top | item 15212497

Equifax Lobbied to Kill Rule Protecting Victims of Data Breaches

893 points| Dowwie | 8 years ago |ibtimes.com | reply

167 comments

order
[+] Top19|8 years ago|reply
Wow if anything this is quite worse than the article says.

You can read Equifax's original letter in all of its Orwellian double-speak: https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=CFPB-...

It's absolutely shocking to me how many times they use the words "serve the public interest".

The sell-out that wrote that letter btw is this guy: https://www.cov.com/en/professionals/s/david-stein

[+] maxxxxx|8 years ago|reply
Fun fact: Obama's attorney general, Eric Holder, works at the same firm. These guys are the embodiment of the revolving door.
[+] Top19|8 years ago|reply
oh man even worse this guy used to work in regulation for the government as part of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Such a clear case of "regulatory capture", or the process where former employees of regulatory agencies leave to go reveal all their thinking and decision making tactics to the highest bidder.
[+] smsm42|8 years ago|reply
Why you call him a "sell-out"? He seems to be professional consultant. His main argument seems to be that CFPB does not have legal right to enforce the regulations he is talking about. That may be true or false - I have no idea, for that one needs to be a lawyer specializing in regulation law and parse the documents establishing CFPB and all accompanying regulations and caselaw. Which is way beyond my abilities, and I suspect, most of people here. But how it is "Orwellian"? He also raises a very correct argument that considering only benefits of successful class action and not the costs of the litigation and the fallout for both consumers and credit industry is just wrong. I mean, if you win $10 from successful lawsuit but would be forced to pay $20 more next time you need a credit check (numbers are just an invented example, of course), then this setup won't be worth it for you.

Again, his point may be wrong - maybe benefits of class actions are much larger than the costs - but this point is certainly in no way is "Orwellian". And if he is right, avoiding such regulation would definitely be in the public interest, in a very direct sense of the term. We have tons of regulations which serve as nothing more than a feeding ground for unsavory opportunistic plaintiff lawyers, with no benefit for purported victims (which get peanuts while lawyers are getting millions, and often the lawyers just buy plaintiffs for minuscule sums in order to mass-file lawsuits) and huge costs for everybody else. Last thing we need is more of these.

[+] samstave|8 years ago|reply
>>>David Stein advises clients on retail financial services, credit reporting, financial privacy, payments, fair lending, and technology and e-commerce issues. He assists banks, non-bank lenders, consumer reporting agencies, payments and technology companies, and their vendors with regulatory, compliance, supervision, enforcement, and transactional matters.

Notice hw he in no manner of speak "assists" any of the consumers/users of said services?

This guy is a shill POS.

[+] VeronicaJJ123|8 years ago|reply
Is using words like "sell-out" for a professional doing his job consistent with HN policies?

This is a genuine question and not a rhetorical one.

[+] sillysaurus3|8 years ago|reply
The sell-out that wrote that letter btw is this guy:

I don't think it's a good idea to post someone's personal information in such a flippant way. He's not a public official and the whole point here is to witch hunt him. It comes up with his name, phone number and email address.

[+] late2part|8 years ago|reply
Perhaps the world would be a better place if Equifax went out of business. The other two members of the oligarchy could easily shoulder the load.
[+] wfo|8 years ago|reply
Or just delete all 3 from the earth, physically destroy all of their data storage media and let people make loans the way they always have for millennia, without three unaccountable private behemoths stealing and hording private data on every citizen then charging them to see/access/protect it, then cutting costs around security and getting all of it stolen. They do not need to exist and their services are a net negative on society.
[+] nielsbot|8 years ago|reply
Maybe entrust this function to a government agency? A least they wouldn’t be in the business of selling your information—i assume that happens in some fashion under the current system but maybe someone can clarify?
[+] foobiekr|8 years ago|reply
there is no reason to believe the others are better.
[+] smsm42|8 years ago|reply
Less players in already highly monopolized business is better? How exactly?
[+] Twirrim|8 years ago|reply
There's more than just 3 credit agencies, it's just that those three are the most reliable of them for credit reports. Given all the complications people have with even those three, it really doesn't say much for the rest of the industry.

The odd thing is, I never had to worry about this stuff in the UK. There's no notion of a credit score or centralised credit agencies that I needed to worry about. Most loan etc interactions take place with your existing financial institutions who already have your information on record.

