Date: Thu, 24 Dec 92 11:26:06 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V1#119 Computer Privacy Digest Thu, 24 Dec 92 Volume 1 : Issue: 119 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears Re: Digital Licenses in NY State Re: Credit denies millionaire due to credit report Re: Sallie Mae and SSNs Privacy Concerns and the So-Called Privacy Advocates Re: UPS Digital Clipboards Re: The UPS clipboard SSN & Gernuglflux! 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 [129.139.160.133]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Stephen M Jameson Subject: Re: Digital Licenses in NY State Date: 23 Dec 92 12:17:01 Organization: General Electric Advanced Technology Labs Reply-To: sjameson@atl.dnet.ge.com In article jhess@orion.oac.uci.edu (James Hess) writes: >>Needless to say, I voted for the candidate who said we need to reduce >>government rather than the one who wanted to expand it. >> >Not to question your politics, but remember that Bush was director of the CIA, >which is not noted for its concerns for privacy or legality. Ask yourself, >which parts of government did he propose to reduce or expand? Of course, >if you run the country off the books, through Ollie North, you can reduce >the visible government... ;-) I do question your politics, if you assume offhand that the Republican candidate was the one most likely to reduce government. Government has expanded substantially under the previous Republican administrations, and will doubtless expand at least as substantially under the upcoming Democratic administration. Any continued expansion of government is a potential threat to privacy and to all other rights we hold, and is in fact a far more serious threat than any other non-governmental threats that are discussed in this group. This is because while you at least have some choice about your dealings with private organizations, you generally have none about the necessity to deal with the government, i.e. you are truly forced to provide the information simply, for example, to earn a living, or even, in the case of the census, for being here. The Libertarian Party, whose candidate Andre Marrou was on the ballot in all 50 states, is the only major political group with an unambiguous and consistent committment to the reduction of government and its concomittant threats to all of our rights, including the right to privacy. -- Steve Jameson General Electric Aerospace / Martin Marietta sjameson@atl.ge.com Advanced Technology Laboratories Moorestown, New Jersey **************************************************************************** ** . . . but I do not love the sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow ** ** for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that ** ** which they defend . . . ** ** -- Faramir, "The Two Towers" ** **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ From: Stephen M Jameson Subject: Re: Credit denies millionaire due to credit report Date: 23 Dec 92 12:28:27 Organization: General Electric Advanced Technology Labs Reply-To: sjameson@atl.dnet.ge.com In article James Davies writes: >(from an AP wire service story, seen in the Rocky Mountain News 12/11/92) > >Jim Clayton, a "mobile home magnate" from Tennessee with a reported net worth >of $265 million, was recently rejected for a VISA card by the American >Association of Retired Persons. The reason for the rejection was that >there had been frequent requests for his credit report. Firms that do >business with his company often get credit reports on top officers. >(Business is apparently quite good. :-). After being informed of this, AARP >manually intervened to issue him a card. > >AARP spokesman Ted Bobrow said "One of the important things this points out >is that any consumer who is turned down for credit needs to find out why. >It could very well be a mistake." > >Apparently AARP didn't learn anything from this. > What would you have them learn? I doubt that the credit decision was made by AARP, but rather by an outside credit evaluation agency hired by them. Any formula used to evaluate an applicant will have some possibility of error, particularly since the attribute being judged, credit-worthiness, is somewhat subjective by itself. They certainly cannot personally re-check every applicant who is rejected, and can reasonably only be expected to do so when a rejectee points out what he or she feels is a mistake. I think the statement reflects the lesson that AARP, Jim Clayton, and anyone else should take from this: When you think a mistake has damaged _your_ interests, check, because you may be right. -- Steve Jameson General Electric Aerospace / Martin Marietta sjameson@atl.ge.com Advanced Technology Laboratories Moorestown, New Jersey **************************************************************************** ** . . . but I do not love the sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow ** ** for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that ** ** which they defend . . . ** ** -- Faramir, "The Two Towers" ** **************************************************************************** ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:56:22 -0500 (EST) From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" Subject: Re: Sallie Mae and SSNs I wrote: > >The problem is that Sallie Mae uses my SSN, not my daughter's, as > >the account number. I called Sallie Mae and the