When it comes to personal defense there are two schools of thought.

One is arm yourself, or take training (karate, judo, aikido) so you can defend you and yours.  Dropping into the crane or grasshopper stance just might deter a none-to-bright mugger.

The other is to run.  Head for the hills, the nearest exit or the rear of the bar.  You might get away unscathed or the thugs may settle for someone less fleet of foot.

Millions of feds are facing the self-defense dilemma these days.  Since the dual OPM hacks data on an estimated 22 million people, touched by the government in some way, is believed to be in the hands of an unnamed foreign power that rhymes with China.  The people are current or former federal workers, government retirees, some people who applied for government jobs or security clearances.  Like most of the people reading this!

While most of the pros are looking at the national security implications of the breach, there is the ordinary people side too.  The government has promised limited help to help folks avoid — or at least be aware of — attempts to use their credit.

A column last week  looked at some of the options feds have to protect their credit. They include regular credit monitoring which many prefer, to a credit freeze, which individuals can control

The column prompted lots of comment, including this from an IRS employee who has been there, done that, got the hack-T shirt.  He writes:

 “A colleague at IRS suggested that as a past victim of identity theft (someone apparently opened a cell phone account in my name) I may have something to contribute to your timely discussion of OPM credit protection for federal employees on Federal Report.

“Since neither credit monitoring nor a credit freeze is defined in your article, and since there is no direct link to the relevant show by Shirley Rooker, someone unfamiliar with the difference between the two may incorrectly conclude that a credit freeze is of relatively limited value.  As a past victim of identity theft, the freeze and thaw are both free for me, but I assure you I would gladly pay the nominal fees of $5 to $10 depending on one’s state for this service, because it stops everyone (including me, Visa, Comcast, etc.) from opening new accounts in my name.  Credit card companies already monitor for suspicious activity on existing accounts, notify the cardholders, and temporarily suspend accounts until they receive a reply, so I see little value in OPM providing credit monitoring services for that sort of fraud.

“What you would need to investigate specifically is whether the existing or proposed OPM-sponsored credit monitoring service will send the federal employees notification of every new account of any type opened in their name (since they will presumably not have a credit freeze in place).  Opening a new credit, utility or service account is neither fraud nor suspicious activity, so I doubt the credit monitoring service would provide this sort of notification.  The services would likely only notify the subscribers once the accounts have been declared delinquent and gone into collections, resulting in bad credit. This is likely to happen years after the subscribers have discovered the fraud themselves, after requesting their free annual credit report (from the 3 credit reporting agencies themselves, in writing, if they are savvy, or from annualcreditreport.com if they aren’t, or from freecreditreport.com if they are suckers and want to pay for another subscription).  By then the “monitoring” has kicked in far too late.  It is like having a private policeman who comes to your door every time you are raped, beaten, or murdered.

“As to who benefits, the credit reporting agencies benefit from people not requesting a freeze because they get a fee every time someone checks your credit.  I used to get unsolicited credit card offers galore; now I get none, not because my credit is bad but because no one can pay the credit reporting agencies to check my credit without my consent.  Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion do not want OPM to provide freezes for all federal employees or even inform us of the option because they will lose significant amounts of money.  Just follow the money if you are doing an investigative report.

“In addition, the credit card PIN numbers Rooker refers to are useless for security purposes because U.S. banks still use them only for cash advance withdrawals, not for point of sale purchases, unlike European banks.  U.S. banks have no plans to change this policy. It doesn’t matter whether your U.S. credit card has a chip or just a magnetic stripe.  Any thief who can sign a piece of paper and steals your computer chip credit card can use it make a purchase because it only requires a signature, not a PIN entry.  And if they just steal the card number, expiration date, and 3-digit access code, they can make any number of online purchases without the physical card because again, a PIN is not required.  I know of no way to put a password on a US credit card — Rooker seems to be referring to checking and savings accounts, which are already PIN protected at ATMs.  I am pretty confident credit monitoring will not solve this problem.

        Read more: Mike Causey

“Credit monitoring cannot stop or repair identity theft; nor can writing to an alleged creditor for “verification” once a violation has occurred, since the creditor and the credit reporting agencies will automatically “verify” whatever is on their erroneous records; there is currently no legal requirement for them to conduct any research.  I recovered my identity only after threatening the alleged creditor with a criminal lawsuit after conducting months of legal research on specific violations of federal and state law perpetrated by the alleged creditor’s collection agency and their attorney.  They fixed my credit simply because they were afraid, not because they were convinced I was innocent.  I had refused their opportunity to sign their affidavit of identity theft because it required that I waive my rights to obtain any itemized paperwork related to the alleged debt (which they still hadn’t sent me, only a bill) or pursue any action against them. ” — C.S.

Nearly Useless Factoid:

By Michael O’Connell

Sixty-two percent of Americans own 10 or more T-shirts.

Source: Duane Svec Advertising

Copyright © 2024 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.