Date: Mon, 29 Mar 93 15:56:10 EST Errors-To: Comp-privacy Error Handler From: Computer Privacy Digest Moderator To: Comp-privacy@PICA.ARMY.MIL Subject: Computer Privacy Digest V2#029 Computer Privacy Digest Mon, 29 Mar 93 Volume 2 : Issue: 029 Today's Topics: Moderator: Dennis G. Rears Virginia voters & Social Security Numbers Rights of non-citizens Controlled Items law on ss.no (Privicy Act) Re: Social Security Numbers as ID Re: police asking arrestees for SSN Court Bans SSN Disclosure 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]. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 10:49:49 EST From: Jeremy Epstein Subject: Virginia voters & Social Security Numbers In a copyrighted story, the March 24 Washington Post includes an article describing a ruling by the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals that Virginia's law requiring a SSN to register to vote is unconstitutional. The decision is being hailed by civil rights groups as a victory for the 4 million Virginians who are registered to vote. Because voter roles are public information, registering to vote is equivalent to publishing your SSN. The judges wrote "The harm that can be inflicted from the disclosure of a Social Security Number to an unscrupulous individual is alarming and potentially ruinous.... The statute at issue compels a would-be voter in Virginia to consent to the possibility of a profound invation of privacy." A spokesperson for the Virginia Attorney General's office said they have not decided whether to appeal the ruling. The case was brought by Marc Alan Greidinger, a 29-year-old Fredricksburg lawyer (who represented himself) after he was denied the right to register to vote because he refused to reveal his SSN. Greidinger said that during the lawsuit he gave his SSN who was able to get his current balance on two loans, last payment dates, and university transcripts. It is not believed that the ruling will affect other state agencies (such as motor vehicles) which require SSNs, because those are not considered public records. The article mentions help from the Public Citizen Litigation Group (one of the Ralph Nader organizations), and quotes the legal director for the ACLU, which was not involved in the case. --- I guess the "good guys" won one! ------------------------------ From: KitchenRN@ssd0.laafb.af.mil Subject: Rights of non-citizens Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 10:25:00 Susanna Elaine Johnson writes: >Being a Canadian citizen I don't have an SSN. So I know what >happens if the local gestapo asks for one and you don't have it. > >You go to jail for a minimum of three days while they >"investigate" you. Note that this isn't an arrest - you haven't >been charged, merely "detained". > >Of course, if they are able to show that you are NOT a US citizen >then the above mentioned three day limit does not apply for the >following reasons: > > (1) Not being a US citizen you have no civil rights, so > the police can do anything they want to you with > impunity. This isn't true. Just because you aren't a US citizen, this in no way precludes you from having the same rights as a citizen as far as the way the police are supposed to treat you. If they told you this, they were lying. If they just treated you differently, they were not following the US Constitution. You might have grounds for a lawsuit . . . (I am not an attorney.) > (2) They can, if sufficiently annoyed, turn you over to Immigration. > You can rot in an INS jail for months while they verify your > status. > (3) It can take weeks to do a worldwide make through > Interpol. Meanwhile you sit in jail. After all, > you MIGHT be some sort of international terrorist... Again, this isn't true. If you have an attorney, and the attorney can give them proof of your status (green card, etc.), then they have no grounds for turning you over to the INS, nor for holding you just because you don't have an SSN. If you're legally in the country, they should let you go, unless they have grounds to hold you for a crime. > If I sound bitter about your land of liberty it is because I speak >from experience. All I can say, Anna, is if this was your treatment, I apologize. This is *not* the way non-citizens are supposed to be treated. Rick Kitchen kitchenrn@ssd0.laafb.af.mil ------------------------------ From: Richard Pierson Subject: Controlled Items Organization: Bellcore Date: Thu, 25 Mar 93 20:27:05 GMT Just noticed something today while filling up the ole commuter car today, a sign was posted on the diesel pump of the selfserv I use in PA. "All customers purchasing diesel fuel MUST fill out a 'receipt' BEFORE fuel will be dispensed". I went inside and asked about this "receipt" and was shown a form, from the Govt, that had Name,address,lic#, Plate#, gallons, price, phone#. The attendent had no idea what it was for but said she had to fill it out using the purchasers license for info. Is this a federal or state thing, the receipt had no ID as to who it was from and I looked for a form number all over it. This receipt is required whether cash or card is used. She said that she thinks the owners put it in with the state tax money they submit monthly for fuel taxes. This form also gets validated on a printer at time of purchase. Is diesel now a controlled item ? -- ########################################################## There are only two types of ships in the NAVY; SUBMARINES and TARGETS !!! #1/XS1100LH #2/10/10/92 Richard Pierson E06584 vnet: [908] 699-6063 Internet: fist@iscp.bellcore.com,|| UUNET:uunet!bcr!fist #include My opinions are my own!!! I Don't shop in malls, I BUY my jeans, jackets and ammo in the same store. ------------------------------ From: vdifrancis@msuvx2.memst.edu Subject: law on ss.no (Privicy Act) Date: 27 Mar 93 22:26:41 -0600 Organization: Memphis State University It is illegal in the US for a government agency to require a person to give a ss.no. in order to get a drivers-licence, or any other privilege,right,or benefit. Thats the law, See 5 USC 552a, Im copying from public law 93-579-Dec. 31,1974. Sec.7.