Date: Fri, 09 Oct 92 16:06:56 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#090 Computer Privacy Digest Fri, 09 Oct 92 Volume 1 : Issue: 090 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears What is privacy? [Mike Brokowski: Re: Address required on checks] Re: Computer access to SSN and bank accounts: 48hrs episode Check or PO only - No cash accepted. Re: Blockbuster & video rental records Re: SSN in login ids / posting grades Re: Comments on SYMC or FRAM The Computer Privacy Digest is a forum for discussion on the effect of technology on privacy. The digest is moderated and gatewayed into the USENET newsgroup comp.society.privacy (Moderated). Submissions should be sent to comp-privacy@pica.army.mil and administrative requests to comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil. Back issues are available via anonymous ftp on ftp.pica.army.mil [129.139.160.200]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 17:28:19 EST Subject: What is privacy? Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 17:53:32 PDT From: Dave Gomberg I would like to post the following: What is privacy? If we are to discuss the interactions of technology and privacy, it seems to me we must start with a definition of privacy. This is of concern to me not only as a consumer, and one would would like to keep private things private, but also as a creditor, who would like to know a lot about folks I am lending money to, and even more after they stop paying. It seems to me that SOME privacy issues are potentially anti-business. Now that does not mean that we should take up one side or the other as a knee- jerk reaction, but it does mean that we need to be concerned about all the ramifications of any proposed policy before we take it too seriously. So please be kind enough to post your definition of privacy as it applies to this list. Thanks. Dave Dave Gomberg GOMBERG@UCSFVM Internet node UCSFVM.UCSF.EDU (415)731-7793 Seven Gateview Court, San Francisco CA 94116-1941 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 23:17:57 EDT From: Brinton Cooper Subject: [Mike Brokowski: Re: Address required on checks] Organization: The US Army Research Laboratory Mike Brokowski writes, in part >>3. You must give id when spending over $10K with one merchant in, I >>believe, one year, or the merchant can get in serious trouble. . . >>-- >>Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 >>ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA >> > >I am curious about 3) and the money orders. Does anyone know the rules >for requiring id depending on the amount of yearly purchase? It seems I believe this is a misstatement. IRS has a rule regarding the handling of large sums of money at a bank. If you withdraw a sufficiently large sum ($10K?), they must file something like a 1099 with IRS. This is to enable "cash flow analysis" by the IRS in order to detect tax evasion and is the means, and only means, by which Al Capone was ever convicted of anything. _Brint ------------------------------ From: Eric Smith Subject: Re: Computer access to SSN and bank accounts: 48hrs episode Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest) Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 11:25:58 GMT Apparently-To: comp-society-privacy@ames.arc.nasa.gov In article Steve Forrette writes: >Several people wrote to say how easy it is to get a dialup account with a >credit bureau to get people's credit profiles. But, isn't each inquiry logged >in the computer? I, from time to time, will get a copy of my credit profile >in order to check its accuracy. It also lists each inquiry that has been >made within the last year (2 years?). If there were an inquiry from an >organization that I did not recognize or authorize, I would definately look >into it. > >Steve Forrette, stevef@wrq.com > There is something I don't understand about this. If you see an unauthorized inquiry on your credit file, can't you use it as evidence to sue the deep pocket credit bureau for invasion of privacy? But if you can, why haven't millions of disgusted consumers already done so? Surely the deep pockets of the credit bureaus and/or their client corporations such as banks etc. are enough money to motivate consumers to sue, especially considering that this is already a litigation prone society. But in that case the credit bureaus would have gone broke from all the judgements already. So I guess I'm confused, there must be some factor I'm not considering that resolves this contradiction. I also have a question about resolving mistakes in a credit file. If you see an account that isn't yours, put in the wrong file by mistake, you can tell the credit bureau it isn't yours, and they have to contact the creditor for verification. But wouldn't most creditors just verify the account automatically regardless of who it belongs to? Does the creditor have to send some kind of proof to the credit bureau and/or the consumer? Or do they just have to say yes or no, it is or isn't a valid account? And what if it's hard for them to tell whether it belongs to the consumer who complained? For example, what if someone used fraud to open an account using someone else's name and credit information, such that the creditor thinks the consumer who complained is really the person who opened the account? In that case does the consumer have any recourse at all? ------------------------------ From: Hap Haas Subject: Check or PO only - No cash accepted. Date: 8 Oct 92 13:05:58 GMT Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology Following up on the check-cash-address thread, here's an interesting thing that happened to me: I ordered something overnight, COD from Federal Express. When it arrived, the delivery person would not accept my cash payment. She said they required a check or PO number. I asked what the heck she thought COD stands for . . and she was quite insistent that THEY define COD as Charge On Delivery. It caused a big problem for me - I wasted about 30 minutes to an hour resolving the payment problem. She claims they reason is that not all their drivers are bonded, which makes sense. Nontheless, when I order "COD", I use the commonly