ID Task Force Letter

Download PDF
Federal Identity Theft Task Force
Federal Trade Commission
Office of the Secretary
Room H-135 (Annex N)
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20580

As Chair of the U.S. Public Policy Committee of the Association for Computing
Machinery (USACM), I welcome the request for comments by the Federal Identity Theft
Task Force. Identity theft is a growing trend affecting thousands of Americans each year.
It requires a national discussion at the highest levels of government in order to devise
appropriate policies to reduce its occurrence. Members of our committee have been
involved in issues of digital identity, information security, cyber crime investigation, an
other topics for many years. Recently I provided expert testimony before the committee
investigating the 2006 Veterans' Administration data breach. Our experience and stud
has shown us that where identity theft is concerned, two major issues go hand in hand:
computer security and privacy.

Well-publicized instances of personal data exposures and misuse have demonstrated the
threat of identity theft and corresponding challenges to the adequate protection of
privacy. Personal data -- including copies of video, audio, and other surveillance -- needs
to be collected, stored, and managed appropriately throughout every stage of its use by all
involved parties. However, protecting private, personal data requires more than simply
ensuring effective data security. It requires approaching personal data as a steward rather
than as a custodian.

As we have detailed in our statement on privacy
(http://www.acm.org/usacm/Issues/Privacy.htm, and included with these comments), a
holistic, proactive approach to ensuring privacy is necessary, and is an important part of
helping minimize the risk of identity theft. This approach gives people more control over
their personal data and has the salutary effect of enhancing the early discovery of identity
theft. Following the guiding principles of data minimization, consent, openness, access,
accuracy, security, and accountability and our associated recommendations will go a long
way toward ensuring privacy of stored data and reducing the risk of identity theft. It
would help make data custodians into data stewards.

DATA SECURITY AND DATA BREACH NOTIFICATION POLICIES

A uniform national policy could harmonize company practices for protecting personal
data across the United States, but such a policy, if it is not sufficient for protecting
personal information, could also undermine consumer protection. We recommend that
strong national standards be developed that are based on widely-accepted international
data security standards. For example, ISO 17799 on information security management
and ISO 18033 on data encryption are comprehensive and detailed security standards that
have been adopted by the international community. These are the basis for developing
data security plans, but ultimately any data security standards should be technologyneutral
and based on the highest possible protections for personal data. Further,
notification is often an effective method for ensuring that companies continually improve
their security practices. Clearly if there is a breach, regardless of the risk to consumers, a
company's security system should be hardened to deal with the vulnerabilities. A
national breach notification standard could provide more transparency about ineffective
or effective security practices. Last year Congress tried to establish a national breach
standard based on varying degrees of risk. At that time, we expressed concern that a riskbased
standard would not provide the level of transparency necessary to ensure protection
of personal data. In short, implementing lowest common denominator standards for data
security or notification is inefficient and raises the possibility of doing more harm than
good.

USE OF SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBERS

Regarding the use of Social Security numbers (SSNs) in data records, the use of SSNs is
risky and can cause (and has caused) problems for protecting privacy and reducing
identity theft. If they are to be used, there should be clear guidelines limiting and
auditing access to this data. Furthermore, SSNs should be used only as an identifier, and
not for authentication. Possession of a SSN is not enough to confirm, or authenticate, that
a person is the individual assigned to that SSN. Simply because someone has a security
pass (identification) does not mean that they are the person who was issued that security
pass. They would be authenticated when an authorized agent confirmed that the person
presenting the pass is the person assigned to that pass.

Another way to limit access to the SSN (and by extension minimize the risk of identity
theft) would be to store the SSN in a separate file linked by some unique, generated
number. This decreases the relative risk in holding SSN's in databases by placing it in a
less-frequently accessed file, which can also have separate, more stringent, access
controls than other personal information in the database. This same practice should apply
to any substitutes for a SSN, if they are used in the same ways, and with the same
frequency, that SSNs are currently used.

