly who you aren't) is rather important for an awful lot of things. Most of these companies mostly want it to make sure you pay your bill. It doesn't technically need to be the PK, but if it's unique it may as well be.

      Your SSN isn't really all that important a number in and of itself. The only reason it's important at all is because it's unique to you, any number you have which associates you with something can be stolen and the percentage of your identity associated with that number can be stolen. That's because no one ever validates that the SSN you give is actually yours, which is sort of where the whole problem comes in. Until a solution is worked out for that identity theft isn't going to go away any time soon.

    13. Re:Bad news. XD by Eskarel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Then you use a number unique to them in their context, but for the most part, the vast majority of the kinds of customers you'd need to uniquely identify for a US company are US residents and since you can't work without an SSN, people who don't have one aren't generally good customers or will pay in cash.

    14. Re:Bad news. XD by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 2, Informative

      For your first point: If I wanted to consent to a credit check, then I'd have no problem giving them my SSN, but there's no reason they need to store that permanently. For my simple reasoning, keep reading.

      For your second point: My last paragraph (see "Caveat:") in my previous post mentioned that idea, but you didn't read the last sentence:

      I'm sure one could invent other methods of solving this.

      One trivial solution would be to store only a hash of the SSN. That way, nothing is lost if the database is stolen/copied/sold, and nobody loses their privacy. The SSN is only in plain sight as long as it takes the CSR to type it into the computer.

    15. Re:Bad news. XD by Teufelsmuhle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I sincerely doubt the customer service rep has any idea whether or not the SSN is really gone. I'm sure they're more than happy to change the number displayed on the screen in front of them though, and as far as they are concerned that means the old number has disappeared.

      But yes, behind the scenes, the SSN is almost certainly still present in a change log or on backup tapes somewhere. There's zero chance these companies go through the effort to completely purge your SSN from every log and tape. Once they have that number in their system, they've got it forever.

    16. Re:Bad news. XD by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Well, just because 'they' ask for an SSN, doesn't mean you have to give it!!

      The best defense against a company keeping your SSN,is to NEVER give it. Sure, it might be a PITA sometimes, but, these days, it isn't nearly as hard as it used to be

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    17. Re:Bad news. XD by HiThere · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At one time one was not supposed to use the SSN for anything not involving the Social Security Administration. That was a long time ago. I was told that it was originally illegal, but I don't know that this was really so.

      N.B.: This was specifically the SSN. Don't generalize it to other kinds of data, which have largely never been regulated.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Bad news. XD by unlametheweak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And the company can then refuse to do business with you.

      One could only hope. It amazes me how even in the 21st century there are some people who would be stupid enough to give a business there SSN. I could understand giving them a fake SSN, just to fuck them up, but not a real SSN. I used to give radio shack fake phone numbers and addresses when they asked for them. People do not need to know this information, in fact they should not know this information.

      Unfortunately people continue to do business with these types of companies, thus rewarding them for their bad and irresponsible behavior. I never give out by SSN.

    19. Re:Bad news. XD by cayenne8 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "Sometimes? How about nearly impossible to do anything without giving it."

      Who is it impossible with?

      Cable? They don't have my SSN.

      Cellphone? The don't have my SSN

      Power? They don't have my SSN

      Insurance? They don't have my SSN

      Not impossible...some want a deposit, I do that...I get it back usually within a year.

      Right now..only ONE utility I have has it..the water dept...and I verified that their system is so old and antiquated, that they cannot put anything in the computer without it. That is the one time I've relented in almost a decade, and I've been fighting this fight for like 20 years...it is MUCH easier now, you just have to be a bit adament and fight for it some times, but it is much easier now than it used to be, believe me.

      I ONLY give mine out for SSN taxation reasons, and the like. I've had my identity stolen twice, and usually when I explain that...they relent and find a way around it...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  2. Something I've considered... by Anonymusing · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lately it seems everyone wants to know my SSN: my dentist, my grocery store, my heating fuel supplier, the guy who changes my oil, etc. When credit checks are required, I ask them to try running it without the SSN (just address data) and often they will try. Other times, they are simply using the SSN as a convenient identifier for customers -- !!!! -- so I politely suggest a different number, or insist on only giving 3-4 digits of it. Thankfully my health insurance company will generate an internal ID# for you, if you request it, so that your SSN is not printed on your insurance card and therefore stored at your physician's office.

    Other than to the government, and to organizations directly attached to my banking needs, what's wrong with giving a different number in place of the SSN? As long as you can remember it, that is. Would that be considered some kind of fraud?

    --
    Liberal? Conservative? Compare perspectives at Left-Right
    1. Re:Something I've considered... by pz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Back in the early 1980s -- yes, nearly 30 years ago -- MIT allowed students to refuse to have their SS numbers as their Institute ID numbers. In those cases, and also for foreign students who nominally don't have SS numbers, they issued numbers that passed the SS check, but were from an otherwise unallocated block. They cleverly encoded your class year into the number to boot. For a long time I gave my MIT ID number when non-finance-related institutions requested an SS. Worked fine.

      I haven't had an active MIT ID for a long while, so don't know what they do now.

      --

      Put my fist through my alarm clock with its ding-dong death inside my ear. - The Blackjacks.
    2. Re:Something I've considered... by jDeepbeep · · Score: 3, Interesting

      MIT allowed students to refuse to have their SS numbers as their Institute ID numbers.

      A technical college I attended in Arizona was slightly different. They did allow you to use your SSN for your student ID, however, if you did so, every 4 months you were sent a letter that explained why this was a bad idea, for the student, to persist in doing this, and it closed out with a paragraph urging you to change it to something different.

      --
      Reply to That ||
    3. Re:Something I've considered... by digitalchinky · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The simple reason: Because everyone else is doing it.

    4. Re:Something I've considered... by moose_hp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not trying to be a troll here, this is an honest question.

