Identity theft
-
I'm not saying they're worthless, just suspicious. Removal from the mailing lists is a nice feature. You should commit some fraud and see if they catch it. Sending you notices doesn't mean they are actually doing anything but sending out notices. The whole company could be a kid in his mom's basement sending out reminder emails. (Lifelock seems to be legit) This is an effort to protect you from a crime. I was under the impression that there was already a group of folks who are supposed to protect us from crimes. This service is kind of like having a burglar alarm I think... but what happens when it goes off? Also you should keep in mind that I know nothing about this specific company. I'm only passing on a warning about this type of company. (I saw this warning either on Jim Lehrer or my local news, not sure which but those are the only ones I watch) I hope you realise the falsehood in the last sentence you said there...
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/
>> I was under the impression that there was already a group of folks who are supposed to protect us from crimes. << The subject warned the reader, that at your invitation, we now venture outside the box, we dare to question "what, a box, who put us in this box ?" I can't remember the name of the PBS video in which they show that while ducks have simple pair-bonding software, ( I saw the video, "believe it or not" ) ostriches WILL trust one mommy to guard the eggs of the entire gang of ostrich-moms. Hence, as proved on tape, mommy ostriches have evolved to be able to tell which eggs are HERS, when resources become scarce. Recently I asked this question of PBS, no response yet: http://discussions.pbs.org/viewforum.pbs?f=175&sid=8fc27c9e364d8ac394c871c58a8e2b9e Monopolies intrinsically tend to rot, and government falls into that category, sigh. But you have probably also thought deeply on this, your "under the impression" suggests tongue-in-cheek, right ?
pg--az
-
It's a really interesting idea - an idea for a colabarative project! Feel like starting it? I'm game if you are.
Well, the problem is with passwords in the first place. You can't keep them secure and keep them useable at the same time. Biometrics may be an answer to that, but it's unreliable in some special cases. The base problem with identity theft is that the commonly accepted set of information doesn't really prove that you are who you say you are. In most cases a Photo ID is all that's needed to identify yourself, and anyone under 21 knows how worthless that idea is. What we need, and I've been thinking about this a long time, is some way to identify yourself remotely which would be impossible for a third party to replicate. You know, humans recognise each other by looking at their faces usually. Nobody can steal that from you, but almost any form of ID that is detachable from your person, can be copied, stolen or spoofed. "You'll steal my identity over my dead, faceless body!"
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/
-
>> I was under the impression that there was already a group of folks who are supposed to protect us from crimes. << The subject warned the reader, that at your invitation, we now venture outside the box, we dare to question "what, a box, who put us in this box ?" I can't remember the name of the PBS video in which they show that while ducks have simple pair-bonding software, ( I saw the video, "believe it or not" ) ostriches WILL trust one mommy to guard the eggs of the entire gang of ostrich-moms. Hence, as proved on tape, mommy ostriches have evolved to be able to tell which eggs are HERS, when resources become scarce. Recently I asked this question of PBS, no response yet: http://discussions.pbs.org/viewforum.pbs?f=175&sid=8fc27c9e364d8ac394c871c58a8e2b9e Monopolies intrinsically tend to rot, and government falls into that category, sigh. But you have probably also thought deeply on this, your "under the impression" suggests tongue-in-cheek, right ?
