HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 20:51:27 -0800
From: David Ruggiero <osiris@halcyon.halcyon.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Sallie Mae and SSNs
Reply-To: David Ruggiero <osiris@halcyon.halcyon.com>
Organization: [little or none, I'm afraid]
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 117, Message 8 of 9

Dave Niebuhr writes:

 >The problem is that Sallie Mae uses my SSN, not my daughter's, as
 >the account number.  I called Sallie Mae and the person on the
 >other side stated that he couldn't do anything about it and that
 >I should address a letter to his supervisor (naturally).

Depends on the type of student loan. If this was a "PLUS" loan, it's
actually issued to your daughter but guaranteed by you, the parent.
In this case, SallieMae having *your* SSN makes pretty good sense.

If, however, it was another kind of loan ("Stafford", "GSL", "SLS", etc.),
this isn't as easy to see. It could be that they want *your* number to
make it easier to find *her* current address if she later defaults on
the loan (parents usually being more stable and easier to trace than their
recently-graduated offspring). Just a guess....

One of my clients is a large student-loan guarantee organization - I'll
make some enquiries there and report anything interesting that's said.
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 23:37:50 GMT
From: Harry Erwin <erwin@trwacs.fp.trw.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Schools and SSN
Organization: TRW Systems Division, Fairfax VA
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 117, Message 7 of 9

What is the status of aliens lacking SSNs? For example, the children of
diplomats...

???

-- 
Harry Erwin
Internet: erwin@trwacs.fp.trw.com
Date: 19 Dec 92 23:38:15 CST
From: sean@cobra.dra.com
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Blockbuster Video
Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc.
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 116, Message 9 of 11

In article <comp-privacy1.113.7@pica.army.mil>, BRYAN@wvnvm.wvnet.edu (Jerry Bryan) writes:
> I just had my first encounter with Blockbuster Video.  They wanted
> my driver's license number, my SSN, a credit card number, where
> I worked, and my boss's name.  I balked on the SSN, they would not
> give in, and I walked out.

BLOCKBUSTER must being using different forms in different areas.  The forms
used as the St. Louis stores have the word "optional" written over the space
for the Social Security Number.  That may be because Missouri uses the SSN
as its driver's license number (records sold to anyone for $1, or in bulk
for 1 cent each).

However, its the "Membership Terms and Conditions" that have the real privacy
related stuff (on a seperate piece of paper from the Application).

     Membership Terms and Conditions
[...]
3. Member authorizes BLOCKBUSTER Video to release information contained
in this Application or generated through the use of the membership card.
[...]
2/92

-- 
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
Date: 24 Dec 92 04:26:13 GMT
From: The Jester <ygoland@edison.seas.ucla.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: SSN & Gernuglflux!
Organization: Republicans for Sanity
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 119, Message 7 of 7


Before I open my mouth, can someone point me to the SSN faq.
					The Jester

[Moderator's Note:  I will send it out today, ._dennis ]

-- 
			The Jester
"Damnit Jim, I'm a doctor not a mind reader!"-Bones
"It what you DON'T know that counts."-Me
"Work Smarter, Not Harder"-Scrouge McDucks' Dad
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:57:32 GMT
From: Charles Mattair <mattair@sun44.synercom.hounix.org>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Blockbuster Video
Organization: Synercom Technology, Inc., Houston, TX
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 116, Message 11 of 11

In article <comp-privacy1.115.4@pica.army.mil> Doctor Math <root@sanger.chem.nd.edu> writes:
>
>Conclusion: Blockbuster's concept of 'security' is: "We have authorization
>to charge your credit card." It would seem to be all the security they
>need - this way, they're never out any money :) :( :(
>
>It could be argued that there are other video rental stores, but it can
>also be said that Blockbuster would rather this not be true, and is likely
>doing everything they can to eliminate the competition.

Based on my experiences, BB has no security.  Our (me/wife's) account is in
her maiden name and I never carry my card.  I never have any problems renting
movies - it appears the counter droids are happy if you can come up with a
name the computer knows.