      I'm not from the United States, nor I live there, but I never got why exactly is a SSN supposed to be secret, is it possible to do identity theft with only the SSN alone? Here in Mexico we have a ton of personal identification numbers (RFC, CURP, IFE number, Passport, Drivers License, Military Service, Social Security, Professional Certificate, etc) and none of them is really supposed to be secret, I don't get why people from the USA a secret number that you're not supposed to divulge, yet you need to give up for reasons like cable TV contracts and there's chaos when something like a database of SSN got leaked .

      --
      DON'T PANIC.
    5. Re:Something I've considered... by jDeepbeep · · Score: 5, Informative

      is it possible to do identity theft with only the SSN alone?

      Unfortunately, yes. It provides enough of a building block (used both as an identifier and as an authenticator) to allow a moderately-clever person to build up the rest of the identity.

      --
      Reply to That ||
    6. Re:Something I've considered... by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's not. It's supposed to be unique (within certain criteria: they do get reused eventually) across everyone in the USA, so the Social Security Administration can identify everyone. That's all it was designed for.

      It just happened that the SSN was the first major government number that everyone was required to have. So everyone else used the fact that it was there and unique to make their lives easier. Which means that now everybody tracks you by that number, and if you have that number you can impersonate anyone in any database that uses it.

      It's not supposed to be secret. It's not supposed to be your full ID. It just became that.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    7. Re:Something I've considered... by ArtemaOne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Its not so much a secret, but by possessing a social security card you've agreed to not use the number as an identifier.

    8. Re:Something I've considered... by lazlo · · Score: 3, Funny

      Something I've considered, it seems that SSN's are being used very similarly to passwords. Make sure to use good security practices and change yours every 60 days.

      --
      Pound! Bang! Bin! Bash! is this a shell script or a Batman comic?
    9. Re:Something I've considered... by ronaldb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The main problem I think is that a lot of businesses use it as if it were a secret. If that mindset would change, the problem would go away.

      "So you say you're Mike Jones. We need to verify that. What are the last 4 digits of your SSN?"
      - "Hold on, let me get your last bill, where it's printed on the top of every page."

      How can that be used as a security measure? Using an identifier as an authentication method is simply a BAD IDEA.

    10. Re:Something I've considered... by MirthScout · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's actually a good question. The answer is , no, it is not supposed to be secret. It is an identifier; identifiers are not secret.

      The problem is that so many companies misuse SSNs. They treat them as if they were passwords.
      What is your name? John Smith
      What is your SSN? 123-45-6789
      OK, you must be John Smith all right. What can I do for you?

      It is this completely broken way that companies "verify" your identity that is the problem. People try to keep their SSN secret to reduce the chances an "identity thief" will get it and use a company's and/or bank's broken procedures to steal from you.

    11. Re:Something I've considered... by db32 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see this problem as backwards. People are scrambling to fight this nonsense uphill battle. The cat is out of the bag. Pandora's box has been opened. It is WAY too late to get all of this stuff back. The only way forward is for SSNs to become worthless as identifiers. This personal information is quickly becoming trivial to obtain, fighting the trend is only going to continue to make it a problem for identity theft.

      The real answer is to hold businesses to the fire for exposing/trading/selling it and accepting it so readily to open new accounts. If businesses were more security minded in defending the information it would be less of an issue. If businesses were more security minded in verification it wouldn't be an issue. However, this continued nonsense about trying to protect your SSN is only allowing businesses to continue to put the risk and responsibility on the individual for their own greed driven fuckups.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    12. Re:Something I've considered... by radtea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It just happened that the SSN was the first major government number that everyone was required to have.

      The same is true of the Social Insurance Number (SIN) in Canada, and I don't think I've ever divulged mine to anyone who wasn't my employer, my accountant, or the Canada Revenue Agency.

      So the question in my mind is why Americans have allowed their SSN's to be used in these ways, while in Canada we've not allowed a similar number to be used in similar ways? I don't think I've ever given my SIN to my cell phone provider, cable company, or anyone like that.

      Having lived in the US my impression is that this is a cultural difference: Americans value convenience much more than Canadians (which probably explains why the US has somewhat higher productivity than Canada) and that the bellicosity of American culture has normalized intimidation and bullying as a means of social interaction, so American businesses are more likely to try to bully customers into giving up inappropriate information, and individual Americans are more likely to go the convenient route and give that information up.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    13. Re:Something I've considered... by onyxruby · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Many years back I worked as a skiptracer / fraud researcher for a well known credit card company. The short of the answer is that with a social security number a person can readily learn a persons private financial details by pulling a credit report.

      There is no mechanism that prevents companies from doing so, they 'self authenticate' as it were. Unlike a person who must provide details to prove that they really are who they claim they are. All a business has to do either claim you have given your consent or that you owe them money and they gain full access to your private credit report.

      With a credit report alone I can tell everything from what kind of car you own (as most people finance) to where you live, where you have lived, what your lifestyle choices are, where you shop and so on. It's a pretty thorough invasion of privacy. Using additional services I can gain other information about you such as property you own, tax records, court records, family records, residence, an unscrupulous person could even find out your health records. In ten to fifteen minutes I have a very telling picture of your life, whether you want someone to have it or not.

      The bottom line is that with a social security number there is very little about a person that cannot be readily discerned in a very short period of time. Unethical people will quickly cross the line, checking things that they shouldn't or, even stealing your identity.

    14. Re:Something I've considered... by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      (something similar to md5 but which is guaranteed to be unique).

      No such algorythm is guaranteed to be unique, because it's lossy. It's the same reason you can't zip and rezip a 100 MB file down to 1 byte. There are only a certain number of combinations that you can fit in 32 bits, and eventually you're going to get collisions. This is for any hash, not just MD5. It's not possible to make a hash function that doesn't have collisions. The only reason they're an issue for security is that vulnerabilities can make those collisions predictable. Collisions aren't a security risk. Predictable collisions are.

