The author is alive and well and living somewhere west of the Greenwich meridian.
 
Google
Long Dark Tea-Time Web
Site hosted by DreamHost
 
Archives
March 2003
April 2003
May 2003
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
<< current
 
Tea-Time Feeds
Atom feed Atom feed
Subscribe with Bloglines Bloglines subscribe
Add to Yahoo MyYahoo subscribe
 
All your links are belong to us
Chicken or Beef?
eAsylum.net
Hateful Things
KnowProSE
K'vitsh
The Long Dark Tech-time of the Soul
The Mad Prophet Blog
Meg Does Blogs
Net Politik
Rush Limbaughtomy the Dittohead Recovery Site
South Knox Bubba
 
Rolling, rolling, rolling
Alternet.org
Angry Bear
Arianna's Blog
The Big Picture
Curry Blog
General Glut's Globblog
GuvWurld
In These Times
It's Still The Economy Stupid
Let's run the numbers
Tufte's Economics Classes Blog

SF  Bay Blogger
 
Douglas Adams
1952/3/11 - 2001/5/11

DNA Home Page
Wikipedia Entry
The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul Novel
H2G2
 
StatCounter:
SiteMeter:
 
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License

The Long Dark Tea-Time of the Soul
Miscellaneous ramblings written as my soul endures a long dark tea-time
 
Wednesday, February 23, 2005  
A two tiered response to privacy violations?

Does anyone else see not just a slight, but a massive inequity between what happened when Paris Hilton's personal phone information got stolen, and what happened when ChoicePoint managed to give away personal details of not just one, but potentially hundreds of thousands of people?

In one situation we have a bunch of celebrity phone numbers and some happy photo snaps posted on the web. A few celebs get their phones jammed with crank calls and no doubt quickly got a new phone number, big deal. I'm sure that T-Mobile has probably dished out new phones and free T-Mobile service credits to everyone concerned even if, as it is likely to be the case, they weren't to blame for the "hack". So, one emabarassed celebrity who probably wont get anyones phone number given to her again, and a huge amount of press, and bad PR for T-Mobile even though its quite possible she just had a dumb password that someone guessed.

In the other case we have a bogus application to ChoicePoint resulting in the release of names, addresses, phone numbers, social security numbers and every else the budding identity fraudster needs to steal the identity of thousands of people. And even after the fact, even those who didn't yet get their identity stolen (several hundred already did), the rest and sit back and wait, fingers crossed, that their information isn't out on the web somewhere waiting to suck their bank accounts dry at any moment. No one really nows and quite possibly these people will have to run scared for years before they can think of taking their eye off their credit reports.

So what is the inequity? Well in one case we have the Secret Service involved, looking out for Hilton's back, working with T-Mobile to investigate and shutting down all sites that continue to propogate the information from her mobile. In the other well, the news of the fraud appears to have been buried for almost a year at the request of "federal authorities" in defiance of the California law that required ChoicePoint to notify everyone of the release of their personal information. Now ChoicePoint are just offering a free year of subscription to credit history monitoring services to those 145,000 is has, so far, identified as victims of the fraud. Apart from that little, if anything seems to be done about it and ChoicePoint appears to be washing its hands of the problem.

At least one person has already decided to hit ChoicePoint with a law suit and I can easily expect a class action suit to follow quite prompty, although being a multi-state case it is likely that it would fall fowl of Bush's recent anti-class action bill that forces it to be fought in class-action unfriendly federal courts. Wired News is now indicating they think such suits will fall on deaf ears, as courts have previously dismissed attempts to sue banks that have been duped by identity thieves on the grounds that the victim wasn't a customer of the company they were suing. Maybe that was just a badly presented suit that failed, but it certainly sounds like there should be a case to sue someone when a company that you didn't even ask to be holding your data screws up and hands it over to criminals.

Or is it, that just because we the people are many and not of celebrity status we dont get a personal investigation by the Secret Service, and in general we just get screwed because on average we don't have the time or resources to seek restitution in a court of law.

2/23/2005 02:54:00 PM 0 comments

0 Comments:

Post a Comment