Another local store uses your phone number for a customer number and never
checks ID.
-- 
Charles Mattair		 			mattair@synercom.hounix.org
Any opinions offered are my own and do not reflect those of my employer.
Cheap, fast, good - choose two.
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 16:04:14 CUT
From: Dewey Coffman <ibmpa!vpdbox.austin.ibm.com!dewey@ibminet.awdpa.ibm.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Zip+4 Problems?
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 120, Message 8 of 8



	I'm a big fan of using my Zip+4 on my mail, does giving out this
	"extra" +4 of zip code give out any more info about yourself
	other than "where to send the mail"?
--
Dewey Coffman		ibmpa!vpdbox.austin.ibm.com!dewey%ibminet.awdpa.ibm.com
Consulting @ IBM			dewey@ctci.com
11400 Burnet Rd				All opinions are mine.
Austin, TX 78758-3493, USA		(512) 823-6463
===============================================================================
Social Security Earnings Report 1-800-772-1213, "Lead or Leave" 800-99-CHANGE
Date: 23 Dec 92 12:28:27
From: Stephen M Jameson <sjameson@fergie.dnet.ge.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Credit denies millionaire due to credit report
Reply-To: sjameson@atl.dnet.ge.com
Organization: General Electric Advanced Technology Labs
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 119, Message 2 of 7

In article <comp-privacy1.113.8@pica.army.mil> James Davies <jrbd@craycos.com> writes:

>(from an AP wire service story, seen in the Rocky Mountain News  12/11/92)
>
>Jim Clayton, a "mobile home magnate" from Tennessee with a reported net worth
>of $265 million, was recently rejected for a VISA card by the American
>Association of Retired Persons.  The reason for the rejection was that
>there had been frequent requests for his credit report.  Firms that do
>business with his company often get credit reports on top officers.
>(Business is apparently quite good. :-).  After being informed of this, AARP
>manually intervened to issue him a card.
>
>AARP spokesman Ted Bobrow said "One of the important things this points out
>is that any consumer who is turned down for credit needs to find out why.
>It could very well be a mistake."
>
>Apparently AARP didn't learn anything from this.
>

What would you have them learn?  I doubt that the credit decision was made by
AARP, but rather by an outside credit evaluation agency hired by them.  Any
formula used to evaluate an applicant will have some possibility of error,
particularly since the attribute being judged, credit-worthiness, is somewhat
subjective by itself.  They certainly cannot personally re-check every
applicant who is rejected, and can reasonably only be expected to do so when a
rejectee points out what he or she feels is a mistake.  I think the statement
reflects the lesson that AARP, Jim Clayton, and anyone else should take from
this: When you think a mistake has damaged _your_ interests, check, because you
may be right.
--
Steve Jameson                 General Electric Aerospace / Martin Marietta
sjameson@atl.ge.com           Advanced Technology Laboratories
                              Moorestown, New Jersey              
****************************************************************************
**  . . . but I do not love the sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow    **
**  for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory.  I love only that   **
**  which they defend . . .                                               **
**    -- Faramir, "The Two Towers"                                        **
****************************************************************************
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:42:05 GMT
From: "T. Archer" <ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Ownership of Telephone Numbers
Organization: University of Tennessee 
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 120, Message 7 of 8

In article <comp-privacy1.116.6@pica.army.mil> Leonard Erickson <leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com> writes:
>Path: utkux1.utk.edu!darwin.sura.net!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!qt.cs.utexas.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!computer-privacy-request
>Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:27:23 GMT
>From: Leonard Erickson <leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com>
>Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
>Subject: Re: Ownership of Telephone Numbers
>Reply-To: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
>Message-ID: <comp-privacy1.116.6@pica.army.mil>
>Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
>Sender: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
>Approved: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
>X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
>X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
>X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 116, Message 6 of 11
>Lines: 27
>KitchenRN@ssd0.laafb.af.mil writes:
>
>>I don't know if this applies to private residence numbers, but recently, MCI 
>>has been advertising in California that if you want lower rates on your 
>>800-number charges, you can transfer from Pacific Telephone and TAKE YOUR 
>>800-NUMBER WITH YOU.  This kind of implies that the number belongs to you, 
>>not to the telco.
>
>800 numbers are a special case. They are being made "portable" so that you
>can change long distance companies without the penalty of having to get all
>your business cards, ads, etc reprinted.
>
>800 numbers are just a translation table lookup anyway. They merely "map"
>to a specific "normal number".
>
>Regular phone numbers are most *definitely* owned by the phone company.
>Ask the folks who have had their number changed when the phone company
>put in a new exchange here!
>
Or ask any BBS operator who has moved across town.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 10:35:04 GMT
From: Phil Karn <karn@qualcomm.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 120, Message 2 of 8


These "radar detector detectors" probably operate by looking for
spurious microwave local oscillator radiation from the detectors.  Any
superhet or synchrodyne detector is going to have a local oscillator,
and shielding it sufficiently is probably too expensive. Too much
leaks back through the mixer to the antenna.

An alternative would be to spread the local oscillator and then
despread it at the first IF. Hopefully the spurious radiation would
then be too far below the noise floor of the detector detector.