      But let's think about your "irreversible algorythm" idea:

      An SSN is a 9 digit number. That's a maximum of 1 billion SSN numbers across the country.
      If this "standard method" uses an algorythm that's publicly known (and it wouldn't be a standard if it didn't) then someone simply needs to do:

      x=1
      while (x++ 1000000000)
      {
      store_data(perform_algorythm(x))
      }

      and they've got a lookup table for the encrypted data.
      A billion calculations won't take long, even on a single computer. Let's say it takes 1 second (a horrendously complex hash) to calculate this hash for a given number. That's a billion seconds. It would take only 31 years to calculate the entire SSN keyspace, on that single machine.
      Get 60 machines doing it, and you've got it in 6 months.

      What criminal gang wouldn't do this, since it would give them access to "encrypted" identity theft information for...well....ever?

      Now, to give you an idea of how complex that 1 second hash is, to determine a WPA-PSK key from a passphrase involves 4096 iterations of the hash function. This is for a single key. I tested performance on an old 400MHz Pentium 2, and it calculated about 10 keys per second. So that's 40,960 hashes per second, for a standard hash. 1 hash per second on a current machine would be unbelievably slow.

      If the has used were similar in performance to HMAC-SHA1 used for WPA-PSK, it would take that 400MHz machine not quite 7 hours to calculate the entire encrypted data value for every SSN in the USA.

      I don't know what driver's licence numbers are like in the US, but in Canada (Ontario) they're a letter followed by 14 digits. That makes the entire keyspace 2600 trillion possibilities. That increases the possibilities quite a bit, but current computers are exponentially more powerful than the 400MHz PII I tested on.

      A current machine can do more like a million hashes per second, or more.
      Get a couple of dozen machines working on this, and you'll have usable data sooner, rather than later.

      --
      "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
    15. Re:Something I've considered... by MidnightPsycho · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > so I politely suggest a different number, or insist on only giving 3-4 digits of it.

      I tried this once with Verizon. I was signing up for a new account, in person, at the Verizon store. They wanted my SSN, and I told them I wouldn't take the account if I had to give that out.

      They said no problem. The salesman called their credit dept, and handed the phone to me. They asked my name & address, and asked for the last 4 digits of my SSN.

      They were searching some database - they found me by last name & address, and they only wanted the last 4 digits to verify that they found me. And I am sure they put my SSN into my account while I was on the phone.

      I don't think it helps to keep SSN's from these businesses . . . they can grab them without needing to get them from you.

    16. Re:Something I've considered... by KingMotley · · Score: 2, Informative

      Who or what generates the number isn't the problem. If everyone switched over to using your ID number, then pretty soon everyone would be saying to keep that secret just like they do for SSN now. The problem is that the number is being used to authenticate you instead of just identifying you. If companies demanded a valid notarized SSN card as proof prior to obtaining anything in your name, then you could tell your SSN to anyone and it wouldn't matter (with the assumption that it's impossible to forge a SSN card -- granted it isn't impossible, but that's another topic).

    17. Re:Something I've considered... by duffbeer703 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Having lived in the US my impression is that this is a cultural difference: Americans value convenience much more than Canadians (which probably explains why the US has somewhat higher productivity than Canada) and that the bellicosity of American culture has normalized intimidation and bullying as a means of social interaction, so American businesses are more likely to try to bully customers into giving up inappropriate information, and individual Americans are more likely to go the convenient route and give that information up.

      Sorry to break it to you, my passive-aggressive Canadian friend, but you're wrong. This has nothing to do with the reasons that SSNs have become a prevalent form of identification.

      In the past, US states had a far larger measure of autonomy than they do today, and were unwilling or unable to exchange information with each other. Even things like mailing addresses were and are non standard -- most of Brooklyn in NYC has a mailing address of "Brooklyn, NY", while in Queens, NYC, mailing addresses are the names of the original towns! (Maspeth, Flushing, Astoria, etc)

      One side effect of this was the US Banks and other institutions were local or regional. (Which is why US banks have generally been smaller than European banks, which are national banks) This was fine until the early 20th century, because people tended to stay in the same area. But in the post-WW1 era, people became more mobile, which led to problems.

      If you had lots of debt and bounced a bunch of checks in New York, you could setup shop in Virginia and essentially start with a clean slate. Or if you lost your driver's license in New York, you could get one in Vermont, etc. The SSN was really the only way to establish that Frank Smith in NY who bounced a check or had a criminal record was the same Frank Smith in Virginia.

      Today, computers and interstate compacts are linking state records, so a speeding ticket in Maine is known to cops in California. Most border states also have compacts with Canadian provinces, because US truck drivers would get Canadian drivers licenses after getting DWIs in the US. (and vice versa).

      Today, a business can protect itself against fraud in many cases without an SSN. But this was not the case in the past, and past practices take a long time to fade away.

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    18. Re:Something I've considered... by onyxruby · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sure, these can be done fairly easily. One of the most common types of fraud I encountered was where a parent would take credit out in the name of their own child. The parent figures their in the clear, and denies responsibility when it comes time to pay. Meanwhile the child may not find out until they turn 18 years and suffer a bad experience. I had many instances where I would get hold of someone around 18-20 years old and tell them what was going on.

      It's a terrible position to be in, your 18 years old, quite possibly still living at home, and discover that your own mother or father took out 10-20 thousand dollars worth of debt in your name. The way the law works is that you are not responsible for fraud ($50 limit can apply in some cases) as long as you file a fraud report. The net result of this is you end up with a kid in the position of having the file a fraud report with the police knowing that their own parents could go to prison. It's a terrible position to put someone in, but without the fraud report and police report there is nothing that can be done.

      These things can also apply in situations where someone has "no credit". Typically a person with no credit still has credit, even if they have never taken out a loan. You would have records from getting a checking account, paying your utilities (this is becoming far more common and will soon be standard practice), renting an apartment, cell phone and so on. Even if you had none of the above (you use cash only) you would discover that many creditors will give someone with no credit a $2-300 credit line regardless.