(a)(1) It shall be unlawfull for any Federal,State or local government agency to deny to any individual any right,benefit or privilege provided by law because of such individual's refusal to disclose his social security account number. (2) the provisions of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not apply with respect to- (A) any disclosure required by Federal statute,or (B) the disclosure of a social security number to any Federal,State, or local agency maintaining a system of records in existence and opperating before January 1, 1975, if such disclosure was required under statute or regulation adopted prior to such date to verify the identity of the individual. (b) Any Federal, State,or local government agency which requests an individual to disclose his social security account number shall inform that individual whether that disclosure is mandatory or voluntary, by what statutory or other authority sush number is is solicited, and what uses will be made of it. From: Dan Hartung Subject: Re: Personal Telephone Numbers Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 02:35:12 GMT chonoles@sde.mdso.vf.ge.com (Chonoles Michael Jesse) writes: >Many plans for future communications systems have the concept >of a personal telephone numbers. Some simple versions of these are >already available , AT&T's 700 service, BellAtlantic ContactLines, etc. > >What would the consequencues be of every person having one telephone >number that would be used for work, home, vacation, etc. Oy. I can see the simplicity from the caller's end, but can you imagine the fuss for the callee? Checking in everywhere, and what if you forget -- you might miss an important call! Then there's the problem of getting junk phone calls no matter where you are -- work, vacation, taking off from LaGuardia .... I sure don't like the idea of creditors calling me at work, either. Or people from work being able to get you at home when you don't want them to. For me, I like the idea of being able to initiate contact when I'm on vacation or weekend -- dial up, get email, etc.; but being skypaged when I'm halfway up a ski lift is not a pretty picture to me. ;-) >Some suggestions were that you could have your social security number be your >telephone number, but any string could be used. Ewwwwwww. Just give it out to anyone, why not? So what that it doesn't even have a checksum. And the SSN mixups that happen al the time today -- no problem, just say "sorry, wrong SS Number" .... -- The Presidential Towers complex here | Dan Hartung | Ask me in Chicago is bounded by four streets: | dhartung@chinet.chi.il.us | about Jefferson, Adams, Monroe ..... | Birch Grove Software | Rotaract! and Clinton! ------------------------------ Return-Path: Date: Sun, 28 Mar 93 23:02:59 -0600 From: Jeffrey C Lerman Subject: Re: Social Security Numbers as ID In a recent posting, the question was asked: As a quick question (which has probably already been answered. CA requires SSN for getting a driver's lisc. now.... Is that legal? (funny word) Is that in violation of other (national?) laws? They will refuse to issue the lisc. if you dont provide the information. Thanks Jonathan and you answered: [Moderator's Note: It is now legal for a state to do this. ._dennis ] I read in the paper the other day (in the NYT, I beleive, since that is the only paper I read) that someone just won an appeal in a court case in VA relating to this. They were suing the state of VA for requiring an SSN on driver's license appications; they were successful. I no longer remmerb the gory details; perhaps someone else does? -Jeff ------------------------------ From: Noel Witt Subject: Re: police asking arrestees for SSN Organization: Florida State University ACNS Date: Sat, 27 Mar 1993 17:35:57 GMT Apparently-To: comp-society-privacy@bikini.cis.ufl.edu Jonathan Thornburg writes: > In article Wm Randolph Franklin > writes: > | [...] in some (most?) places, the police want an > | SSN when they arrest you. There was a local case a few years back, > | where someone was charged with, approx, obstruction of governmental > | administration for refusing. He beat that charge, but it probably took > | some work. > > Gee, I wonder what happens if you don't have an SSN? Not everyone > arrested by American police is an American, certainly most foreign > tourists won't have SSNs... > > Or alternatively, what if you have one but don't know it and don't > have the card with you? Have you forgotten your rights as an american citizen ???? When you are arrested you have the right to remain silent !!! What this means is that you don't have to give your SSN, Name, Address or anything else requested of you..... Simply demand all your rights as an american citizen and demand legal councel.... Then hope your legal councel remembers that you have rights, and defends