On TechRepublic: 12 tech terms that make you sound old
BNET Business Network:
BNET
TechRepublic
ZDNet
TalkBack 13 of 16:
Next »
« Previous
Tough Call
My first thought is how did someone allow a laptop to be stolen? Do these people just leave them unattended on a sidewalk and go on a coffee break?
I wouldn't automatically assume the motive for the theft is to acquire sensitive personal information. My first thought here is it was probably just a thief looking for a quick few bucks or a crack-head looking to trade it for a few rocks or something along those lines. And, yes, the thief, if caught, should be held accountable for his actions as should anyone that chooses to use the information for personal gain or harm to others.

Whether the company should be held liable for this is another thorny issue. This isn't quite like someone stealing your car to rob a bank. This information is extremely sensitive and has the potential to result in harm to many people. Does liability apply here? Possibly. Depends on the whether the company was negligent in protecting the information. Do you think protection of information this sensitive requires more than reasonable care? Does this rise to the level of public interest that it should be considered strict liability?

Ultimately this will end up in front of an appellate court somewhere. If not this case then another. For far too long companies have been routinely collecting more personal information than required for the stated purpose. What possible reason could these people have for needing a social security number? That is something companies are required to justify before asking for. People never question it. Of course, I do. Too many times some company wants my SSN and when I asked the justification for it they simply attempt to blackmail me. Give it to us or you do not get what you want. I ususlly tell them...well, off topic here.

Perhaps its time the various legislative bodies around the country should take a look at making this strict liability. Probably won't rise to that level since the possibility of bodily injury resulting is virtually non-existant. They do need to do something to make companies aware of the need for extraordinary care with sensitive data since the potential for harm is so great. Perhaps companies careless with personal information should, at a minimum, be held liable for legal costs often incurred when restoring the reputation, credit rating, etc to the level it was before the loss of the information. You cannot be careless in other actions and escape liability this easily. Why should this be an exception.

So, at the end of the day, I think they should all be held accountable for their actions...The thief for the theft in criminal court, anyone using the information for personal gain or harm to another in both criminal and civil court and the company that was negligent in failing to take necessary precautions to adequately protect the information from theft in civil court.

>>>The blood bank will no longer require Social Security numbers from its donors, and has revised procedures for handling computer hardware and other sensitive equipment.<<<

Then why were they asking for that information to start with? Curosity? Habit?

Nothing like the threat of financial loss to make companies rethink the need for collecting sensitive personal information they want and people start being more careful with that information.
Posted by: AmusedAtItAll   Posted on: 12/22/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

More Steps To Protect Identity Need To Be Taken NOW  andyhayes1 | 12/21/04
Protect Identity Need To Be Taken NOW  trg13 | 12/22/04
Ok someone help me here  Squawkbox | 12/21/04
We have already seen that if a man made it  bjbrock | 12/21/04
Good Post  Jeff Spicoli | 12/21/04
See ya proved my point from other stories like this  Squawkbox | 12/21/04
Guilty is guilty  Real World | 12/22/04
Of course the thieves should be held responsible  Squawkbox | 12/22/04
This is another example of IT users not  bjbrock | 12/21/04
I'm not sure I agree  rapson | 12/22/04
Identity Theft  trg13 | 12/22/04
This is basic carelessness  Protector | 12/22/04
Tough Call  AmusedAtItAll | 12/22/04
Reasonable expectation  Squawkbox | 12/22/04
The central blood bank requires SSN  mathandmetal | 12/22/04
OPPS, my mistake.  mathandmetal | 12/22/04

What do you think?

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

advertisement
Click Here
advertisement

Meet Doc

  • Here to help you with your Document Management Needs
  • Doc is an enigma. Born to a Russian ballerina and a German electrical engineer, he grew up in various locations in the United States. He’s seen the insides of more brands, versions, and generations of printer and printer-related hardware than almost anyone.
  • To learn more about this mysterious figure check out his blog on ZDNet and his Workspace on TechRepublic. You’ll be glad you did.
  • Produced by
    ZDNet and