person on the > >other side stated that he couldn't do anything about it and that > >I should address a letter to his supervisor (naturally). David Ruggiero wrote: >Depends on the type of student loan. If this was a "PLUS" loan, it's >actually issued to your daughter but guaranteed by you, the parent. >In this case, SallieMae having *your* SSN makes pretty good sense. > >If, however, it was another kind of loan ("Stafford", "GSL", "SLS", etc.), >this isn't as easy to see. It could be that they want *your* number to >make it easier to find *her* current address if she later defaults on >the loan (parents usually being more stable and easier to trace than their Not quite accurate. I have two student loans, one a PLUS for one daughter which I am paying half for and the account number in no way resembles my SSN and neither does her account number (1/2 and 1/2 split). Sallie Mae didn't even enter into this transaction. The other one, the Sallie Mae, was originally given by Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association (TIAA) and placed on the secondary market where Sallie Mae picked it up for servicing. I don't remember it being a PLUS loan, though. Therefore, if both are PLUS loans, why does one financial institution use my SSN as an account number and the other doesn't? To be fair, though, the first one wasn't placed on the secondary market. Dave Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:03:14 -0500 (EST) From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" Subject: Privacy Concerns and the So-Called Privacy Advocates A question just crossed my mind. When Caller-ID is in the process of being instituted in an area, the privacy-mavens scream bloody murder. Yet, with the known (I suppose) wide-spread usage of SSNs as identifiers, where are they? People I talk to are surprised when I tell them that if I knew their SSN I could find out all kinds of information about them and possibly do them irreprable harm if I wanted to. Is this a mis-guided sense of "security" or what? Does it spring from the original Social Security for being a supplement to retirement funds and the general public doesn't realize just how much businesses know about one or can find out if so desired. I'm not a complete privacy freak, but I do know when to give information and when not to do so. Dave Dave Niebuhr Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973 (516)-282-3093 ------------------------------ From: John De Armond Subject: Re: UPS Digital Clipboards Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 23:02:01 GMT Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access. The Mouth of the South. allen@tessi.com (Allen Warren) writes: >I usually get a brick, wrap it in brown paper, and glue the envelope I get >from other groups on top of the brick, writing on the envelope 'Delivery >Refused'. Since the sending company must then pay the extra postage on the >brick, I seldom get a followup from a company, although one company was stupid >enough to send me two more notices, so on the third (total) notice from them, >I wrapped up about four bricks in a small box and glued the envelope on the >top of this box. I never got another notice from this company! Your recipient never sees the brick. The PO simply discards any BRM that is obviously inappropriate. There is also a cap on charges acrued to any single piece of mail, about 85 cents as I recall. If you want to return BRM, stick about 4 ounces of paper in it and mail away. The reason you didn't get a second solicitation from that company is direct mail is EXPENSIVE. Postage on a typical 4 ounce bulk mail piece is about twenty cents. A BRM (business reply mail) piece is at a minimum 38 cents for the postcard. More for added weight. Then figure in the cost of printing and packaging the promotionals. The advertiser does NOT want to mail to anyone who is not a candidate to reply. John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC |Interested in high performance mobility? Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? Marietta, Ga | Send ur snail-mail address to jgd@dixie.com | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta? Write Me for info on Dixie.com. ------------------------------ Apparently-To: mcnc.org!comp-society-privacy From: Scot Wilcoxon Subject: Re: The UPS clipboard Organization: Self Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 02:14:10 GMT >volpe@bart.nosubdomain.nodomain (Christopher R Volpe) writes: >... >Consider, also, that the signature may actually be the least valuable >piece of information in that record. How much could you tell about a >competitor if you had access to their UPS shipping records? In many >cases, even the insured value of packages is recorded. >... Then let us not hear from the radio systems which Federal Express is using. -- Scot E. Wilcoxon sewilco@fieldday.mn.org voice: +1 612-825-2607 ------------------------------ Return-Path: From: The Jester Subject: SSN & Gernuglflux! Date: 24 Dec 92 04:26:13 GMT Organization: Republicans for Sanity Before I open my mouth, can someone point me to the SSN faq. The Jester [Moderator's Note: I will send it out today, ._dennis ] -- The Jester "Damnit Jim, I'm a doctor not a mind reader!"-Bones "It what you DON'T know that counts."-Me "Work Smarter, Not Harder"-Scrouge McDucks' Dad ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V1 #119 ******************************