pg--az
Yeah. The cops are pretty worthless at preventing crime. Not too bad at catching people after the fact, but that doesn't help too much. I'll actually use my Biology degree for once and answer your other question. The thing about ostriches is fairly common in the animal world. Humans do it all the time. Usually the behavior is confined within family units, so the act of protecting eggs that aren't yours results in increased propogation of some of your genes, since you are all related. In hard times though, priority goes to your own offspring. Behavioral genetics is all about genes that define instinctive behaviors that have the sole purpose of propogating the rest of the genome. "Selfish genes" are concerned with nothing beyond survival to the next generation, so the concept can be used to explain seemingly altruistic behaviors in animal populations and to some extent, human beings. I often wonder if my transgender condition has something to do with this. It's not important for me to procreate because I have 3 brothers... it's more important to have an extra hand in the nurturing role since the family is overloaded with males. Thus, there is pressure to switch gender roles in order to ensure survival of the family. Of course, humans fight these instincts so I have two kids of my own - possibly resulting in propogation of transgender 'ability' to the next generation. (note, we are concerned with behavior here (gender roles), not physiology(sexual roles), as is seen in the sex-switching frogs) /now that I read your PBS question I figure you probly understand all that, but I'm not going to un-type it :)
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/
-
Yeah. The cops are pretty worthless at preventing crime. Not too bad at catching people after the fact, but that doesn't help too much. I'll actually use my Biology degree for once and answer your other question. The thing about ostriches is fairly common in the animal world. Humans do it all the time. Usually the behavior is confined within family units, so the act of protecting eggs that aren't yours results in increased propogation of some of your genes, since you are all related. In hard times though, priority goes to your own offspring. Behavioral genetics is all about genes that define instinctive behaviors that have the sole purpose of propogating the rest of the genome. "Selfish genes" are concerned with nothing beyond survival to the next generation, so the concept can be used to explain seemingly altruistic behaviors in animal populations and to some extent, human beings. I often wonder if my transgender condition has something to do with this. It's not important for me to procreate because I have 3 brothers... it's more important to have an extra hand in the nurturing role since the family is overloaded with males. Thus, there is pressure to switch gender roles in order to ensure survival of the family. Of course, humans fight these instincts so I have two kids of my own - possibly resulting in propogation of transgender 'ability' to the next generation. (note, we are concerned with behavior here (gender roles), not physiology(sexual roles), as is seen in the sex-switching frogs) /now that I read your PBS question I figure you probly understand all that, but I'm not going to un-type it :)
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/
Xlnt - you must know the details I forget, I saw somewhere that entire SPECIES of insects avoid getting eaten by imitating the coloration of Insects with some actual deterrent, poison or whatever, kind of "stealing the other Insect's card". Imagine some predator eating one of the fake insects, exclaiming "YUM", and then it eats one of the real insects and gets poisoned. Via the magic of the Internet just remembering << "Paul Davies" "nature got there first" >> confirms that is one of his favorite memes.
pg--az
-
It's a really interesting idea - an idea for a colabarative project! Feel like starting it? I'm game if you are.
-
Actually my creative mind is at a standstill, so I don't quite know how it'd work. Also, me and my ex-colleague are thinking of starting up a small business in web design, so I have to focus all my non-working hours into that!
No worries, I know the feeling (all to well in fact). Good luck with your startup, I hope it goes well for you.
-
Well, the problem is with passwords in the first place. You can't keep them secure and keep them useable at the same time. Biometrics may be an answer to that, but it's unreliable in some special cases. The base problem with identity theft is that the commonly accepted set of information doesn't really prove that you are who you say you are. In most cases a Photo ID is all that's needed to identify yourself, and anyone under 21 knows how worthless that idea is. What we need, and I've been thinking about this a long time, is some way to identify yourself remotely which would be impossible for a third party to replicate. You know, humans recognise each other by looking at their faces usually. Nobody can steal that from you, but almost any form of ID that is detachable from your person, can be copied, stolen or spoofed. "You'll steal my identity over my dead, faceless body!"
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/
Jasmine2501 wrote:
Biometrics may be an answer
Jasmine2501 wrote:
some way to identify yourself remotely which would be impossible for a third party to replicate
Jasmine2501 wrote:
almost any form of ID that is detachable from your person, can be copied, stolen or spoofed
Are you thinking along the biometrics route? Or something else? I've tinkered with the idea of microchipping but there are a few limitations that would have to be overcome in order to make it work effectively. I haven't been following the progress of microchip technology enough to know whether these things have been taken care of yet but I doubt it. My ideal - a chip with the ability to transmit information over short distances (a few meters will do) yet small enough to buried under your skin imperceptibly. The chip could be powered by natural sugars found in the body and (ideally) not give off any harmful radiation. To prevent it being spoofed it should (somehow) carry a signature generated by your DNA. In this way each chip would be individual to its owner (host? :)), & would cease to function once removed from the body (no sugars, no power). I know that this is all "pie in the sky" at the moment but this kind of technology would revolutionize identity management - you would never have to carry a credit or debit card, drivers license, keys, passport, cash etc. ever again. You would be instantly recognizable, even remotely as the chip identifies you "locally" could conceivably pass on your credentials to/for the remote request. The downsides? The first few that spring to mind - although a chip like this may be unique to you, your personal information would still be stored on systems over which you have no control (very much like it is today). Secondly, the infrastructure required to support this would take years to put in place and would probably be far more expensive than most would consider a justifiable expense. Apart from the cost of implementing the infrastructure what about the cost to the individual? It would need to be affordable to the point of becoming mandatory in order to stand a chance of success. So, plus sides & downsides to a concept that'll never go further than this page, though it's alot of fun to think about. Any comments? What's your ideal identity management solution? If I may ask, that is.