      A determined identity thief will even build up your credit on your behalf, paying the small bill over a course of a year or two until they can get your credit improved to the point were you start qualifying for $1000+ credit on credit cards. In essence they pay some of your bills they give you on your behalf until such time as they can walk out on several thousand dollar plus credit accounts. By all means, even someone with no credit should monitor their credit report (even if only the annual credit report you get for free).

    19. Re:Something I've considered... by telso · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, SSNs do not get reused. I recently met someone who works for the SSA who told me that they are currently trying to figure out what to do about this. The obvious solution -- increasing the number of digits, like what happened recently to the ISBN -- takes a lot infrastructural changes, both in government and the private sector. He said congressmen often told the SSA "Just do it!" and used things like this as an example of how bureaucracy is slow and inefficient, but that most of them now understand that the civil service doesn't always drag its feet because they resist change, contrary to what Sir Humphrey may have made them think.

  3. Your Rights & Your Actions by eldavojohn · · Score: 2, Informative
    Here's a 36 page document outlining your "Federal and State Laws Restricting the Use of SSNs" and identifies the gaps. The GAO actually has some good reading and ammunition for this if you've got the time. And here's the really dry "Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (Identity Theft Act)" itself. Now, stronger stuff has been presented in 2005 but aside from stiffer penalties being signed into law in 2004, I haven't seen much.

    So, you could call them up and threaten them with prosecution under the aforementioned acts which--given the right tone of voice--should do the trick for you. Or, if you read the GAO report, they say:

    In 1998, Congress made identity theft a federal crime when it enacted the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (Identity Theft Act).5 The act made it a criminal offense for a person to "knowingly transfer, possess, or use without lawful authority," another person's means of identification "with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, or in connection with, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable state or local law." Under the act, a name or SSN is considered a "means of identification," and a number of cases have been prosecuted under this law.

    Now, with that, I would seek a lawyer who would take this case (maybe even some high profile lawyer or a member of the EFF) and clearly outline the above in a written letter with your signature informing them that they are in violation of the "Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (Identity Theft Act)" and if they do not remove your Social Security Numbers, you will take legal action. If your case is solid enough, you might be able to really stick it to DirectTV for storing personal private data "without lawful authority" as they do not have the written consent of every customer.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Your Rights & Your Actions by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In 1998, Congress made identity theft a federal crime when it enacted the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (Identity Theft Act).5 The act made it a criminal offense for a person to "knowingly transfer, possess, or use without lawful authority," another person's means of identification "with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, or in connection with, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable state or local law." Under the act, a name or SSN is considered a "means of identification," and a number of cases have been prosecuted under this law.

      Now, with that, I would seek a lawyer who would take this case (maybe even some high profile lawyer or a member of the EFF) and clearly outline the above in a written letter with your signature informing them that they are in violation of the "Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (Identity Theft Act)" and if they do not remove your Social Security Numbers, you will take legal action. If your case is solid enough, you might be able to really stick it to DirectTV for storing personal private data "without lawful authority" as they do not have the written consent of every customer.

      Nothing in that quote suggests it is against the law for the company to retain the SSN in the course of lawful business, and as they are not intending to commit or aid or abet an unlawful activity, then your harshly worded letter would be meaningless.

      Of course, other laws may be quotable with better effect...

    2. Re:Your Rights & Your Actions by jeffshoaf · · Score: 3, Insightful
      While I agree that DirecTV shouldn't have their customers' Social Security # (and I'm a customer), I don't believe the quote you provided from the GAO report says that they're doing something illegal per the part I've emphasized below:

      In 1998, Congress made identity theft a federal crime when it enacted the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act (Identity Theft Act).5 The act made it a criminal offense for a person to "knowingly transfer, possess, or use without lawful authority," another person's means of identification "with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, or in connection with, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable state or local law." Under the act, a name or SSN is considered a "means of identification," and a number of cases have been prosecuted under this law.

      DirecTV can simply claim that they have no intent to commit, or to aid or abet, or use the SS# in connection with an unlawful activity.

      --
      Putting the "anal" back into "analyst"...
  4. PIPEDA by holophrastic · · Score: 2, Informative

    .P.I.P.E.D.A.
    Canadian regulation that in short says any business has to divulge any personal information of yours that they are storing, and allow you to change or remove it. It may be with a simple web-site form, it may be with a written letter, but that's the law.

    1. Re:PIPEDA by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I actually didn't know we were the toughest. I'mnot sure if I should or should not be proud of that. But either way, it's respectable.

      The privacy act(federal legislation), is a pretty interesting bit of work. Applies to everyone, no matter what. Applies to all levels of government, law enforcement and the rest. If businesses want something they have to grovel for it, if you want it removed they have to do it. If the police want something, they have to show just cause(which can make it really hard to get some types of warrants). Then there's provincial legislation as well, which builds on top.

      Personally I'm quite happy with it. Now if we could just get some of our regulatory bodies working as well as the privacy commissioner we'd be doing better in other areas.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  5. What did you expect? by pedestrian+crossing · · Score: 4, Funny

    Information wants to be free.

    --
    A house divided against itself cannot stand.
  6. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by Reece400 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you provide your SSN to Comcast, they also store it indefinatly.
    They use it for internal credit checks to make sure you don't owe them any money on previous accounts (and likely for other things as well).

    That said you can usually setup an account without your SSN, but you'll need to set it up directly with your local office instead of by phone or internet.

  7. Expiration date by Bromskloss · · Score: 3, Funny

    Your SSN has expired, please choose a new one.
    Old SSN: __________________
    New SSN: __________________
    Retype new SSN (tip: copy from above): __________________

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Not gonna happen by FlyingBishop · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As someone currently working on a database that contains SSNs, I can tell you I couldn't get rid of every instance of yours if I tried. The entire architecture is based around not losing your data no matter how stupid I am. It's a nice thought, but the reality is that you're only increasing the number of people looking at your SSN by trying to get rid of it.