In addition to our recommendations on privacy, we are enclosing a fact sheet on identity
and authentication. The general lack of understanding of these principles has indirectly
led to many of the instances of identity theft and privacy exposure. We recommend that
the Task Force be clear in its use of terms, and help to educate companies and
government about these concepts.

NATIONAL IDENTITY FILES

While the development of national identity files to help restore identity to victims of
identity theft has a valuable policy goal in mind, it appears to pose the same kind of risks
for identity theft faced by other databases. If this idea were to move forward, it should be
limited to those individuals who have had their identities stolen already. Another concern
is how to authenticate victims of identity theft over a long period of time.
As the attached fact sheet indicates, it can be difficult to authenticate people based on
personal data. With such a system it is important to be very clear on the risks and
resources involved, or these files may become another target for identity theft - a very
tempting one as these files are intended to serve as the ultimate verification of identity.

Thank you for considering our views. The work of the Task Force is an important step
toward increased efforts that help reduce identity theft and encourage more secure,
private and reliable computer information. If USACM can provide any clarification to
these comments, or answer any other technical questions, please do not hesitate to contact
our Public Policy Director, Cameron Wilson, at 202-659-9711 or
cameron_wilson@acm.org.

Sincerely,
Eugene Spafford, Ph.D.
Chair
U.S. Public Policy Committee of the Association for Computing Machinery


About ACM and USACM

With over 80,000 members worldwide, The Association for Computing Machinery is an
educational and scientific society focused on advancing computing as a science and a
profession. USACM serves as the focal point for ACM's interaction with U.S.
government organizations, the computing community, and the U.S. public in all matter of
U.S. public policy related to information technology.

Related Articles

Global Technology Policy Newsletter – March 2017
ACM PUBLIC POLICY HIGHLIGHTS ACM provides independent, nonpartisan, and technology-neutral research and resources to policy leaders, stakeholders, and the public about public policy issues, as drawn from the deep technical expertise of the computing community. Apply for the new A ...Read More

  • (Posted on 12-Mar-17)
  • ACM Joint Task Force on Cybersecurity Education Grabs Spotlight at U.S. Congressional Hearing
    The ACM Joint Task Force on Cybersecurity Education seized the spotlight during a congressional hearing on “Strengthening U.S. Cybersecurity Capabilities” on Capitol Hill on February 14, 2017. The hearing before the House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittee on ...Read More

  • (Posted on 18-Feb-17)
  • Global Technology Policy Newsletter – February 2017
    ACM PUBLIC POLICY HIGHLIGHTS ACM seeks to educate policymakers, the computing community, and the public about policies that will that foster and accelerate innovations in computing, computing education, and related disciplines in ways that benefit society. ACM Statement on U.S. E ...Read More

  • (Posted on 12-Feb-17)
  • ACM Sponsors Data Sciences Education Roundtable at the U.S. National Academies of Sciences
    ACM is sponsoring a new 3-year initiative by the National Academy of Sciences on data science postsecondary education. A series of roundtable discussions will bring together representatives from academia, industry, funding agencies, and professional societies to explore the trans ...Read More

  • (Posted on 17-Jan-17)
  • Global Technology Policy Update – December 2016
    ACM PUBLIC POLICY HIGHLIGHTS Cybersecurity Education and Research in Europe – The ACM Europe Policy Committee released a policy white paper “Advancing Cybersecurity Education and Research in Europe.” Committee Chair Fabrizio Gagliardi recently presented the find ...Read More

  • (Posted on 12-Dec-16)
  • Global Technology Policy Update – October 2016
    ACM PUBLIC POLICY HIGHLIGHTS Computer Science Education and Research in Europe – ACM Europe Policy Committee members will be attending the European Computer Science Summit in Budapest, Hungary on October 24-26, which features programs on the challenges and opportunities in ...Read More

  • (Posted on 09-Oct-16)