-
Xlnt - you must know the details I forget, I saw somewhere that entire SPECIES of insects avoid getting eaten by imitating the coloration of Insects with some actual deterrent, poison or whatever, kind of "stealing the other Insect's card". Imagine some predator eating one of the fake insects, exclaiming "YUM", and then it eats one of the real insects and gets poisoned. Via the magic of the Internet just remembering << "Paul Davies" "nature got there first" >> confirms that is one of his favorite memes.
pg--az
The viceroy butterfly is an example of that. There are fish that evolved that way too. Humans do it to some extent as well... we fake our identities to project an image we want to project, depending on the situation. "Trash-talking" is a perfect example of that... saying you can win a fight whether you can or not, is sometimes more effective than actually fighting.
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/ - see the "Programming" section for (freeware) JazzySiteMaps, a simple application to generate .Net and Google-style sitemaps!
-
Jasmine2501 wrote:
Biometrics may be an answer
Jasmine2501 wrote:
some way to identify yourself remotely which would be impossible for a third party to replicate
Jasmine2501 wrote:
almost any form of ID that is detachable from your person, can be copied, stolen or spoofed
Are you thinking along the biometrics route? Or something else? I've tinkered with the idea of microchipping but there are a few limitations that would have to be overcome in order to make it work effectively. I haven't been following the progress of microchip technology enough to know whether these things have been taken care of yet but I doubt it. My ideal - a chip with the ability to transmit information over short distances (a few meters will do) yet small enough to buried under your skin imperceptibly. The chip could be powered by natural sugars found in the body and (ideally) not give off any harmful radiation. To prevent it being spoofed it should (somehow) carry a signature generated by your DNA. In this way each chip would be individual to its owner (host? :)), & would cease to function once removed from the body (no sugars, no power). I know that this is all "pie in the sky" at the moment but this kind of technology would revolutionize identity management - you would never have to carry a credit or debit card, drivers license, keys, passport, cash etc. ever again. You would be instantly recognizable, even remotely as the chip identifies you "locally" could conceivably pass on your credentials to/for the remote request. The downsides? The first few that spring to mind - although a chip like this may be unique to you, your personal information would still be stored on systems over which you have no control (very much like it is today). Secondly, the infrastructure required to support this would take years to put in place and would probably be far more expensive than most would consider a justifiable expense. Apart from the cost of implementing the infrastructure what about the cost to the individual? It would need to be affordable to the point of becoming mandatory in order to stand a chance of success. So, plus sides & downsides to a concept that'll never go further than this page, though it's alot of fun to think about. Any comments? What's your ideal identity management solution? If I may ask, that is.
I'm thinkin biometrics is probably the answer. I don't think people will accept a chip implant. I wouldn't want one. Also, the chip signal could be spoofed. A National ID card with a fingerprint on it, would be a good idea, but the fingerprint data should be stored somewhere, so it can be periodically compared to make sure the print on the card remains the same as the print that the original person signed up with. That way, if someone put their fingerprint on your card, it would be ineffective. If they tried to use a card with your print on it, they would be denied because their prints don't match. Retinal scans could be used as well. There is already a national database of fingerprints from criminals. As a society we don't seem to have a problem with that, but a database with everyone's prints in it (ideally, captured at birth), is something people seem to take issue with. Implementation of this system is not really a technical problem. It's more of a social issue. How do you get everyone in there? What if people refuse to be printed? Should people have the right to refuse? Some religions forbid the capturing of biometric data... what will we do for those people? All these are questions that are tricky to answer.