    1. Re:Not gonna happen by clam666 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's why SSNs should never be used as primary keys. They are a lookup field to provide a pseudo-unique way of looking up a tied-to-a-individual record much like you might use a last name, an account number, or some other piece of information that can find an actual record entry tied to for transactional purposes.

      Primary/Foreign keys should be used to establish a unique record for transactional purposes or to relate to another record for referential integrity. That's all they should be used for.

      Social security numbers, loan numbers, account numbers...These kind of things shouldn't be used for this purpose, they should be used for filtration purposes. That way if any of them change (SSNs blocked out for testing purposes, person switches to a new account number for some reasons, etc. it has no impact on the integrity of the system.

      --
      I'm a satanic clam.
  10. Here is what you should know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Read This, I hope it helps!

    http://www.privacyrights.org/fs/fs10a-SSNFAQ.htm

  11. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by homey+of+my+owney · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Although is is actually illegal to use a SSN for identification, companies claim it is for, uhhh, just for the record. I'm sure you must be among the 99% pf people with a cell phone. I've tried with all of the big three to get a phone without giving a SSN, explaining that it is illegal to require me to provide it, and they all told me "I understand, thanks for shopping with us".

  12. Broken by design. by jackb_guppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is no reason for a POS to have SSN. There are many other methods to get uniqueness.

    When companies ask for it, I request for what use do they have for it. I have left hospitals for requesting the information, for they have no need for the information.

    But to ask a person doing a POS transaction for their SSN, is just plan broken.

    1. Re:Broken by design. by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Informative

      This isn't really in defense of the hospitals, but a WHOLE LOT of people use the hospital because they can't pay for medical attention and the hospital can't refuse. The SSN is likely there so they can track you down to the ends of the Earth to try and get their money.

      --

      "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    2. Re:Broken by design. by GargamelSpaceman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How about we scrap SSN's and have transaction ids. The taxpayer gives whatever business their current transaction id, then requests a new one from the government invalidating the old one. That old one is then only worth a damn from the time it was issued to the time a new one was requested. The government keeps a list of all your transaction ids, and the dates during which they were valid. NO SSN REQUIRED. Care would be taken not to issue the same transaction_id while it is still valid for someone else ( only one person at a time can have a given transaction id ).

      --
      ...
    3. Re:Broken by design. by snspdaarf · · Score: 3, Funny

      We had people from a regional hospital come to our office for free PSA testing. When I asked about the need for an SSN on their form, I was told they used it for patient tracking. I left it blank, and they told me it was mandatory. Well, there was no threat of perjury statement on the form, and no signature, so I gave them a fake one. Fuck 'em. They don't need my SSN if they have my name, phone number, and the doctor I want the results sent to.

      --
      Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
    4. Re:Broken by design. by fataugie · · Score: 4, Funny

      So it was you who gave them my SS#!
      You insensative Clod!

      --

      WTF? Over?

    5. Re:Broken by design. by ThatsNotFunny · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having worked in an admissions department at a hospital, I can tell you that SNNs are rarely verified by admissions personnel. Equal parts laziness due to job dissatisfaction and lack of time due to overwhelming workload. We would key in whatever number the patient gave us. It would be quite easy to provide a fake number and the hospital would not be aware.

      --
      "Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine No Posessions?'" -- Elvis Costello
    6. Re:Broken by design. by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's funny I usually just provide my health card, and then I don't have to worry about giving out my social insurance number. I also don't have to worry about paying.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    7. Re:Broken by design. by mh1997 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How about we just scrap social security and then we wouldn't need SSNs. Or allow people to opt out of social security and those people that opted out would not need an SSN.

    8. Re:Broken by design. by FictionPimp · · Score: 3, Informative

      I work at a college, when I started the main thing we were doing was changing our system to assign unique ID's to all students and remove all SSN numbers in places where it was used as ID's.

      The whole project took about a year to do. Now there is only one place where you can still find the SSN number, and that is only because it is required for some financial aid things.

    9. Re:Broken by design. by wamerocity · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What's even funnier is that the USPSTF has recommended AGAINST random PSA screening in individuals who are not already high risk (above 50, history of family prostate cancer) due to low positive predictive value and high false positive rates. The reasoning is that since you are more likely to get a false positive if you are not high risk, you will then spend unnecessary money on treatment, procedures (including biopsies which can put you at additional risk, AND if caught early they haven't been shown to increase your lifespan. I.E. Prostate cancer caught early is as treatable as prostate cancer caught later when true symptoms show up. Just an FYI if anyone cares.

      --
      "Thank you for using Stop-n-Drop, America's favorite suicide booth since 2008"
    10. Re:Broken by design. by PRMan · · Score: 2, Funny

      Poor Maria Gonzalez. All of them.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    11. Re:Broken by design. by Mr.+No+Skills · · Score: 2, Informative

      This is bad policy, since many potential hospital "customers" don't have an SSN. Hospitals have to service newborns, visitors, illegals, etc. Using SSN as the unique ID doesn't work, and they usually have work-arounds for this.

      --
      Sleep is for the Weak
    12. Re:Broken by design. by stonewallred · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have local power under a false name and SS number. I have cable under a different false name and SS. My local phone service was under yet another false name and SS number. I pay all my bills on time, using cash, and with the exception of the utility company, I had to pay no deposit or give them a credit card number, which would not have been a problem, as all of my names have credit cards. I went through a spell with no insurance and ended up at the emergency room with a serious cut. When they asked me my name, I gave my true one, loss of blood will cause bad thinking at times, yet gave them a bogus SS number and address. Figured the MD did not need to know my address or SS number while he was stitching me up. The nice lady at the payment office was surprised when I paid the bill on the spot in cash. I do not give out my SS number except when I absolutely have to. In fact there is a federal law that prevents places from using your SS number as an identifier(in the medical/health care field) with the new HIPPA thnigee they passed.

