Identity theft

The crime of identity theft happens more often to wealthier, white, females.

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/vit16_sum.pdf

“Based on the 2016 survey, more females (13.5 million) experienced identity theft than males (12.5 million). However, males and females had similar identity-theft prevalence rates (10% each). Whites (12%) had a higher prevalence of identity theft than blacks (7%), Hispanics (6%), and persons of other races (8%). Whites and persons of two or more races (12% each) had a similar prevalence of identity theft. Persons ages 35 to 49 and ages 50 to 64 (12% each) had a higher prevalence of identity theft than all other age groups.

Also, persons in the highest income category (those in households with annual incomes of $75,000 or more, which includes 35% of all persons age 16 or older) had the highest prevalence of identity theft  (14% experienced it).”

Facebook vs. Google

I'm a big Google fan. The story of its founders is the American dream. I remember exactly where I was (at my desk at work) when the TN vet-ag librarian told me about it. I use it constantly. Facebook. Oh, not so much. Yes, I'm aware of it, but can't think of any reason to join. Sounds too much like junior high school--friends, constantly gossiping, not going out side the group, etc. Not for this gal. Although I have used it from time to time to track down people--like the teenage piano teacher I had when I was 6 years old.

Wired is in my first issues collection (my hobby), and I still subscribe because 1) it's incredibly cheap, and 2) I can read it in the car or coffee shop much easier than reading it online. The Facebook article in the July 2009 issue is something you all should read, whether you're in an online community that uses real identities and data, or you are a fan of Google for going outside your comfort zone for information.

Facebook has a 4 step plan to dominate the internet, 1) Build critical mass (200 million members who contribute 4 billion pieces of information every month; 2) Redefine search (members will turn to friends); 3) Colonize the Web (10,000 partner sites); 4) Sell targeted ads everywhere (from the data you've contributed which will target you for ads). And then when the government takes over like it did GM and Chrysler? Shazaam.

Apologies are NOT accepted!

"We regret to inform you that during the weekend of March 31/April 1 there was a criminal intrusion into a university database of current and former employees and that some of your personal data--your name, social security number, employee ID, and date of birth--has been compromised and could be misused. . . Please accept our most sincere apologies"

I first read about this in today's paper, but because it was the OSU Office of Research, I retired in 2000, and because I hadn't been notified of something that happened over two weeks ago, I figured I was safe. I was wrong. I never applied for a grant through the Office of Research, never worked there, had no reason to even think my name was in their data base. I was the co-author of an article in JAVMA in the 90s and that information may have in some way been cycled through the Office of Research by the other author if he obtained a grant. With 14,000 names hacked and thousands and thousands of faculty and staff members at OSU who get money for research, what were the chances one would be mine? I'm baffled.

"We regret that your personal information has been subject to unauthorized access due to this attack." What is it with apologies these days? People don't do anything wrong--only inanimate objects screw up. Stuff happens to stuff? Not even, "our firewall collapsed."

Two weeks after the theft of my identity from my employer's database, I'm offered a 12 month credit protection plan--but of course, I have to put my identifying information on-line. Goody goody.

354 Have you ever read the fine print?

I saw a newsletter (free) on a topic (could be anything--travel, horses, genealogy, publishing) that looked interesting. Now, I know these sites are only fronts for advertising--they provide free information on the internet or sent to my mail box, in order to collect readers, who will then click on ads, and the website receives a return on its investment. It is really just a modern magazine, which for a hundred years has been articles wrapped in advertising for subscribers whose names were freely sold to other advertisers.

Here’s the deal:

It wants my name, e-mail address, some demographics, etc. and recommends I read the disclaimer.

First it assures me that my privacy is very important to this company, and then goes on to explain how very unprivate all this is.

It doesn’t collect identifiable information unless I provide it (by subscribing).

It won’t sell or rent my information to a 3rd party.

It will only use my information to notify me of updates and for marketing purposes (that’s really pretty broad).

It isn’t responsible for the policies of websites to which it links.

It doesn’t use cookies to recognize visitors (but if I’m a subscriber, I assume I’m not a visitor?)

It will assist me by providing on-line shopping opportunities and advertising related to the information I’m reading about.

It will share aggregated research data, such as a my domain name and the Web site pages I have visited with advertisers or business partners.

Now here’s the big one:

as a general rule, it will not disclose any of my personally-identifiable information other than as set forth above except

when I specifically grant permission (like if I forget to check off not to share it) or

if it is required, such as when there is a good faith belief that the law requires it. It is that phrase, “as a general rule,” that sounds a bit squishy to me.

Advertisers or Web sites that have links to this newsletter’s web site may collect personally identifiable information about me. The information practices of the Web sites linked to this newsletter are not covered by its privacy policy.

If I make a purchase from a merchant or service provider listed on its Web site, the information obtained during my visit to the merchant or service provider's Web site - including tracking information, cookies and credit card number and contact information - is provided so that the purchase transaction may occur. Each merchant or service provider has a separate privacy and information collection practice.

There is a hosting company (unidentified) that protects the data about me that this company has collected.

I think the final statement is something about the above not being legal advice.

Everyday we give away our privacy, which is why I'm not too worried about the Patriot Act. We HAVE no private information. We gave it all away when we became enamored with the internet.

#83 High tech, high fat, low common sense

The push from the Health Information Management folks to make everything electronic in order to insure the privacy requirements of the new HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act of 1996 (August 21), Public Law 104-191, which amended the Internal Revenue Service Code of 1986) would be a bit more believable if I hadn’t been in doctors’ offices since HIPAA’s implementation in April.

The new rules require 1) standardization of electronic patient health, administrative and financial data, 2) unique health identifiers for individuals, employers, health plans and health care providers and 3) security standards protecting the confidentiality and integrity of "individually identifiable health information," past, present or future.” A full employment law for the computer folks since these systems have to be continuously upgraded.

We, the patients, have signed innumerable forms saying we’ve been informed. They’ve changed the cubicles at check-in for the waiting rooms, and built fancy stalls to separate us at the pharmacies. Our surname is no longer called out in the waiting room--too bad if your name is Bob or Bill. No more sign in sheets--you might see who arrived at 8:15. But you can’t regulate common sense apparently.

This week I was left alone after a high-tech test in a room with really fancy information equipment, the kind AHIMA wants all medical facilities to have. Up on the computer screen was a list of names, birth dates and ID numbers in the section of the alphabet for my name--records in this database were linked to the records for my testing--and everyone else’s. The password to the equipment used for my test was on a yellow-sticky on the front of the machine. Oh yes, and scattered on the counter were packaged hypodermic needles and an open package of sealed vials (didn’t recognize the medication, but someone else might).

Last spring I was in this same new, state-of-the art facility sitting by myself in one cubicle, with information about the last patient still on the screen. When paper files were being used, I don’t recall ever seeing someone else’s file.

I also noticed that the staff working directly with patients in the back rooms where testing is done, were walking around the halls eating snacks out of open bags. When it was my turn, I was ushered into another area where the technician had her breakfast coffee and muffin on her desk. On my way out, I noticed a lovely staff lounge, with sink, microwave and seating, but why use it when you can eat all day long at your desk while manipulating carefully shielded patient data?