Re: Identity Theft (was: CRIME Computers vulnerable at Oregon department)

From: T. Kenji Sugahara (sugahara@private)
Date: Thu Sep 26 2002 - 22:58:20 PDT

  • Next message: Crispin Cowan: "Re: Identity Theft (was: CRIME Computers vulnerable at Oregon department)"

    Dear Dr. Crispy Creme,  :p
    
    I think it has to be a combination of both prosecution and prevention.
    
    The problem with prosecution in the current context is that is treated 
    as a property crime.  As a property crime, it does not have the same 
    priority as a personal crime.  Many times, identity theft isn't 
    prosecuted because financial institutions usually take the hit.  This 
    results in a perception among criminals that they can get away with it. 
      Most of the time they do.  It has become so easy to steal an identity, 
    it's turned into something akin to script kiddies breaking into 
    unsecured systems.  The real problem is that people waste hundred of 
    hours trying to repair their credit records.  These victims keep 
    getting bills from accounts they never opened... years after their 
    identity was stolen.  It makes it more difficult for victims to obtain 
    home loans, car loans, etc.
    
    The solution is to vigorously prosecute identity thieves.  Personally I 
    would like to see it made into a measure 11 crime, but again, we run 
    into the problem of scarce resources, jail space and law enforcement 
    resources.  However, most identity thieves are also involved in other 
    illegal activities.  It's rare when you find someone who simply steals 
    an identity for profit.  Most likely it is to support a drug habit.  
    Making identity theft and aggravating circumstance (if it already 
    isn't) would probably work well.  Tom or Geo, what's your take on this?
    
    In terms of prevention:
    
    I'd personally like to see biometric information encoded onto a chip on 
    your drivers license.   (sort of like the chips starting to show up on 
    some credit cards.)  However, you are right, people will always find 
    ways around the system.
    
    Do you know if people's irises remain the same from child birth?  If 
    so, a combination of iris and fingerprint information stored with an 
    electronic version of a birth certificate could be helpful.  The state 
    would have to devise a method where it would be write once for the 
    biometric information for a single identity.
    
    My question is, how would a uniform identity system involving the use 
    of biometric or other authentication system run afoul of civil 
    liberties?  We're already tracked through our SS numbers, how would 
    this be any different?
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Sep 26 2002 - 23:50:23 PDT