    13. Re:Broken by design. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Funny

      Almost every insurance company requires it to process your claim. Now, whether the insurance companies should be able to do that is a whole different argument.

      For fun, try having twins and have the insurance agency disallow the second child as duplicate service.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    14. Re:Broken by design. by SkyDude · · Score: 2, Interesting

      so I gave them a fake one.

      And I've done the same thing. The SSN is used by the medical records companies that are operated similar to credit bureaus. As with credit bureaus, the SSN is not the primary method of ID, but it helps sort out people with the same name. Medical records are far more detailed than your credit history. You'd be amazed what's in them.

      --
      == First cross river, then insult alligator.
    15. Re:Broken by design. by grimarr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not so much that the SSN is used as an identifier, that is after all what it was designed for. (Although as many have said, it was not supposed to be multi-purpose.) The bigger problem is that it's also used as authentication, even by the same organization that uses it as an identifier. It's like having a password that has
      to be the same as your username, and you can never change it.

      And using just the last 4 digits is not much better. Sure, your billing statement that someone grabs out of your trash only has the last 4 digits of your SSN. But if that's all the bank is going to ask for as "proof" of identity, you're just as screwed.

  13. Re:issue people new SSNs every year by maxume · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem is that the banks (and similar) have convinced you that you are the one being defrauded.

    Sure, someone opens an account using your details and it sucks for you, but it wasn't your mistake, it was the institution that opened the account that made the mistake.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  14. DirecTV gives service to identity thieves! by NixieBunny · · Score: 2, Informative

    I had their collection agency call me earlier this year asking if I really was the person who ordered service in my name in a house on the other side of town and failed to pay the bill for three months. No, it was an SSN thief who took out service in my name, using my fine credit rating. It turns out that DirecTV doesn't check your bona fides such as your address - they only run a credit check on the name and SSN you provide, without verifying that you belong to either that name or SSN!

    --
    The determined Real Programmer can write Fortran programs in any language.
  15. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by Lord+Jester · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... explaining that it is illegal to require me to provide it...

    Except for the purposes of a credit check.

    Part of the reason companies keep this information, in my estimation, is to have ready to perform future credit checks if you request additional service.

    I know with my cell contracts, every time I have added a line, my credit gets checked. Nevermind that I have been a customer in good standing for many years.

  16. you're confused by Lord+Ender · · Score: 5, Insightful

    SSNs are not secrets. They are not authentication credentials.

    Storing (or even leaking) SSNs is not the problem. The problem is when certain negligent organizations use knowledge of SSNs as some sort of proof of identity. If you're worried about your SSN being misused, talk to those companies.

    --
    A slashdotter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber.
  17. Re:Glad you have free time by wampus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Don't do that! Tin foil is actually aluminum foil, which is produced by Alcoa. Alcoa is a front for the New World Order and they treat the metal in such a way to actually increase signal propagation from your brain. The only real solution to government mind control or reading is to boil your head in distilled or rain water. 30 seconds at 100C should be enough.

  18. Those SSN Grubbing low lifes by SomeRADDude · · Score: 2, Informative

    Dish Network and DirecTV keep your SSN as previously mentioned to ensure that you do not owe them money from a previous account and so you can never again qualify for new user treatment (free equipment, programming packages and installation), the sock sucking bastiges. As for identity theft, unless you conduct all business by trading beans in a 3rd world country, at this point it seems to be a matter of when, not if.

  19. Indemnification by zogger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I always turn it right around on them instantly whenever some merchant wants my number. I got nailed years ago with ID theft, which really sucks and takes a long time to fix, so I came up with something that has been working for me.

        I mention getting nailed previously, etc.,, then ask to see their indemnification policy on security breaches, in writing, so everything is "legal and proper".

      You get the *really* blank stare then, because about zero of these companies have anything like that..because they are jerks, but we all know that anyway.

        Let them sit for a bit and stew on that. Again, you throw it right back at them when they claim they are secure and "your data is safe with us" and all the other BS..."well, sir, we are secure, and...". They ALL say that, every single stupid company out there claims to be "secure". They initiate that claim when you ask. That's a *vital point* there. As part of this proposed business transaction now, they, through their rep who is talking to you right then and is prepared to accept your money, will make a statement that they are 'secure". This is the bingo moment.

        I go, along these lines, "swell, that sounds great! You are secure, wonderful, that makes me feel better because ID theft is such a hassle and expense! Err..uhh..just for my records then, please just show me and if you could provide me simple copy of your "data security" warranty provisions, the indemnification policy you must have then, thanks! And BTW, not that this will ever come up, but exactly how much cash do I get back from you when and if you get compromised? If you are "totally secure" as you claim, then you should have no problems with a guarantee that you are secure in writing".

      Salt to taste there, and I am never outright rude or obnoxious about it,(I will speak in a loud and clear tone though so any other customers present can hear this exchange) just make them backup their contractual claims they just made to you. They just offered you a proviso in the terms of an oral contract to go along with whatever written crap they want you to fill out that they are, in fact, "secure", so you can ask for proof and so on.

      The original clerk will be baffled as expected and will then pass the buck. Then just keep bumping it up the food chain until you hit some manager who doesn't want to be bothered and they give you the service without having to hork over your precious. Sometimes it's fast, other times it takes awhile, but usually it works.

        If some manager starts to get redneck on you, you can go, again, along these lines, "Oh, you now are withdrawing your offer, because your company lied to me? You tried to extract my cash from me based on a lie? That's serious legal fraud in this state my friend" and etc.

    Anyway, it usually works and it certainly is fun!