accepted definition of Cash On Delivery and expect to pay with Legal USA Tender: CASH! Oh well . . hh -- Harry Haas GTRI/RIDL/SB | Georgia Tech Research Institute Research Engineer II | 225 North Ave. hh2@prism.gatech.edu | Atlanta Georgia, 30332 "I know engineers . . . . they *love* to change things" - Bones ------------------------------ From: hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) Subject: Re: Blockbuster & video rental records Organization: Information Services, Swarthmore College, Swarthmore, PA, USA Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 21:54:37 GMT mccoy@ils.nwu.edu writes: > _Privacy for Sale_ (by Jeffrey Rothfeder, a must read for people who are > interested in this stuff...). Type of Material: Book LC Call Number: HG3751.7 .R68 1992 Author: Rothfeder, Jeffrey. Title: Privacy for sale : how computerization has made everyone's private life an open secret / Jeffrey Rothfeder. Publication Info: New York : Simon & Schuster, c1992. Phys. Description: 224 p. ; 25 cm. Notes: Includes bibliographical references and index. Subjects: Credit bureaus--United States--Records and correspondence--Access control. Subjects: Banks and banking--United States--Records and correspondence--Access control. Subjects: Confidential communications--United States--Third parties. Subjects: Privacy, Right of--United States. Subjects: Computer security--United States. LC Card Number: 92000364 ISBN: 0-671-73492-X : $22.00 -- hirai@cc.swarthmore.edu (Eiji Hirai) : : : : : :: ::: :::: ::::: Unix Geek for Swarthmore College : : : : : :: ::: :::: ::::: Information Services, Swarthmore, PA, US. I don't speak for Swarthmore College. ------------------------------ From: Nigel.Allen@lambada.oit.unc.edu MMDF-Warning: Parse error in original version of preceding line at AED.PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Re: SSN in login ids / posting grades Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 18:25:31 EDT The University of Toronto uses a student number system which has nothing to do with the Social Insurance Number (SIN), the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Social Security Number. For most students who originally registered as full-time undergraduates in arts and science, the student number is the nine-digit number that appeared on the pre-numbered application form that they used to apply to the university in the first place. The first two digits are the last two digits of the year the student first registered. I have also seen student numbers beginning with a leading zero and then two digits corresponding to the initial year of registration. Faculty and staff are identified on their library and identification cards by a six-digit payroll number. This number, not the Social Insurance Number, is used when dealing with the university's dental and prescription drug plans. (For government medical insurance, individuals are identified by an Ontario Health Card number, which is not connected to the Social Insurance Number. The Ontario Health Card is relatively new; previously health insurance worked on a one-number-per-family basis, rather than the present one-number-per-person basis.) Other provinces once used the Social Insurance Number as the basis of their medical insurance plans, but I believe all have now abandoned the SIN. You normally have to give a bank your SIN when you open an account so that interest earnings can be reported to the tax department. However, no Canadian university is likely to use the SIN as a log-in ID. In short, Canada is a utopia, and you should all move up north. :-) ------------------------------ From: Jinfu Chen Subject: Re: Comments on SYMC or FRAM Keywords: Symantec, Frame Technology Date: 9 Oct 92 17:15:48 GMT Followup-To: misc.invest Distribution: usa Organization: Motorola, LICD, SPS, Mesa, AZ In article <1992Oct8.214004.25766@cbnewse.cb.att.com> LOGIN@cbnewse.cb.att.com writes: >Symantec, SYMC, which went down from high of $51 to about $6. >What does the company do? How strong is the company in Software area. >One reason, why the stock took so big dive may be due to institutions >holding 20 million out of 22 million shares outstanding. It is almost >too scary to own any technology stock now unless already beaten down. >Another example Borland went down today as low as 25 1/2. The Oct. 8th issue of Wall Street Journal has a cover article about Symantec and not surprising, Borland International. It's about arest of a formal Borland senior executive Eugene Wang defecting to Borland with alleged trade secret of Borland. Local police arested Wang and searched Wang's house as well as the house of CEO of Symantec and Symantec's headquarter. Borland filed a suit against Symantec shortly after the arest. Briefly, the story is about Wang quited from Borland and several managers in Borland were suspicous about his departure to Symantec. Although this is not first time Borland employee defecting to its rival but Wang's behavior a few days(weeks?) before the departure caused some managers to suspect he might be doing something to damage the company. Since Borland (and Symantec?) is using MCI for email and MCI keeps outgoing mail in back up up to five days, Borland was able to retrieve Wang's outgoing mail after he left and several of his messages were sent to Symantec's CEO whose name escaped my mind. Wang's secretary also defected with him and when she went back to Borland to claim her personal belonging, she copies files from her PC to two disks as watched by a Borland personnel person and erased files she copied from the PC. Ironically once she left, the erased files were recovered by using Symantec's own best selling program (N?? Utilities) and the files are related to Borland's three year product plans and other confidential documentations. The story is very interesting from the hi-tech spy point of view and probably boring from the financial side. And it rases issues of (email) privacy and hi-tech trade secret, which are already hotly debated these days. I probably leave out many details so go get the paper and read yourself. ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V1 #090 ******************************