Credit Karma to launch free ID monitoring following Equifax hack
reuters.com
reuters.com
"I Introduced the Freedom from Equifax Exploitation (FREE) Act with Senator Brian Schatz. Our bill gives you more control of your data. Companies like Equifax make billions selling access to your data without your consent, then charge you if you want to stop them. It's nuts. The FREE Act lets you freeze – and unfreeze – access to your credit file at no cost. It's like a free Do Not Call list for your credit data. The idea behind our bill is simple: Equifax doesn't pay you when they sell your data. You shouldn't have to pay them to stop selling it."
"I also reintroduced the Equal Employment for All Act to prevent employers from asking job applicants for their credit histories. Credit reports are already riddled with errors. The Equifax hack will make it worse. Inaccurate reports shouldn't hurt your job chances. Bad credit doesn’t make you a bad employee. Workers should compete on the merits, not on their credit scores."
https://www.facebook.com/senatorelizabethwarren/posts/847975...
Press Release: https://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=1837
Bill Text (Warning: PDF) https://www.warren.senate.gov/files/documents/2017_09_15_Fre...
EDIT: GET INVOLVED!
Which is to say that in the absence of a government identity verification service, you really shouldn't be able to open a new account without showing up to a branch office in person. That would at least limit identity theft to those that bear some physical resemblance to you. If they could also take cheek-swab DNA samples directly from the applicant, establish shared secrets, and exchange cryptography certificates at that time, that would be great.
The procedure should really be predicated on the possibility that they would later have to prove conclusively in court that the account-opener and the defendant are actually the same person.
Why is it not already this way? If a credit reporting agency falsely alleges that you have a history of failing to repay your debts (when in reality the person failing to pay is actually a scammer who has no relationship with you whatsoever) and that false allegation negatively impacts your ability to obtain a new credit line in the future, isn't that libel? Why aren't credit reporting agencies already being sued left and right as it is under existing law?
If a company wants to make it their job to determine the credit-worthiness of individuals, then shouldn't they be required to make sure that information is accurate or face libel charges?
Because the credit industry can afford better lobbyists and lawyers than you.
A normal, rational person would indeed know that to be libel, but US treats damage to reputation differently from Europe. I'm not a lawyer, but I think in the US you have to prove the allegation was false, that they knew it was false when making it, and that the false statement actually caused you harm.
The businesses in the industry establish the reasonable norms for knowing when something is false. The CRAs say they trust the creditors to report accurate information, and the creditors say they trust the CRAs to match reports to the correct records. They both point at the identity thief as the true culprit.
But you can't sue them, because they used your name, and no one knows who they really are. Essentially, it's a blame-shifting shell game that only holds up because of the massive amount of money flowing through the industry.
Too Big To Fail, I think. They did eventually get sued for "robo-sigining", although personally I think everyone who ordered their staff to participate in it should have been jailed for perjury. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-breaks-down-93-bln-robo-...
Will be interesting to see how LifeLock responds.
There needs to be more transparency into the storing of personal information and the whole process of credit scoring an individual for the purposes of the borrowing they wish to do. This is a service that should be free. Why should people be paying to access their own information? That's just weird. The lenders are the ones who should be financing the credit scoring industry.
But so far I haven't had issues as long as I ignore the offers. Kind of like Mint--the service is valuable enough that the value of the data I'm providing is worth it for me.
[0]: 2 years ago - https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/2qq95l/i_am_the_found...
[1]: 1 year ago - https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/3zh78n/im_ken_lin_fou...
[2]: 9 months ago - https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/5ha7sg/im_kenneth_lin...
Not for marketing purposes, but for other purposes?
Next week Credit Karma could just as well be on the front page of the news for being hacked.
Read their ToS and privacy policy. Your data WILL be mined & your data be sold to marketers and third parties.
They are in this business of providing you "free" services, where you give up extremely valuable (otherwise inaccessible) financial data to marketers