Identity Theft - Trends And Issues For Online Customers - Coursework Example

IDENTITY THEFT By Name Course Instructor Institution City/State Date Table of Contents IDENTITY THEFT 1 Table of Contents 2 Executive Summary 3 Introduction 4 Theory and Concepts 4 Trends 5 Key Findings / Discussion 6 Case Study 8 Recommendations and conclusions 9 References 11 Executive Summary Identity theft has become the top legal setbacks in the current digital age since host of hacker as well as scammers steal people private data/information, driving license numbers, credit card numbers, and also bank account numbers. So, identity theft does impact not only victims, but also companies like financial institutions that maintain their customers and workers private information. Moreover, compromised systems are still the key threat to internet security given that they are used to lift-off various security attacks like distributing malware, identity theft in addition to spamming. This report draws on current literatures and various other sources to evaluate what is known concerning identity theft as well as what can be done to prevent it. Conventionally, privacy infringement has been seen as offensive actions by certain transgressors who bring about direct harm to victims. Victims of privacy infringement often experience discomfiture, psychological suffering, or fill their reputations have been damaged. Traditionally, the law responded when the deepest secrets of a person were exposed, when repute was tainted, or home was attacked. From the traditional point of view, privacy is everyone’s’ right, and this is so in the contemporary society where everyone has a right to privacy. The report is about Identity Theft, it offers an overview of trends and issues of identity theft for online customers, businesses, banks and governments. Fundamentally, as it will be evidenced in the report, the increased utilization of the internet offers various forms of manipulation opportunities like identity theft, where web accounts are accessed by hackers by means of the internet. Identity Theft Introduction Basically, privacy protecting commences with its conceptualisation, so there is need to comprehend the nature of privacy issues so as to resolve them. As it will be argued in the report, to prevent identity theft, there is need to architecturally understand the emerging privacy as part of the bigger legal and social structure. Therefore, privacy protection has to concentrate not just on penalties as well as remedies, but also on shaping the architectures. Statistically, consumer identity theft in 2005 led to consumer and corporate losses of almost $56 billion U.S. dollars with almost 30 per cent of identified identity thefts brought about by breaches of corporate (Romanosky et al., 2008, p.2). A data breach according to Munton and McLeod (2011, p.161) takes place when individually recognisable information like the name as well as credit card or social security number is unintentionally lost or stolen maliciously. Such breaches may lead to losing lots of records, resulting in identity theft and associated felonies. Many countries have tried to reduce such felonies by espousing laws for data breach disclosure that need companies to inform clients when their private information has been stolen. Increasing globalisation and non-existence of cyber borders offer a ripe setting for identity thieves to operate effectively both domestically and globally (Finklea, 2014, p.1). Enforcement of federal law is therefore throwing down the gauntlet hackers who have several identities. The report critically analyses issues and trends of identity theft. Theory and Concepts Identity theft has turned out to be a serious problem in contemporary society costing organisations, people as well as governments lots of money in the prosecution, detection, control, and prevention. Critical elements of a Government strategy for managing identity theft include: regulation, public awareness and vigilance programs, management of identity, information protection, training and education, justice systems and law enforcement, alliances and collaboration, procedures of reporting, and support for the victims (Jamieson et al., 2014, p.1). The legislation enactment as an instrument of strategic policy to mitigate identity theft as well as associated crime such as money laundering is an important feature of present and future governments’ strategies. With suitable legislation, companies such as government institutions can act with augmented confidence of laws and policy to help in remediation, recovery of lost data and prosecution of the criminals (Jamieson et al., 2014, p.1). Normally, identity theft causes are not recognized, but it is a crucial consideration when assessing the maximum possible effect of laws regarding data breach disclosure. Persuasively, these laws cannot reduce or prevent identity thefts that are within the firm’s control (Romanosky et al., 2008, p.8). In a randomized survey carried out for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) by Synovate in 2007, it was established that 12 per cent of identity thefts took place because of interaction with companies, 56 per cent of the victims failed to understand the cause. In a different survey of 505 victims performed in 2006 by Javelin Research, Romanosky et al. (2008, p.8) cites that 16 per cent believed the theft was within the control of the companies. Boyer (2008, p.35) posits that, once the hackers seize the private information, they utilize it differently; for instance, they can withdraw money from victim’s bank accounts, or apply for new services. Trends Moreover, they can use the victim’s driver’s license, social security number, or passport to get medical benefits or identification. Survey by The Centre for Identity Management and Information Protection (CIMIP) in 2007 of more than 500 Secret Service cases on identity theft revealed that almost 80 per cent of hackers utilized the identity of victim to get and use cash or credit, 22 per cent utilized the identity to camouflage their own identity, while almost 20 per cent use for application of vehicle loans (Romanosky et al., 2008, p.8). Based on Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2010, almost 6.6% of all households in U.S had at least one victim of one or more forms of identity theft. Regrettably, the number of families with no less than one victim of identity theft heightened by 23 per cent between 2005 and 2007, and also the number of families that