3 ms·

Um, the FTC says otherwise. > For consumers impacted by the Equifax breach, today’s settlement will make available up to $425 million for time and money they s

Um, the FTC says otherwise. > For consumers impacted by the Equifax breach, today’s settlement will make available up to $425 million for time and money they spent to protect themselves from potential threats of identity theft or addressing incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/07/equifax-pay-575-million-part-settlement-ftc-cfpb-states-related https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2019/07/equif... That consumer fund of $425 million was "supposed" to also cover protection from any potential incidents of identity theft. So, let's go with this pool then. Assuming there are 21,250 valid claims qualifying for the cap, is the settlement complete? There's no one left to compensate? I'd say clearly not. Are you willing to bet that only 0.01% of the breached credentials were misused? How did they even arrive at this number? Let's say we assume, it really is a number lower than that. With whatever's left, I'd be willing to bet, a significant number would not trust Equifax with monitoring anymore. Perhaps they even bought credit monitoring as a reaction to the breach. How do you compensate that? Which ever way you want to slice this, it's clearly insufficient.

harryh 7y ago
That FTC statement says exactly what I said: There is a 425 million pool. It's to be used for: 1) "time and money they spent to protect themselves from potential threats of identity theft" (the 31 million part) OR 2) "addressing incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach" (the 394 million part) And yes, at some point both pools can be exhausted at which case there will be no more money for future claims. That's how a settlement works. Since there have currently been exactly 0 incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach it might not be so far fetched to say that there will be plenty of money in the pool to cover any incidents.
- aloknnikhil 7y ago
  Your original comment, before you edited it, did not call that out. You specified the 425 million as only for people affected by the breach. And that's not what it was for. Anyhow, how do you know there have been exactly 0 incidents? Where do you even begin to trace any incident back to this breach as the cause? Claiming it as non-existent is a bit naive. The damage has been done. Your information is out there. Again, slice it anyway you want. Let's assume NO ONE has been ACTUALLY impacted. Let's go with identify theft protection. As a consumer, I don't trust Equifax anymore. Since they mishandled my data, it's perfectly valid for me to reject them and opt for another monitoring service I trust, which let's say I have to pay for. I am in the situation covering my bases because of Equifax. So, I expect them to compensate me for this service. Oh wait, there's no money left. Use our credit monitoring service or get wrecked. And this is ok? So, based on your statement, we're literally relying on a vast majority of people either opting for the credit monitoring from Equifax or not claiming any damages for the rest to receive any compensation? If that's OK, then I guess I'll stop engaging here.
  - harryh 7y ago
    There are numerous credit monitoring services you can use for free. There is no need for you to get any money to use one. I personally like CreditKarma.com
    - aloknnikhil 7y ago
      It's not about you though. People have choices. They don't trust a free service, because you more often than not end up being the product. Again, not claiming Credit Karma sells your data (on the contrary the CEO claims it's only for selling ads based on your credit report) https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_founder_of_credit_karma_ask_me_anything/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_found... But it's my choice as a consumer. Do you make all of your choices with only cost as the factor? Probably not. Or at least not when it comes to security. So, people will have their preferences. But apparently not, if you're party to this settlement.

harryh 7y ago

That FTC statement says exactly what I said: There is a 425 million pool. It's to be used for: 1) "time and money they spent to protect themselves from potential threats of identity theft" (the 31 million part) OR 2) "addressing incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach" (the 394 million part) And yes, at some point both pools can be exhausted at which case there will be no more money for future claims. That's how a settlement works. Since there have currently been exactly 0 incidents of identity theft as a result of the breach it might not be so far fetched to say that there will be plenty of money in the pool to cover any incidents.

aloknnikhil 7y ago
Your original comment, before you edited it, did not call that out. You specified the 425 million as only for people affected by the breach. And that's not what it was for. Anyhow, how do you know there have been exactly 0 incidents? Where do you even begin to trace any incident back to this breach as the cause? Claiming it as non-existent is a bit naive. The damage has been done. Your information is out there. Again, slice it anyway you want. Let's assume NO ONE has been ACTUALLY impacted. Let's go with identify theft protection. As a consumer, I don't trust Equifax anymore. Since they mishandled my data, it's perfectly valid for me to reject them and opt for another monitoring service I trust, which let's say I have to pay for. I am in the situation covering my bases because of Equifax. So, I expect them to compensate me for this service. Oh wait, there's no money left. Use our credit monitoring service or get wrecked. And this is ok? So, based on your statement, we're literally relying on a vast majority of people either opting for the credit monitoring from Equifax or not claiming any damages for the rest to receive any compensation? If that's OK, then I guess I'll stop engaging here.
- harryh 7y ago
  There are numerous credit monitoring services you can use for free. There is no need for you to get any money to use one. I personally like CreditKarma.com
  - aloknnikhil 7y ago
    It's not about you though. People have choices. They don't trust a free service, because you more often than not end up being the product. Again, not claiming Credit Karma sells your data (on the contrary the CEO claims it's only for selling ads based on your credit report) https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_founder_of_credit_karma_ask_me_anything/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_found... But it's my choice as a consumer. Do you make all of your choices with only cost as the factor? Probably not. Or at least not when it comes to security. So, people will have their preferences. But apparently not, if you're party to this settlement.