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/ - see the "Programming" section for (freeware) JazzySiteMaps, a simple application to generate .Net and Google-style sitemaps!
-
I'm thinkin biometrics is probably the answer. I don't think people will accept a chip implant. I wouldn't want one. Also, the chip signal could be spoofed. A National ID card with a fingerprint on it, would be a good idea, but the fingerprint data should be stored somewhere, so it can be periodically compared to make sure the print on the card remains the same as the print that the original person signed up with. That way, if someone put their fingerprint on your card, it would be ineffective. If they tried to use a card with your print on it, they would be denied because their prints don't match. Retinal scans could be used as well. There is already a national database of fingerprints from criminals. As a society we don't seem to have a problem with that, but a database with everyone's prints in it (ideally, captured at birth), is something people seem to take issue with. Implementation of this system is not really a technical problem. It's more of a social issue. How do you get everyone in there? What if people refuse to be printed? Should people have the right to refuse? Some religions forbid the capturing of biometric data... what will we do for those people? All these are questions that are tricky to answer.
"Quality Software since 1983!" http://www.smoothjazzy.com/ - see the "Programming" section for (freeware) JazzySiteMaps, a simple application to generate .Net and Google-style sitemaps!
Jasmine2501 wrote:
I don't think people will accept a chip implant.
After a bit of thought I agree - you're right. Your point regarding the different religions could also be applied here as there's sure to be a religion somewhere that disagrees with the idea.
Jasmine2501 wrote:
If they tried to use a card with your print on it, they would be denied because their prints don't match.
Kinda like the idea behind the weapons they use in the old Judge Dredd comics? Or different? You may be on to something there - I like the idea.
Jasmine2501 wrote:
a database with everyone's prints in it
In South Africa fingerprints are captured when you apply for your identity document and any time you are arrested. Most people apply for their ID when they're around 16. It's a way of life here & no-one seems to take offense to it, from what you've said it seems to be somewhat different in the US - are fingerprints only captured if you are arrested?
Jasmine2501 wrote:
What if people refuse to be printed? Should people have the right to refuse?
I think that people should have the right to at least protest but refusal would be based more on whether or not the majority of citizens agreed that this would be for the greater good. That said however it opens a can of worms in how far a government or institution can limit an individuals civil rights using majority rule as stick to beat people with. :soapbox: I think if it were to be enforced it would be more successful than if people were allowed to protest. We all have to obey the laws of the country in which we live & were something like this to be passed as law then it would have had to go through the approval process which would include peoples protests. Then again, I wonder what arguments I would have if I was against this concept. What if I felt my rights were being suppressed?
Jasmine2501 wrote:
All these are questions that are tricky to answer.
Yup, you said it sister, and they seem only to lead to more tricky questions. Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most...
-
Jasmine2501 wrote:
I don't think people will accept a chip implant.
After a bit of thought I agree - you're right. Your point regarding the different religions could also be applied here as there's sure to be a religion somewhere that disagrees with the idea.
Jasmine2501 wrote:
If they tried to use a card with your print on it, they would be denied because their prints don't match.
Kinda like the idea behind the weapons they use in the old Judge Dredd comics? Or different? You may be on to something there - I like the idea.
Jasmine2501 wrote:
a database with everyone's prints in it
In South Africa fingerprints are captured when you apply for your identity document and any time you are arrested. Most people apply for their ID when they're around 16. It's a way of life here & no-one seems to take offense to it, from what you've said it seems to be somewhat different in the US - are fingerprints only captured if you are arrested?
Jasmine2501 wrote:
What if people refuse to be printed? Should people have the right to refuse?