  20. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by Albanach · · Score: 4, Informative

    Although is is actually illegal to use a SSN for identification

    No, it's illegal for the Government to use it other than for its intended purpose. Companies can do what they like with it.

    From the Social Security Website: http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/ssa.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=78

    If a business or other enterprise asks you for your number, you can refuse to give it. However, that may mean doing without the purchase or service for which your number was requested. For example, utility companies and other services ask for a Social Security number, but do not need it; they can do a credit check or identify the person in their records by alternative means.
    [emphasis mine]

  21. Some companies keep it even if you die! by wfstanle · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Also, SSNs don't expire, so you get off thier list if you die. "

    This is not necessarily true. My mother died in the year 2000 and we still occasionally get in the mail offers from a company that kept her SSN. We told them she is dead but they keep sending stuff anyway. We've given up and are willing to let them continue to waste their money.

  22. Talk "those" companies... by gillbates · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why?

    Why not - and I mean this seriously - sue them for libel when they bring action for identity theft against you?

    You can very easily demonstrate that the SSN is not a proof of identity (authentication). You can (or should be able to) easily demonstrate that a company which relies on SSN for identity authentication is negligent of its fiduciary duty to protect the assets of its stockholders. Toward the libel charge, you should be able to demonstrate that the company *should have known* there was strong possibility the person who stole your identity was not you, and yet continued to blame you for what was ultimately *their failure* to properly identify the person to whom they extended credit.

    A simple case of this nature - one which establishes precedent and carries high punitive damages - should be enough to get the industry to reform. Without that case, it's just a matter of bickering between consumers and corporations, and guess who controls the media....

    --
    The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
  23. Re:Great Point by maxume · · Score: 2, Funny

    In the glorious future, the government will extend resources to financial institutions that mistakenly issue credit on fraudulently provided information, and help them deal with and resolve the consequences of their actions.

    The hilarity of that statement makes me sad.

    --
    Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  24. Re:Identity Theft is a crime. by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2, Informative

    I don't think giving a fake SSN is identity theft. (And I happen to be a victim of identity theft.) If I say "my name is Jason Levine and my SSN is 583-58-2958" (not my real SSN, of course), I haven't stolen anyone's identity. Yes, that number might match someone's SSN somewhere, but chances are the name won't. So if you look up the SSN and see it's assigned to "Jane Smith", it will be pretty obvious that the SSN given was wrong or an error occurred somewhere.

    Now, if I said "my name is John Smith" and gave John Smith's SSN, Address, etc, *that* would be identity theft.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  25. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by LeadLine · · Score: 2, Informative

    They then asked me to prove to them I didn't have the modem. How the fuck do you prove that?

    You keep the receipt they give you when you return the modem. I've been screwed like that too, now I know better.

  26. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by Fareq · · Score: 2, Interesting

    When I set up my utilities, they all asked for my SSN.

    The gas company and the phone company both told me that providing it was optional. BUT, if I didn't provide it, they would not run a credit check on me, and so would require a $250 cash deposit (interesting that both companies had $250 as the deposit amount) before connecting service, to remain in their possession until I canceled service upon moving out.

    I was glad that I had the option, and I thought it was most honest and upfront of them to tell me my choices.

    I elected to let them run the credit check, but I appreciated having the option.

  27. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Part of the reason companies keep this information, in my estimation, is to have ready to perform future credit checks if you request additional service.

    It's also so they can make you repeat to them the last four digits of your SSN over the phone, out loud, regardless of whether you're in a public place and might not want to tell everyone in the room the last four digits of your SSN. Oh, and that's just to prove you are who you say you are (even though it doesn't do any such thing).

    Oh, and does it bug anyone else when the automated phone system says "we're pulling up your account based on your phone number for your convenience." and then the CSR immediately asks for the same information so they can pull up the account manually (which, of course, most of the time requires giving them the last four digits of your SSN)?

  28. I fought the good fight by Wee · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Having lived in the US my impression is that this is a cultural difference: Americans value convenience much more than Canadians (which probably explains why the US has somewhat higher productivity than Canada) and that the bellicosity of American culture has normalized intimidation and bullying as a means of social interaction, so American businesses are more likely to try to bully customers into giving up inappropriate information, and individual Americans are more likely to go the convenient route and give that information up.

    I fought and resisted and refused and was greatly inconvenienced for many years over the SSN issue. I don't think it started with businesses; I think the government first started abusing it.

    When I went to get my first drivers license in 1986, I brought my scored test and driving evaluation to the little booth where they bundle your info together and take your photo. Way back then, you had to wait a couple weeks for them to mail it to you. Prior to that, oddly, they just gave you the card. I heard the DMV worker tell one guy that they are "going computerized" and the reason for the delay was the data entry process. This new system used your SSN as your drivers license number. I wasn't thrilled about that.

    Part of the application had a big area on the top for your SSN. I left mine blank. In the instructions they mention (in the fine print) that you can get an alternate number, which is what I wanted to do. I get to the counter and the guy throws a major fit. No joke. He loudly asks why I haven't bothered to fill in my SSN, and I ask for the alternate number. He goes on and on, telling me that I'm holding up the line, to "just fill in your damn number like everyone else" and so on. We have about 15 minutes of this back and forth until in a huff he throws me the little additional paper I need to fill out to ask for an alternate number.

    The guy called me a nut, the people stared at me like I was insane. But using a SSN as a license number is a horrible idea. It was later scrapped, too.

    When I moved to California in the late 90's the situation was even worse. I was told I not only needed to provide my SSN, but also a thumbprint before I could get a license. I politely mentioned that SSNs weren't allowed to be used as personal identifiers, and asked what my options were. Apparently not a new topic three, as the very bored lady rolled her eyes and muttered "Your other option is to not drive in California". And that was it.

    Once the government starts doing this, people get the notion that they can do it in their business as well. I tried to rent an apartment once and refused to hand over my SSN. I was unable to rent the apartment. When you get a phone, or cable service, they ask for an SSN. Anything involving a credit check will involve them asking for an SSN, and you can get around it, but it makes things harder. I fought it for years and years, but in the end realized it was futile.