them!!! ------------------------------ Organization: CPSR Civil Liberties and Computing Project From: Dave Banisar Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1993 17:21:41 EST Subject: Court Bans SSN Disclosure Court Bans SSN Disclosure PRESS RELEASE March 26, 1993 "FEDERAL APPEALS COURT UPHOLDS PRIVACY: USE OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER LIMITED - - - - CPSR Expresses Support for Decision" A federal court of appeals has ruled that Virginia's divulgence of the Social Security numbers of registered voters violates the Constitution. The Court said that Virginia's registration scheme places an "intolerable burden" on the right to vote. The result comes nearly two years after Marc Greidinger, a resident of Falmouth, Virginia, first tried to register to vote. Mr. Greidinger said that he found it nearly impossible to obtain a driver's license, open accounts with local utilities or even rent a video without encountering demands for his Social Security number. Mr. Greidinger told the New York Times this week that when the State of Virginia refused to register him as a voter unless he provided his Social Security number he decided to take action. He brought suit against the state, and argued that Virginia should stop publishing the Social Security numbers of voters. This week a federal appeals court in Richmond, Virginia ruled that the state's practice constituted "a profound invasion of privacy" and emphasized the "egregiousness of the harm" that could result from dissemination of an individual's SSN. Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), a national membership organization of professionals in the computing field, joined with Mr. Greidinger in the effort to change the Virginia system. CPSR, which had testified before the U.S. Congress and the state legislature in Virginia about growing problems with the misuse of the SSN, provided both technical and legal support to Mr. Greidinger. CPSR also worked with Paul Wolfson of the Public Citizen Litigation Group, who argued the case for Mr. Greidinger. In an amicus brief filed with the court, CPSR noted the long-standing interest of the computing profession in the design of safe information systems and the particular concerns about the misuse of the SSN. The CPSR brief traced the history of the SSN provisions in the 1974 Privacy Act. The brief also described how the widespread use of SSNs had led to a proliferation of banking and credit crime and how SSNs were used to fraudulently obtain credit records and federal benefits. CPSR argued that the privacy risk created by Virginia's collection and disclosure of Social Security numbers was unnecessary and that other procedures could address the State's concerns about records management. This week the court of appeals ruled that the state of Virginia must discontinue the publication of the Social Security numbers of registered voters. The court noted that when Congress passed the Privacy Act of 1974 to restrict the use of the Social Security number, the misuse of the SSN was "one of the most serious manifestations of privacy concerns in the Nation." The Court then said that since 1974, concerns about SSN confidentiality have "become significantly more compelling. For example, armed with one's SSN, an unscrupulous individual could obtain a person's welfare benefits, or Social Security benefits, order new checks at a new address, obtain credit cards, or even obtain the person's paycheck." The Court said that Virginia's voter registration scheme would "compel a would-be voter in Virginia to consent to the possibility of a profound invasion of privacy when exercising the fundamental right to vote." The Court held that Virginia must either stop collecting the SSN or stop publicly disclosing it. Marc Rotenberg, director of the CPSR Washington office said, "We are extremely pleased with the Court's decision. It is a remarkable case, and a real tribute to Marc Greidinger's efforts. Still, there are many concerns remaining about the misuse of the Social Security number. We would like to see public and private organizations find other forms of identification for their computing systems. As the federal court made clear, there are real risks in the misuse of the Social Security number." Mr. Rotenberg also said that he hoped the White House task force currently studying plans for a national health care claims payment system would develop an identification scheme that did not rely on the Social Security Number. "The privacy concerns with medical records are particularly acute. It would be a serious design error to use the SSN," said Mr. Rotenberg. Cable News Network (CNN) will run a special segment on the Social Security number and the significance of the Greidinger case on Sunday evening, March 28, 1993. The Court's opinion is available from the CPSR Internet Library via Gopher/ftp/WAIS. The file name is "cpsr/ssn/greidinger_opinion.txt". The CPSR amicus brief is available as "cpsr/ssn/greidinger_brief.txt". CPSR is a national membership organization, based in Palo Alto, California. CPSR conducts many activities to protect privacy and civil liberties. Membership is open to the public and support is welcome. For more information about CPSR, please contact, CPSR, P.O. Box 717, Palo Alto, CA 94302, call 415/322-3778 or email cpsr@csli.stanford.edu. ========================================= ------------------------------ End of Computer Privacy Digest V2 #029 ******************************