[+] stephengillie|8 years ago|reply
Were a blockchain used to replace this industry, how would we compensate the miners? Would this be a good use-case for Etherium and Gas?
[+] ransom1538|8 years ago|reply
Question. Can't we just let this company die? Do we really need a new law created by congress (EG HIPAA 2.0). Wont this just destroy the ability to create startups quickly? I understand it will help lawyers get fat and happy, but enforcing 'privacy' laws would be a trolling circus.
[+] samfisher83|8 years ago|reply
Do I really want a startup doing this stuff? Iterate fast and break things? I would rather just have a heavily regulated industry with a lot of checks and balances handle very important data like this. Why could you even access the core databases from the front end? Why isn't the data on completely separate server where all queries are completely scrubbed and verified?
[+] g051051|8 years ago|reply
What do you mean, "let it die"? Do you honestly think there's even a shred of possibility that Equifax would go out of business?
[+] umanwizard|8 years ago|reply
> Wont this just destroy the ability to create startups quickly?

Why does this matter to anyone but startup founders?

[+] pmiller2|8 years ago|reply
Well, I think if you compromise the identities and credit files of 150m+ Americans, "full disgorgement of revenue" is a fair punishment.
[+] KGIII|8 years ago|reply
I wonder if this act can be used in court to demonstrate intent to remain negligent? The idea being that they lobbied for this because they had decided to not invest in better security.
[+] justinjlynn|8 years ago|reply
This type of behaviour shouldn't be surprising at all. Corporations are, on the average, amoral -- a result of human group behaviour. As with wild animals, one doesn't get mad at them for following their instincts -- yet, one shouldn't hesitate to carry a gun lest they themselves become lunch.
[+] transitionnel|8 years ago|reply
Thanks for the grounding simile.

Everyone gives something to take part in and benefit by society. Corporations form, and seem to refund to their members all that they gave and occasionally more. We do not measure the externalities well, only the benefits. An externality estimator would be a great economic tool, does anyone know of one?

[+] kartan|8 years ago|reply
I will like to know what's the ethical standards of the people that are trying to push for this legislations. Do they realize that they can be victims themselves of this kind of abuse? I guess that it's the tragedy of the commons. They can suffer the consequences, but they are ripping all the benefits.

When I say the Ferengi* in Star Trek, I found it hilariously unrealistic. Nowadays the possibility of corporations with rights but without responsibility is a scary possible future. Reality can surpass fiction.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferengi

[+] glasz|8 years ago|reply
so i have been sort of monitoring this equifax thing. yesterday or the day before i was thinking "let's see what the aftermath brings to light"...

let's reflect for a moment: biggest leak of personal data of us citizens - right after the opm debacle. the same company funds strategies detriment to its customers.

i bet everybody feels like it can't get any worse.

i'm not very old, limited experience but i will predict, brace yourselves, this will go on and on. _nothing_ will change because people don't fucking care and the minority who does care does not have the electorial power it needs to change this system.

i'm waiting for the same thing to happen in germany. it's even worse here because virtually only one company has the monopoly over private credit ratings. everybody is annoyed and _nobody_ cares. we have major elections this month and all those sheep will vote safe.

this is going to be fun. good luck over there, friends.

[+] jimjimjim|8 years ago|reply
that place is evil.

Mister Burns style evil.

evil should be punished not rewarded.

(i am already familiar with the phrases: all corporations are like that. everyone is doing it.)

[+] whataretensors|8 years ago|reply
I had my identity stolen 10 years ago. 6 months ago I finally had the last of it wrapped up. I hope. It was a miserable experience that costs a ridiculous amount of time, money, and effort to clean up. And it seemed completely random.

This breach is likely worse than anyone can predict. It could lead to a near unlimited amount of identities for organized crime groups.

To illustrate, my wait times on the phone to the IRS was usually between 1-3 hours(during off-peak seasons too).

At this point it might be worth scrapping the social security system and switching to private keys.

[+] wallabie|8 years ago|reply
Boy, the IBTimes has always been a terrible place to read articles, especially with its autoplaying videos, but now when you scroll down (after having stopped the video of course) it inexplicably jumps to the lower right corner of the screen and then PULLS the article to the top of the screen where the video used to be. So while you're reading and scrolling, the article just jumps away from you and you lose your place.

Incredible. How anyone thought this is good web design is beyond me. Then again, IBTimes has always been a really shitty place for journalism overall.

[+] lefstathiou|8 years ago|reply
I selfishly prefer that we limit the damages that can be sought from businessss by victims of cyber crime. I don't have the resources and capability to fight against state sponsored hackers, neither does the NSA, any major corporation or anyone on HN. It would be nice to know that I won't be risking jail or bankrupting my company by bringing my services to market. The call to arms to punish these companies can have far reaching ramifications on the cost of services and ones willingness on the margin to build them.
[+] emodendroket|8 years ago|reply
Well you can't say lobbying doesn't have great ROI.