experienced theft of credit card number rose by 31 per cent in the same period (Office for Victims of Crime, 2010). As cited by Langton and Baum (2010), during the 2008 data collection of identity theft victimization as part of the regular Survey for National Crime Victimization, it was established that 3.3% of households had no less than one victim of various form of identity theft. Whereas the Internet has assisted in information dissemination concerning identity theft and how people can elude victimization, it has as well helped hackers and criminals to get crucial information regarding people’s identities. Sadly, legislation has failed to keep pace with the increasing platforms used by criminals like cyberspace. In Australia, and other countries such as US and UK, no inclusive law at national level exists that by and large needs notification of security breaches, including private information (Jamieson et al., 2014, p.12). However, in the US the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act needs notification of information violations, but the act is applicable inly in financial institutions. Key Findings / Discussion Under the conventional paradigm, protections of privacy defend against all forms of offences, and it entails remedies and rights for all offences, and in particular instance, criminal penalties for the offenders. Thus, the traditional paradigm is volatile since it waits for felonies to happen so as to react (Solove, 2003, p.5). Basically, privacy is integrally personal, and the contemporary right to privacy acknowledges the individual’s independence. The Restatement of Torts posits that rights protection by the privacy invasion action is a right of everyone, odd to people whose privacy has been invaded (Schwartz & Peifer, 2010, p.1938). Based on this viewpoint, privacy is enforced through offering people with solutions to invasions of privacy. For instance, all privacy torts, as cited by Solove (2003, p.5) provide a remedy for certain damage brought by criminals. The tort of intrusion protects individuals from deliberate invasion into their ‘seclusion or solicitude’ or ‘his personal concerns or affairs. The tort for private facts disclosure to the public offers people with remedies for revealing matters in public regarding their personal private lives. Besides that, the false light tort protects people from false information distribution while the appropriation tort protects against utilization of name or resemblance for the benefit of a different entity or person. As stated by Lane et al. (2014, p.123), the privacy torts intend to redress certain problems brought about by privacy violations such as identity theft. Majority of contemporary privacy issues are naturally systematic, and they are an outcome of information flows, taking place between various entities. In this case, there is no single criminal; since it involves lots of actors, with infinite range of aims as well as motives, all doing dissimilar things at different times. Previous studies established that government agencies and organisations that are proactive as well as put framework for identity fraud into practice and are governed by good policy have numerous benefits as compared to those who do not (Jamieson et al., 2014, p.6). Foremost, business organisations are displaying their readiness to combat the insider form of attack considering that the insiders are top perpetrators of damages. So, by embedding a zero tolerance rule for insider acts of identity crime, the organisation will as well be severing the insider-planned crime connection. Besides that, the course from organisational leadership to manage, measure, as well as alleviate the identity theft problem may be a crucial cultural change ; thus, conveying encouraging organisational results. According to Jamieson et al. (2014, p.6), the enactment of management models phases, stages, and steps by business organisations, is more certainty granted by governmental strategic components for identity crime management, like legislation. Nowadays, much of contemporary information collection takes place in haphazardly; this according to Solove (2004, p.66) creates difficulty since problems related to aggregation muddies the use of privacy law in a particular instance. Independently, a certain piece of information can fail to be extremely invasive of a person’s privacy, but when such pieces of information are joined together, they can create a comprehensive description of a person, in what Solove (2004, p.66) terms as digital profile. The whole can be superior as compared to the totality of the parts. This phenomenon takes place for the reason that information, which is not revealing alone may somewhat be revealing when combined with other information pieces. Presently, in Australia, identity theft is not regarded as a federal transgression, but there are several offence provisions, which may be utilized to take legal action against criminals who unlawfully use attained private information. This can be found in the Criminal Code, and in other federal legislation parts like the Migration Act of 1958 and the Financial Transaction Reports Act of 1988 (ALRC, 2009). In 2000, the Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs in the House of Representatives decided that the identity theft offences to be included in the Criminal Code (ComLaw, 2005). Case Study In 1994, as cited by Allison (2003, p.1), Robert Hartle’s private information (such as social security card, driver’s license, as well as birth certificate) and name was used by an identity thief to purchase merchandise that included motorcycles (2), pickup trucks (3), and a doublewide trailer home and also opened credit accounts. Mr Hartle was not aware of the problem until he started getting calls from collection agencies for debt collection and recovery. Eventually, the identity thief had accumulated more than $100,000 U.S dollars in debt under the victim’s name. Yet, this was merely the start of the nightmare since Hartle had a challenging task of repairing his tainted credit history and restoring his reputation. His dilapidated credit connoted that he would not in the future be offered any loan, mortgage, or other types of credit. So as to repair the financial harm done to his name, Hartle was compelled to undergo the wearisome undertaking of convincing creditors that he had not feloniously gained from them. He afterwards had to resolve the wrong entries concerning his credit report in the three U.S Credit Bureaus. This