    It's become so common place that refusing to hand over an SSN makes you look like a whacko in many people's eyes. Which is really sad.

    California has had a law since 2002 that requires any business holding personally identifiable information to disclose any security breaches regarding that info to anyone possibly affected. Businesses screamed holy hell when it was enacted. I've seen first hand how worked up people get when you provide them with a list of people they are forced to notify. I know how much all those letters cost to mail. A federal law like that would be a good thing. But I think the genie is out of the bottle.

    -B

    --

    Ash and Hickory, straight-grained and true, make excellent bludgeons, dandy for the cudgeling of vegetarians.

  29. Re:Identity Theft is a crime. by jcnnghm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    When the collection agency files against your victim using their social security number for you not paying your bill. It's definitely identity theft, and I bet you would find that if it did effect them, they would try to have you prosecuted.

    --
    You don't make the poor richer by making the rich poorer. - Winston Churchill
  30. Re:Identity Theft is a crime. by PRMan · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Your name will show up as an Alias on their credit report and your address will show up as a former/current place of residence. Then, later, if your house is being foreclosed, it may affect their ability to get a loan or sell their house.

    I used to write mortgage software and credit report retrieval software and I have seen this exact situation, probably from someone giving out a "fake" SSN for privacy reasons, although we had no idea why this other information was on the report (maybe a transposed SSN).

    Anyway, you can have a negative effect on others by doing this.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  31. Re:Ugh, DirecTV should just go away by elbowboy · · Score: 2, Informative

    About a year ago I politely asked my Senators if they would work to end use of SS#s by private companies either by outlawing it except for financial institutions or forcing some sort of costly security minimum for storage of SS#s and insurance in the event of theft to discourage people who don't actually need it. Both of which seem logical enough no one should be actively opposed to it.

    Months later I received a response from both Senators. One was a form letter about how great the Senator was and how he appreciated my support. The other said that he would consider such a bill if one came before him. So feel free to write the bill and send it to your Senator as mine didn't realize creating legislation was part of his job. Not that its a surprise as it would explain why lobbist are so busy writting our laws.

  32. Re:SSSN != Credit union checking account number by sofar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    seriously, you didn't run away screaming from that credit union?

  33. try this by Khashishi · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here's a couple things you can try:
    DROP TABLE customers
    DROP TABLE accounts
    DROP TABLE users

  34. Re:Identity Theft is a crime. by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Your name will show up as an Alias on their credit report and your address will show up as a former/current place of residence. Then, later, if your house is being foreclosed, it may affect their ability to get a loan or sell their house.

    How is it my problem that the CRA keeps lousy records?

    --
    "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
  35. pollute the datastream! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One should be careful giving out fake SSNs, as you may be accused of attempted identity theft or fraud or whatnot. But, who's to say you or some data entry person didn't make a mistake and mistype one of the numbers, or transpose two of the numbers? Looks like an innocent mistake, I say! If you do it consistently enough, you can even use the excuse, "God, that typo has been following me around forever!"

    I'm just sayin'.

    I also use my old phone numbers and addresses for those who require such information. "Oh, that's my _old_ number!" :)

  36. Re:Identity Theft is a crime. by Reaperducer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Everyone should just pick a number between 987-65-4320 and 987-65-4329 and use that. That block is reserved for use in advertising.

    --
    -- I'm old enough to have lived through six different meanings of the word "hacker."
  37. Re:Identity Theft is a crime. by NormalVisual · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This isn't a problem for anyone that knows their rights about the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. If someone tries to collect a debt against you that isn't legitimate, it's a simple matter to write up a letter demanding verification of the debt and send it to the collector within 30 days of receiving the initial notice. The collector then must provide proof of the debt (which they won't be able to do even if the SSN is the same), and if they continue to attempt to collect without being able to verify it, it's like free money after the lawsuit.

    Providing a false SSN is *not* identity theft when it's the only fictitious information given, and I challenge you to show where someone has been prosecuted for it.

    --
    Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
  38. BBB by foeclan · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've had good luck reporting companies to the Better Business Bureau if their customer service is highly uncooperative. I was receiving unsolicited credit card offers from Citi, even though I'd signed up for the permanent do-not-sell list. Their customer service couldn't tell me who sold them my information, but after talking to the BBB, I got a call from someone higher up who let me know Equifax had sold it to them.

    I had much worse issues with Alienware, whose customer service was atrocious. I eventually had to go to both the BBB and the Florida Attorney General's office, but they finally swapped out my lemon of a laptop for a new one.

  39. Create a corporation by Restil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That will give you a tax number you can provide for all these services that seem to require one. Also, if the corporation's identity somehow gets stolen, well, you just trash it and get a new one. It's not the cheapest option available, but it will at least keep your personal information private.

    Just an idea.

    -Restil

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
  40. Re:Why did you give DirectTV your SSN? by gmb61 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    For those who are wondering how to get a fake SSN from a block that won't get allocated, the easiest thing to do is just change the first digit of your real SSN to an "8" - no SSN starting with 8 has ever been allocated and likely will not be for quite some time.

  41. Do not design DBs that store SSN! by laughingskeptic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Many of our peers here are the ones designing databases with SSN keys. Stop doing that! Hash the SSNs with a seed using MD5 or a stronger algorithm (or weaker if there is the possiblity that on rare occasions you will need to brute force the original SSN out). If you are required to validate against a subset of the number, store that hashed also. Done consistently you can use the hash to uniquely identify your customer without having to store the SSN in plain text.

    The U.S. Government should tax the storage of SSN numbers. We could start at 2 cents per day per instance. Once the tax is enacted, it will be a perpetual risk for businesses that this tax rate will go up and there will be an obvious business case for coming up with other methods for identifying customers.