D10, HW3, WP3 Draft

Jared Zucker
Mr. Devon Adams
English 102 – 7891
WP#3 Draft
11/01/2007

Identity Theft

Identity theft is a continuously escalating crime, perhaps some of you have been victims of it. In the early 90’s it was not too uncommon to get mugged walking down the street, having your driver’s license stolen, a couple of credit cards, or maybe even your Social Security Card if you were gutsy enough to carry that on you. In today’s society, this has gone even a step further. Identity theft over the Internet is vastly becoming one of our most common crimes. Family members of mine have been victims of identity theft, much like most of yours probably have been as well. What can the United States Federal Government put in place to aid in the fight of identity theft?

The only way to truly fight crime, is by putting in place some sort of restriction here and there to prevent the crime. This is where the true controversy comes into place. Some people would rather things such as the internet be practically on lockdown than have to really worry about crimes like identity theft over the internet. Others would rather the U.S. Government leave the internet alone because it is all a form of freedom of speech and should not be regulated. So, what should the U.S. Government do? This is where the controversy gets twisted and complicated.

“In December 2003, the Internet Fraud Complaint Center (IFCC) was renamed the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) to better reflect the broad character of such criminal matters having a cyber (Internet) nexus. The 2006 Internet Crime Report is the sixth annual compilation of information on complaints received and referred by the IC3 to law enforcement or regulatory agencies for appropriate action. From January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2006, the IC3 website received 207,492 complaint submissions. This is a 10.4% decrease when compared to 2005 when 231,493 complaints were received. These filings were composed of fraudulent and non-fraudulent complaints primarily related to the Internet.” (IC3). According to the IC3, 4447 of those complaints were in Arizona alone in 2006. Two percent were identity theft alone. However, 71.1% of those reported a monetary loss, with a medium loss of $1374.19. Other crimes such as credit card fraud and check fraud had higher numbers, but usually have some sort of correlation with identity theft after excessive use.

Some agree the government needs to step up and help fight the battle of identity theft over the Internet. However, there are also a group of people who think the government should be left out of the Internet all together because it is an invasion of their privacy. If the government steps in to protect the internet, they will have to protect more than just identity theft. For instance, if the government were to lockdown websites so they had to have a special key issued out by the government to be able to sell products online, this would pose a threat as to who is the one responsible for whether one business is truly more legit than another. According to YouDebate.com, “The First Amendment prevents the government from imposing, or from coercing industry into imposing, a mandatory Internet ratings scheme. Libraries are free speech zones. The First Amendment prevents the government, including public libraries, from mandating the use of user-based blocking software.” This means that websites and such should not be philtered out which is one way the government could potentially help prevent identity theft over the Internet. There should be a higher standard to authorize merchants to sell products online. It should be tougher to retain an SSL (Secure-Socket-Layer) and have to be approved by some kind of government agency before you are allowed to sell your products over the Internet. Anyone can purchase an online store and be running within six hours, which is mainly the time it takes to setup the actual store, not the authorization side of it. This is unacceptable and just makes it that much easier to commit a crime of identity theft over the Internet.

One way to also help prevent identity theft in general, would be first for all credit cards to be required to be protected by a 4-8 digit pin number. This would help cut down the number of credit cards stolen and used just simply using a signature. People are always on the go and always want a quicker way to purchase something, proven by Visa’s new Express Pay where you just hover your card over the credit card processing machine and it automatically authorizes you. No signature or pin number needed for entry. With new technology like this, it only makes it that much easier to continue on with identity theft. The government has the power to help regulate things like this if they really wanted to.

A school I was doing a work study program through ended up getting burglarized in the middle of the night. They smashed the windows and stole the computers in the room. The computers that were stolen had all the personal information of many students involved in this program, I was one of them. My Social Security number was stolen, and now I have to have an ongoing fraud alert on my credit report. My brother-in-law was mugged in Los Angeles once, where his whole wallet was stolen. Ten years later, he has a maxed out credit card of $25,000 spent in a state he has never even been to, where the person even had a cell phone in his name. It took him over a year to get everything cleared out and to prove he had been a victim of identity theft. When my parents first moved out here, they also became victims. The investigation took almost three months, and during this time their checking account had to become frozen since that is where the theft was from. My father had direct deposit from his work, and with all his money in his checking account, he was left with nothing until his next pay day which could not be direct deposited because the account was frozen. You can see how this can create an instant hard ship and is never fun to go through. After the investigation the account was finally unfrozen and had to be moved over to a new account. Because of issues like these, the government needs a quicker way to authorize who is the true person. This gets complicated and cloudy because of the authenticity forged documents can attain. Maybe they do have the resources to quickly obtain who the true John Doe is but just not enough people to work through the long queue provided.

LifeLock, a company that specializes in protecting identity theft, guarantees your identity and will reimbursement you up to one million dollars if you are a victim of identity theft while a client of theirs. They are so sure of themselves, the CEO puts his Social Security number all over moving vehicles and all over his website. Most of the ways they protect clients are steps everyone can take to prevent identity theft. They even list these methods and steps on their website, just comparing themselves to an oil change specialist. Why do it yourself when you can have someone do it for you? Todd Davis, the CEO, says you need to: set fraud alerts on your credit, be removed from those pre-approved credit cards and another junk mail, and order your annual credit report. These are all steps to follow to help protect you from identity theft. According to Davis, the pre-approved credit cards and other junk mail is the most common way identities are hijacked. Of course, the government could put these in place for everyone in America knowing that if you do not yourself you are very susceptible to identity theft. However, it seems doubtful they will do that.

Even though the controversy, I feel the government has to take action and step in. If we were to let the Internet not be regulated, we would have even more crimes than we do now, ones not even linked to identity theft. There is always a new story out about child molesters trying to meet new young girls online or something of that sort. If not for the government stepping in on situations like that, the number would be even greater. We need to have a happy median of the government getting involved but also staying back, however we are far from that point as of right now. Higher standards must be required by the government when allowing merchants to do ecommerce. In the end, like with everything, you are your most reliable source. You must follow the steps in preventing your own crime, becoming a victim of identity theft.

Works Cited:

“Annual Reports.” Internet Crime Complaint Center. 2007. IC3. 20 Sept. 2007

.

Davis, Todd, Jim Greener, and Chini Krishnan. "Identity Theft Protection." Lifelock. 2006. National Crime Prevention Council. 20 Sept. 2007 .

Desai, Jenny. "Tricksters Populate Our Internet Landscape." Science & Spirit 18.1 (2007): 65. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Mesa Community College, Mesa. 20 Sept. 2007.

.

FBI – Cybercrime. FBI. 2007. U.S. Federal Government. 3 Sept. 2007 .

"Internet Censorship Debate and Poll." YouDebate.com. 20 Oct 2007

.

Katel, Peter. "Identity Theft." CQ Researcher 15.22 (2005): 517-540. CQ Researcher Online. CQ Press. Mesa Community College Library, Mesa, AZ. 13 Sept. 2007 .

NCL’s National Fraud Information Center/Internet Fraud Watch. National Consumers League. 2007. National Consumers League. 3 Sept. 2007 .