The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, act as legal, financial or credit advice; instead, it is for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not be current. This website may contain links to other third-party websites. Such links are only for the convenience of the reader, user or browser; we do not recommend or endorse the contents of any third-party sites. Readers of this website should contact their attorney, accountant or credit counselor to obtain advice with respect to their particular situation. No reader, user, or browser of this site should act or not act on the basis of information on this site. Always seek personal legal, financial or credit advice for your relevant jurisdiction. Only your individual attorney or advisor can provide assurances that the information contained herein – and your interpretation of it – is applicable or appropriate to your particular situation. Use of, and access to, this website or any of the links or resources contained within the site do not create an attorney-client or fiduciary relationship between the reader, user, or browser and website owner, authors, contributors, contributing firms, or their respective employers.
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. Compensation is not a factor in the substantive evaluation of any product.
“The Administration proposal helps businesses by simplifying and standardizing the existing patchwork of 47 state laws that contain these requirements,” according to a White House press release.
[Article: Playstation Invasion-Child Identity Theft is No Game]
But some privacy advocates criticized the measure, saying it prevents states from passing tougher measures in the future. If passed in its current form, the administration’s proposal “actually weakens existing state laws already in force on this subject,” says Eduard Goodman, chief privacy officer at Identity Theft 911, Credit.com’s sister company.
The proposal keeps the current definition of sensitive personally identifiable information as someone’s name and Social Security number. Some privacy experts have said that the definition fails to take into account things like email addresses, usernames and geolocation data, which can help thieves steal identities.
A company would not have to tell consumers about data breaches if it collects sensitive information about fewer than 10,000 a year, if the company’s own risk assessment finds little risk that a data breach has harmed people, or if the lost data was encrypted.
[Identity Theft: Free Identity Risk Score and profile from Credit.com]
Image: Leonid Mamchenkov, via Flickr.com
October 19, 2023
Identity Theft and Scams
May 17, 2022
Identity Theft and Scams
May 20, 2021
Identity Theft and Scams