Home > Identity Theft > 1 in 5 Americans Have Had an Email, Social Account Compromised

Comments 0 Comments

Growing numbers of Internet users say they worried about the amount of their personal information that is online, and most have at least tried to cover their digital tracks, according to a new survey by the Pew Internet and American Life Project.

Fully 50% of Internet users told researchers in the survey, taken during July, that they are concerned about their digital footprint, up dramatically from 2009, when only 33% said they were worried.

“There is consistent evidence that the level of concern is growing,” the report says. “It has increased among all groups, and is especially pronounced among Internet users ages 65 and older and those living in households earning less than $30,000.”

The findings seem to be a reversal for consumers. From 2006 to 2009, concern about the digital breadcrumbs dropped from 40% to 33%, according to Pew.

“Maybe back then people were excited about social networks and sharing, but clearly the pendulum has swung the other way. This is the highest number we’ve ever recorded,” said Lee Rainie, Director of the Pew Research Center’s Internet Project and an author of a report on the survey findings.

The Dark Side of the Internet

The survey found a stunning number of Internet users — 1 in 5 — have suffered an e-mail or social media account hijacking, and 1 in 8 adults said they’d been stalked or harassed online. Roughly the same number said they have had their Social Security number or banking information stolen.

Non-financial identity theft, such as a Facebook or e-mail account takeover, might sound less serious than having a credit card account number stolen, but a bout of Facebook or Twitter hijacking can be much more difficult to fix, and it also can lead to numerous other hassles. Facebook impersonations often lead to convincing fraud attempts, for example. In one infamous case last year, the Twitter account belonging to the Associated Press was hacked and fake Tweets sent, causing temporary stock market chaos. (If you’re worried you may become an identity theft victim, you can monitor your credit for free using the free Credit Report Card.)

The concerns have driven Net users to take steps to preserve their anonymity — 86% said they had deleted cookies, removed online posts, used fake personas or taken other measures to hide their breadcrumbs. Website publishers should take note; 36% os participants said they’d declined to use a website because it required them to enter their real name.

Roughly 1 in 5 said they took these steps to avoid certain family members or former lovers, but 28% said they were trying to hide from advertisers — almost the same number (33%) who said they were trying to hide from hackers.

Still, they are realistic about the impact of such steps. A firm majority (59%) said it was not possible to be anonymous online; 66% said U.S. laws are “not good enough” to protect Americans’ privacy. Of note to politicians — support for stronger privacy laws is a remarkably bi-partisan issue. Tea Party supporters, conservative Republicans, self-described moderates and liberal Democrats all gave Pew similar responses.

“Users clearly want the option of being anonymous online and increasingly worry that this is not possible,” Rainie said. “Their concerns apply to an entire ecosystem of surveillance. In fact, they are more intent on trying to mask their personal information from hackers, advertisers, friends and family members than they are trying to avoid observation by the government.”

Oversharers Also Concerned

The survey was taken not long after dramatic revelations by Edward Snowden detailing electronic surveillance programs conducted by the National Security Agency, but Rainie said there didn’t appear to be much of an NSA effect in the survey. Only 5% of those surveyed said they’d take steps to hide digital tracks from the government.

In a seeming contradiction, users who had shared the most personal information about themselves online were also more likely to take steps to hide it. Sara Kiesler, another report author and professor at Carnegie Mellon University, said this actually makes sense. Privacy is not an all-or-nothing proposition to this group, she argues.

“Our team’s biggest surprise was discovering that many Internet users have tried to conceal their identity or their communications from others,” Kiesler said. Carnegie-Mellon helped fund the research. “It’s not just a small coterie of hackers. Almost everyone has taken some action to avoid surveillance. And despite their knowing that anonymity is virtually impossible, most Internet users think they should be able to avoid surveillance online — they think they should have a right to anonymity for certain things, like hiding posts from certain people or groups.”

Image: Design Pics

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team