I think that people should have the right to at least protest but refusal would be based more on whether or not the majority of citizens agreed that this would be for the greater good. That said however it opens a can of worms in how far a government or institution can limit an individuals civil rights using majority rule as stick to beat people with. :soapbox: I think if it were to be enforced it would be more successful than if people were allowed to protest. We all have to obey the laws of the country in which we live & were something like this to be passed as law then it would have had to go through the approval process which would include peoples protests. Then again, I wonder what arguments I would have if I was against this concept. What if I felt my rights were being suppressed?
Jasmine2501 wrote:
All these are questions that are tricky to answer.
Yup, you said it sister, and they seem only to lead to more tricky questions. Of all the things I've lost, I miss my mind the most...
For a long time here (USA), people were only fingerprinted if they were involved in a crime. Some states are doing a thumbprint now when you get your ID. I had to put one on my Colorado state Driver's License, but it's not on the card, only in a database somewhere. It's not a national thing though. The reason I bring up religion (which I prefer to avoid), is because recently a religious group in Canada was granted the right to not have photos on their ID cards. They beleive that taking a photo is some kind of injustice, which I don't exactly understand, but I can imagine they wouldn't like being fingerprinted either. In that situation, you would have the large majority of the population provided with a simple way of validating their identity, while the marginalised group would have to go to greater lengths. If they wanted it that way and could put up with whatever extra hoops they have to jump through to validate thier identity, then I think it would work. The fingerprint is a similar concept to the photo, but more accurate since fingerprints are unique. Faces on the other hand, can be very similar, and computers can't match them with 100% reliability, and neither can people. The system depends on three parts that have to match up, otherwise you could fake the ID. The fingerprint on the card has to match the person's finger, and both of those have to match the fingerprint stored in the database. Otherwise you could just change the fingerprint and photo on the card to match yours and presto... fake ID. Kids who are not of drinking age over here understand fully how effective that is. Worked for me :)
"Quality Software since 1983!"
http://www.smoothjazzy.com/ - see the "Programming" section for (freeware) JazzySiteMaps, a simple application to generate .Net and Google-style sitemaps! -
brucerchapman wrote:
Just borrow a small amount of money ($2-3,000) for something like a very cheap car. Pay it back over a period of 3/4 months (based on your affordability, of course!). After two payments, someone will give you a $500 credit card. Get one of those. Max it out on stuff and pay it down a couple of times. Hey presto! Instant credit! You'll be flooded with credit cards in the post now
Thanks for the tip. I have a car already (drove it from Canada). So I can't get a car loan. But I'll see if I can get a personal loan of some sort.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. (*Sample chapter available online*)When I was 18 my father wanted to help me establish my credit so we went to the bank, and opened a CD (Certificate of Deposit, kinda like a money-market account) in my name in the amount of $2,000. Then I applied for a secured loan ($2,000) solely in my name with the CD as collateral. I made the first two payments and then went back to the bank, paid off the loan completely and closed the CD account. Now I had a loan, albeit secured, in my name on my credit report paid off in three months. The whole thing cost me a little bit of interest on the loan and a penalty for closing the CD too soon. After a couple months when the bank had time to report all this to the credit bureau(s) I wanted to try out my new credit, so I went to buy a car. To my surprise I got the best rate available, and a few weeks later received an offer in the mail for a gold card with a $5,000 credit limit. It's that easy.
-
When I was in this situation of trying to buy a car, I did a loan application on a paper sheet, and then someone typed it. At that time I was not aware of the credit bureaus. This is only later when I finally acquired a credit report, I discovered the person who had typed the loan infos had mispelled my last name. And how strange it might look, the credit bureau had recorded this as a new name listed under my SSN!!! I come from a country where changing name is not meant to happen, and this was a very big surprise that their databases record false datas without even trying to verify them. Afterwards that sounds scary. Some employers do background checks on their employees. They can easily pull data from various types of databases. I wonder how this can impact employee reviews when they find all sorts of incorrect datas. Hopefully, in most of the case they are honest and can sort through the incorrect infos.
It's nothing out of the ordinary to have a misspelled version of your name on your credit report.
