3 ms·

Or, you know, maybe stop talking to homeowners, victims or not, and start talking to people who make locks and safes. Actual subject matter experts rather than

Or, you know, maybe stop talking to homeowners, victims or not, and start talking to people who make locks and safes. Actual subject matter experts rather than targets. CEOs, at best, will be proxies for whatever security personnel they have on staff and we have no way of evaluating the credentials of those security staff. At worst, they'll be advocating for policies that reduce their exposure/costs at the expense of greater overall fraud costs. The senate should use their own knowledgeable proxy in this case. NIST has already shown itself capable of creating security standards of a reasonable quality. Run another public competition for a national ID system capable of replacing SSN and let real security professionals propose (and then debate) a way out of the current mess. Senators can then codify the results of that process into law.

adventured 9y ago
> Or, you know, maybe stop talking to homeowners, victims or not, and start talking to people who make locks and safes. Actual subject matter experts rather than targets. You want to talk to the burglars. They already know the locks and safes and likely know even better how to break them than the creators. In this case, you want to talk to hackers. The reason Congressional panels do things like this, is to put on a good show. They like to be seen dealing with higher level matters/people as a demonstration of stature.
- djrogers 9y ago
  > In this case, you want to talk to hackers. No - the problem here isn’t hacking, it’s allowing a fixed, easily learned number be a sole proof of ‘identity’. SSNs were used in identity theft long before hackers.