3 ms·

You realize is you ban this kind of service, fraud rates are going to multiply 10x in the EU, and new, very inconvenient barriers to fraud will be put in place.

by cm2012 3y ago

You realize is you ban this kind of service, fraud rates are going to multiply 10x in the EU, and new, very inconvenient barriers to fraud will be put in place. I'd like to see one (1) person harmed by any of the data sharing that TeleSign has done here in the history of the company.

oxfordmale 3y ago
There will be multiple persons that didn't get the loan or mortgage they applied for, as their reputation score was deemed to low due to data quality issues.
- cm2012 3y ago
  This "reputation score" means: Are you a bot or a human? It's not a credit score. And if it was, that kind of credit score improves access to credit.
  - bckygldstn 3y ago
    Only to the extent that the scores are perfect.
    - 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
      And we can only reason that they are not. As parent correctly implies, the purpose is risk reduction. A well implemented system will accept false positives, as we saw with the recent Amazon doorbell debacle.
    - ineedasername 3y ago
      Not necessarily: No Score = higher risk, higher interest. Incorrect low score = perceived higher risk, higher interest rate. Depending on how the risks of no/low score are weighted, and how wrong the inaccurate score is, a person may very well be more harmed by no score than by a low score. An inaccurate score might have to be massively off the mark to make a person worse off than no score at all. In the US for example, people with no credit history often get interest rates as high or higher than people with a relatively low credit score. Of course from a privacy & data protection standpoint this doesn't make silently and secretly profiling customers okay. The solution is probably something more like a transparent opt-in system that has easy access for the customer to review their data and decide which pieces of it are included. In the US, the balance is skewed a bit more towards secrecy, and it's not opt-in either. However you can with only modest difficulty check your credit score & information used to calculate it, and challenge parts of it that you think are inaccurate.
ThePowerOfFuet 3y ago
"The end justifies the means"? Come on.
- AndroTux 3y ago
  Sorry, but in this case it absolutely does. The alternative would be, for example, to request ID verification when signing up for a freaking TikTok account. Because that’s what you’re going to get if you prevent fraud prevention. I totally understand that most people don’t realize how big of an issue online fraud is, but believe me: it is a MASSIVE problem with a lot of unforeseen consequences. There are so many angles to fraud in online services that it’s baffling to see with what new ways scammers and fraudsters come up with every day. So yes, this is something that totally justifies the means.
  - phendrenad2 3y ago
    You're absolutely right. And if companies are not allowed to do fraud detection using reputation scores, they'll simply treat everyone as a potential fraud, and raise rates accordingly.
  - Barrin92 3y ago
    > The alternative would be, for example, to request ID verification when signing up for a freaking TikTok account What's wrong with this? When I buy booze in Germany on Amazon for example this is already how it works, you verify your age with your national ID (which has support for a "eID" schema). The big advantage is that the dedicated company doing the processing is by law required to delete all data after verification, so no commercial third party actually ever gets or can sell your identification data. That's way more secure and private than handing TikTok or other foreign companies your means of identification. We would be living in a vastly more secure world if random companies only ever got a yes/no that you initiate by a dedicated, audited actor on your soil. And it basically eliminates fraud as well.
  - celdon25 3y ago
    > Sorry, but in this case it absolutely does. The alternative would be, for example, to request ID verification when signing up for a freaking TikTok account. Because that’s what you’re going to get if you prevent fraud prevention. That sounds wonderful to me. Crack down on the shills and charlatans...
Tryk 3y ago
Right, they HAD to break the law otherwise lawlessness would be pervasive...

by cm2012 3y ago

oxfordmale 3y ago

There will be multiple persons that didn't get the loan or mortgage they applied for, as their reputation score was deemed to low due to data quality issues.

cm2012 3y ago
This "reputation score" means: Are you a bot or a human? It's not a credit score. And if it was, that kind of credit score improves access to credit.
- bckygldstn 3y ago
  Only to the extent that the scores are perfect.
  - 111111IIIIIII 3y ago
    And we can only reason that they are not. As parent correctly implies, the purpose is risk reduction. A well implemented system will accept false positives, as we saw with the recent Amazon doorbell debacle.
  - ineedasername 3y ago
    Not necessarily: No Score = higher risk, higher interest. Incorrect low score = perceived higher risk, higher interest rate. Depending on how the risks of no/low score are weighted, and how wrong the inaccurate score is, a person may very well be more harmed by no score than by a low score. An inaccurate score might have to be massively off the mark to make a person worse off than no score at all. In the US for example, people with no credit history often get interest rates as high or higher than people with a relatively low credit score. Of course from a privacy & data protection standpoint this doesn't make silently and secretly profiling customers okay. The solution is probably something more like a transparent opt-in system that has easy access for the customer to review their data and decide which pieces of it are included. In the US, the balance is skewed a bit more towards secrecy, and it's not opt-in either. However you can with only modest difficulty check your credit score & information used to calculate it, and challenge parts of it that you think are inaccurate.

ThePowerOfFuet 3y ago

"The end justifies the means"? Come on.

AndroTux 3y ago
Sorry, but in this case it absolutely does. The alternative would be, for example, to request ID verification when signing up for a freaking TikTok account. Because that’s what you’re going to get if you prevent fraud prevention. I totally understand that most people don’t realize how big of an issue online fraud is, but believe me: it is a MASSIVE problem with a lot of unforeseen consequences. There are so many angles to fraud in online services that it’s baffling to see with what new ways scammers and fraudsters come up with every day. So yes, this is something that totally justifies the means.
- phendrenad2 3y ago
  You're absolutely right. And if companies are not allowed to do fraud detection using reputation scores, they'll simply treat everyone as a potential fraud, and raise rates accordingly.
- Barrin92 3y ago
  > The alternative would be, for example, to request ID verification when signing up for a freaking TikTok account What's wrong with this? When I buy booze in Germany on Amazon for example this is already how it works, you verify your age with your national ID (which has support for a "eID" schema). The big advantage is that the dedicated company doing the processing is by law required to delete all data after verification, so no commercial third party actually ever gets or can sell your identification data. That's way more secure and private than handing TikTok or other foreign companies your means of identification. We would be living in a vastly more secure world if random companies only ever got a yes/no that you initiate by a dedicated, audited actor on your soil. And it basically eliminates fraud as well.
- celdon25 3y ago
  > Sorry, but in this case it absolutely does. The alternative would be, for example, to request ID verification when signing up for a freaking TikTok account. Because that’s what you’re going to get if you prevent fraud prevention. That sounds wonderful to me. Crack down on the shills and charlatans...

Tryk 3y ago

Right, they HAD to break the law otherwise lawlessness would be pervasive...