161–169 of 169 posts
"Identity Theft" shouldn't even be a thing. Someone falsifies documents and takes out a loan or something that should not have been approved. That's bank fraud and should be an issue entirely between the fraudster and the lender/bank. Somehow banks have re-named it from "bank fraud" to "identity theft," deftly shifting responsibility onto some unrelated third party, who now has to deal with it. "Your identity was sto…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This goes well beyond mistakes, it is utterly absurd that the judge would not look at this more closely absent a defendant in a country on the other side of the planet, especially when this kind of money is involved. It's not a $50 parking ticket. Imagine yourself in their situation, having to defend a legal case in court in a place where you've never been to that has no bearing on anything you've done in your life.…
Yep. This is fundamentally unjust and classic bully boy behaviour by American courts and terrible corporate citizens.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. This is fundamentally unjust and classic bully boy behaviour by American courts and terrible corporate citizens.
The American courts really do try to get stuff right, not bully random foreigners for no reason.
This person has been dragged into an expensive American civil case .
She was clearly contactable as the corps had found her yet she was contacted with what any person who has any cybersecurity training would dismiss as a spam email.
The jurisdiction is a place she has never been.
This should case should have been thrown out, instead she got a summary judgement.
In Australia she could automatically be awarded costs at trial. Here she's going to have to counter sue.
And last but perhaps most significantly, it's clearly not her. Sure, we don't hear about any of the ones they knock back, but this shit would not even get close to getting up in a good legal system.
"Identity Theft" shouldn't even be a thing. Someone falsifies documents and takes out a loan or something that should not have been approved. That's bank fraud and should be an issue entirely between the fraudster and the lender/bank. Somehow banks have re-named it from "bank fraud" to "identity theft," deftly shifting responsibility onto some unrelated third party, who now has to deal with it. "Your identity was sto…
This is true to a large extent but having worked in resolving "identity theft" I can say that it is complex.
In a place like the UK the requirements for a bank loan are pretty stringent but here in Australia they are much much lower and people hate friction. Authentication is a hard problem. Knowing someone's creditworthiness is a hard problem. There are a also many of people out there who are willing to claim "identity theft" has occurred to mean that it is complicated.
Most of the time for people whose identities had been stolen it was fairly easy to remove based on the most cursory evidence (which often I only had access to because I had access to air gapped data that was kept for far longer than the 7 years it was meant to be kept).
The status quo exists because it inconveniences just few enough people and is an acceptable amount of risk to the powerful. One side of politics will denounce anything that looks after the interest of both these groups as too much "red tape" and the other will denounce it as "discriminatory".
For comparison I look to the family violence measures we introduced here in the last decade. It was a battle which took years of firmly but politely refuting the opposing ideas "family violence victims should never have to justify themselves to a credit provider" against "credit providers should never increase their risk without having charged more up front".
A compromise model was found where the credit providers effectively pay for the losses but in reality they just charge it back to their customers. Right now paying for identity theft is a lottery. In future it's going to be internalised up front. This will be good for the victims but for the rest of us its an increased cost.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The American courts really do try to get stuff right, not bully random foreigners for no reason.
Questions of jurisdiction, evidence and costs all suggest otherwise. This person has been dragged into an expensive American civil case . She was clearly contactable as the corps had found her yet she was contacted with what any person who has any cybersecurity training would dismiss as a spam email. The jurisdiction is a place she has never been. This should case should have been thrown out, instead she got a summar…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s entirely possible to do this digitally and have it working seamlessly. In Denmark we have a thing called “MitID” (MyID) which is basically a government login and which you can use to sign and also login to all kinds of things that need to confirm your identity (e.g. Phone subscription, taxes, 3DS verification for Credit Card transactions, etc). It’s essentially 2FA, works by the site sending a confirmation to an…
And then...your govt login is stolen and you are back to square one with "identity theft". National ID systems are such nonsense it is appalling there are people stupid enough to think this is a Good Thing. Easy is NOT always better. The best things in life are definitely not free.
Several trips to a government office, had to get a new set of ID, and wait weeks, all while there was important communications waiting for me on one of the dozens of subordinate government sites which were time sensitive but no one could provide me by an alternative method....
I am just waiting to hear the first story of someone going to prison because they couldn't get the message the tax man sent due to the tax man not letting them read the message....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
ALPRs are everywhere these days. "Very common" is probably understatement in this situation.
Then some statistics shouldn’t be hard to find. I can’t find anything stating this is “very common”. I guess as a rough metric for “very common” let’s say on a similar level to heart attacks. Quite rare still but common enough that you could be justified in calling it very common. So 850,000 cases per year.
So what do you do in a situation like this? I mean really? Total punisher mode, make other judges think twice and sacrifice yourself?
Realistically, she'll cross America off the list of "countries to ever visit" and then worry about it the rest of her life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_extradit...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then some statistics shouldn’t be hard to find. I can’t find anything stating this is “very common”. I guess as a rough metric for “very common” let’s say on a similar level to heart attacks. Quite rare still but common enough that you could be justified in calling it very common. So 850,000 cases per year.
First page of google: 93 percent of police departments in cities with populations of 1 million or more use their own ALPR systems