-
We were lucky enough to be burgled (twice) before identity theft was an issue. The second time, the thief came into the bedroom where we were sleeping. Why? Because all our keys, papers, money, etc., were there. It was scary, but my wife woke up and I chased him away. The only loss was a camcorder and 25 euros (oh, and all the break-in damage to two very expensive window frames). We were the only house in the street without a burglar alarm (animals). Needless to say, we now have one ("pet friendly").
JDL-EPM wrote:
We were lucky enough to be burgled (twice) before identity theft was an issue. The second time, the thief came into the bedroom where we were sleeping. Why? Because all our keys, papers, money, etc., were there. It was scary, but my wife woke up and I chased him away.
I hate to turn this into a political discussion, but am I the only one here who thinks that this is a great argument for gun ownership?
-
When I was 18 my father wanted to help me establish my credit so we went to the bank, and opened a CD (Certificate of Deposit, kinda like a money-market account) in my name in the amount of $2,000. Then I applied for a secured loan ($2,000) solely in my name with the CD as collateral. I made the first two payments and then went back to the bank, paid off the loan completely and closed the CD account. Now I had a loan, albeit secured, in my name on my credit report paid off in three months. The whole thing cost me a little bit of interest on the loan and a penalty for closing the CD too soon. After a couple months when the bank had time to report all this to the credit bureau(s) I wanted to try out my new credit, so I went to buy a car. To my surprise I got the best rate available, and a few weeks later received an offer in the mail for a gold card with a $5,000 credit limit. It's that easy.
Cool - thanks for the tip, Josh.
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. (*Sample chapter available online*) -
JDL-EPM wrote:
We were lucky enough to be burgled (twice) before identity theft was an issue. The second time, the thief came into the bedroom where we were sleeping. Why? Because all our keys, papers, money, etc., were there. It was scary, but my wife woke up and I chased him away.
I hate to turn this into a political discussion, but am I the only one here who thinks that this is a great argument for gun ownership?
Josh.Young wrote:
I hate to turn this into a political discussion, but am I the only one here who thinks that this is a great argument for gun ownership?
A gun would not have solved anything. I was not awake enough to be able to aim properly. I probably would have shot my wife, since she was initially ahead of me in the chase.
-
When I was 18 my father wanted to help me establish my credit so we went to the bank, and opened a CD (Certificate of Deposit, kinda like a money-market account) in my name in the amount of $2,000. Then I applied for a secured loan ($2,000) solely in my name with the CD as collateral. I made the first two payments and then went back to the bank, paid off the loan completely and closed the CD account. Now I had a loan, albeit secured, in my name on my credit report paid off in three months. The whole thing cost me a little bit of interest on the loan and a penalty for closing the CD too soon. After a couple months when the bank had time to report all this to the credit bureau(s) I wanted to try out my new credit, so I went to buy a car. To my surprise I got the best rate available, and a few weeks later received an offer in the mail for a gold card with a $5,000 credit limit. It's that easy.
Josh.Young wrote:
When I was 18 my father wanted to help me establish my credit so we went to the bank, and opened a CD (Certificate of Deposit, kinda like a money-market account) in my name in the amount of $2,000. Then I applied for a secured loan ($2,000) solely in my name with the CD as collateral.
I went to my bank (Bank of America) and asked them about it. But they had never heard of such a loan (a secured loan). What bank did you do this with, Josh?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. (*Sample chapter available online*) -
Josh.Young wrote:
When I was 18 my father wanted to help me establish my credit so we went to the bank, and opened a CD (Certificate of Deposit, kinda like a money-market account) in my name in the amount of $2,000. Then I applied for a secured loan ($2,000) solely in my name with the CD as collateral.
I went to my bank (Bank of America) and asked them about it. But they had never heard of such a loan (a secured loan). What bank did you do this with, Josh?
Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
Currently working on C++/CLI in Action for Manning Publications. (*Sample chapter available online*)Nishant Sivakumar wrote:
I went to my bank (Bank of America) and asked them about it. But they had never heard of such a loan (a secured loan). What bank did you do this with, Josh? Regards, Nish
It was actually Barnett Bank which eventually turned into Bank of America. Hmm, strange. Ask them if you can get a loan with an account as collateral since you don't have any credit. I'll see what else I can find out about it. Josh