is not the only instance identity theft, because in 1996, Delaware bank phoned Mari Frank, a California-based lawyer asking why she had not paid the outstanding balance of $11,000 on the Toys R Us credit card. Upon inquiring where the billing statements were sent by the bank, Frank was given a different address almost 80 miles far from where she was located (Allison, 2003, p.1). In this case, a female acting as a private detective stole personal information of Mari Frank in 1996 that included her social security number, driver’s license number, and birth date. The identity thief spent almost $50,000 in debt under the name of Frank. Even though the criminal was ultimately detained, Frank was left with the burden of restoring her reputation. Akin to Hartle, Frank managed to victims resolve the issue bearing the related cost of additional $10,000 in expenses. Recommendations and conclusions Governmental efforts to create laws for preventing identity theft should balance the challenging needs of businesses, victims, and victims, government agencies, and still remain adequately flexible to handle future issues regarding identity theft. Basically, policymakers can question the extent to which the role of the federal government must be in prevention of identity theft. This is centred on the verity that identity theft is normally done to expedite other frauds as well as crimes and (such as document fraud, credit card fraud, as well as employment fraud). Subsequently, strict government laws against identity theft can prevent proactively other crimes. Policymakers when considering the role of the federal government in stopping identity theft, they should also take into account the role of the government in preventing related offenses (Finklea, 2010, p.22). Besides that, the parliament should take into account the various means accessible to stop identity theft and assess the role of the federal government in effecting them. Promising means of preventing identity theft such as securing data both in public and private sector, as well as enhancing the consumer authentication processes should be espoused. Legislation offering high punishment cannot halt all perpetrators of identity theft and other cyberspace attacks, particularly those from criminal-related organisations such as the Anonymous (a global network of hacktivist and activist entities). Still, proper resourcing of the justice system as well as law enforcement can help deter, stop, detect, and regulate identity theft through hardening of the target. Certain groups will have to concentrate on identity theft in the Internet platform where the professional technical skills are needed in evidence collection and forensics to support due process within the system of justice. People should protect their social security number and stop carrying their social security card in their wallet. If their health plan aside from Medicare or another card utilizes their social security number, the users must ask their company to give them a different number. Besides that, people must combat phishing, where scammers send emails to victims pretending to be government agencies, stores or banks so as to get their personal information. In this case, people should avoid responding to any request of verifying their account password or number. Besides that, people must involve themselves in safe password practices, and stop sharing private information in social networking sites. They should also protect their computer from spies, hackers, and viruses, and also must read the privacy policy and search for prospects to bail out of information sharing. Moreover, people should stop ask for free credit report annually from all their national credit bureaus. In conclusion, In conclusion, Identity theft is a felony promoted by advanced and causal offences like simulating, counterfeit, imitation, and credit fraud and terrorism, and it is prevalent in the financial industry, particularly banks. Combating identity theft needs both governmental and technological resolutions, considering that it cannot be achieved in virtual online setting. References Allison, S.F.H., 2003. A case study of identity theft. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Florida: University of South Florida. ALRC, 2009. Criminalising identity theft. [Online] Available at: http://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/12.%20Identity%20Theft/criminalising-identity-theft [Accessed 16 March 2015]. Boyer, A., 2008. The Online Identity Theft Prevention Kit: Stop Scammers, Hackers, and Identity Thieves from Ruining Your Life. Atlantic Publishing Company. ComLaw, 2005. Criminal Code Act 1995. [Online] Available at: http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2005C00524 [Accessed 16 March 2015]. Finklea, K.M., 2010. Identity Theft: Trends and Issues. Collingdale, PA: DIANE Publishing. Finklea, K., 2014. Identity Theft: Trends and Issues. CRS Report. Congressional Research Service. Jamieson, R., Land, L., Stephens, G. & Winchester, D., 2014. Identity Crime: The Need for an Appropriate Government Strategy. Forum on Public Policy. NSW, Australia: University of NSW University of NSW. Lane, J., Stodden, V., Bender, S. & Nissenbaum, H., 2014. Privacy, Big Data, and the Public Good. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press. Langton, L. & Baum, K., 2010. Identity Theft Reported by Households. [Online] Available at: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/ascii/itrh07st.txt [Accessed 16 March 2015]. Munton, J. & McLeod, J., 2011. The Con: How Scams Work, Why You're Vulnerable, and How to Protect Yourself. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Office for Victims of Crime, 2010. Identity Theft and Financial Fraud: Growing Trends in Identity Theft. [Online] Available at: http://ojp.gov/ovc/pubs/ID_theft/growingtrends.html [Accessed 16 March 2015]. Romanosky, S., Telang, R. & Acquisti, A., 2008. Do Data Breach Disclosure Laws Reduce Identity Theft? Research Paper. Pittsburgh, PA: Heinz School of Public Policy and Management Carnegie Mellon University. Schwartz, P.M. & Peifer, K.-N., 2010. Prosser's Privacy and the German Right of Personality: Are Four Privacy Torts Better than One Unitary Concept. California Law Review, vol. 98, no. 6, pp.1925-88. Solove, D.J., 2003. Identity Theft, Privacy, and the Architecture of Vulnerability. HASTINGS LAW JOURNAL, pp.1-46. Solove, D.J., 2004. The Digital Person: Technology and Privacy in the Information Age. New York: NYU Press. Read More