Phil
Date: 23 Dec 1992 15:36:22 -0500
From: Mitch Collinsworth <mkc@graphics.cornell.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Radar Detector Prohibitions
Organization: Cornell University Program of Computer Graphics
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 118, Message 3 of 9

In <comp-privacy1.116.1@pica.army.mil> rj@cadre.com (Rob deFriesse) writes:

>While it is illegal to ban any reciever, the law also states that it
>is illegal to use a reciever in the commision of a crime.  This is
>how they justify the prohibition of radar dectectors.

>The problem I have with this is that a radar detector prohibition
>assumes that a crime has or will be commited even though there
>may be no proof of the crime.  The counter argument is that a radar
>detector is good for only one thing: to facilitate the violation
>of speed limits.  This is not good enough.  The law is clear.
>Receivers are always legal unless used to commit a crime.

OK, I'm with you this far, but then you add:

>If
>there is no proof of a crime, there is no crime.

Oops, now you've gone too far.  If I murder your sister and you have no
proof, I've still committed a crime.  Not getting caught doesn't make me
innocent.

-Mitch Collinsworth
 mitch@graphics.cornell.edu
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:56:22 -0500 (EST)
From: "Dave Niebuhr, BNL CCD, 516-282-3093" <NIEBUHR@bnlcl6.bnl.gov>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Sallie Mae and SSNs
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 119, Message 3 of 7

I wrote:

> >The problem is that Sallie Mae uses my SSN, not my daughter's, as
> >the account number.  I called Sallie Mae and the person on the
> >other side stated that he couldn't do anything about it and that
> >I should address a letter to his supervisor (naturally).

David Ruggiero <osiris@halcyon.halcyon.com> wrote:

>Depends on the type of student loan. If this was a "PLUS" loan, it's
>actually issued to your daughter but guaranteed by you, the parent.
>In this case, SallieMae having *your* SSN makes pretty good sense.
>
>If, however, it was another kind of loan ("Stafford", "GSL", "SLS", etc.),
>this isn't as easy to see. It could be that they want *your* number to
>make it easier to find *her* current address if she later defaults on
>the loan (parents usually being more stable and easier to trace than their

Not quite accurate.  I have two student loans, one a PLUS for one daughter
which I am paying half for and the account number in no way resembles my SSN
and neither does her account number (1/2 and 1/2 split).  Sallie Mae didn't
even enter into this transaction.

The other one, the Sallie Mae, was originally given by Teachers 
Insurance and Annuity Association (TIAA) and placed on the secondary
market where Sallie Mae picked it up for servicing.  I don't remember
it being a PLUS loan, though.  

Therefore, if both are PLUS loans, why does one financial institution
use my SSN as an account number and the other doesn't?  To be fair,
though, the first one wasn't placed on the secondary market.

Dave
Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 05:59:37 GMT
From: David Banisar <Banisar@washofc.cpsr.org>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: SSN Update - Va.,Mass. and DC
Organization: Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 118, Message 6 of 9

3 updates on the SSN front:

The Virginia General Assembly's ad hoc committee on SSN's will be
having another meeting on Jan. 11, 1993 in Richmond. At that point,
a draft bill on removing SSNs off of driver's licenses. They may
also vote to form a permanent committee on privacy issues and
discuss a privacy commissioner bill that the CPSR, Washington Office
helped draft.

In Mass, CPSR members have been working with the legislature on
S.1036, which will remove SSNs off of Mass. Licenses. A electronic
copy of that bill will be available as soon as it is complete (about
a week of so).

In Washington, DC, the DC Govt. removed the requirement that all DC
lawyers disclose their SSNs, citing the Privacy Act, after requested
by the ACLU and CPSR.
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:12:01 GMT
From: "Glenn R. Stone" <gs26@prism.gatech.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: Blockbuster Video
Reply-To: glenns@eas.gatech.edu
Organization: The Group W Bench
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 116, Message 10 of 11


In <comp-privacy1.115.4@pica.army.mil> root@sanger.chem.nd.edu (Doctor Math) writes:

>A friend of mine had an experience with Blockbuster that went like this:
>Jealous ex goes to Blockbuster, convinces staff that he has permission
>to check out tapes using her account, never returns the tapes, she gets
>stuck with a large bill (it just appeared on the credit card statement).
>Complaints to Blockbuster management (both verbal and written), while
>not ignored, did no good whatsoever.

What?  without a membership card?  If Jealous_ex still had the victim's
BB card, well, *maybe* it's her fault.... if BB took ex's word, with no
card, "seeya in court."  Also, every time I went (note tense) to BB, they
still process a credit voucher.... the solution is to notify your credit
card company and have them challenge BB to come up with a signed, imprinted
voucher.  

(more BB slamming deleted)
I dunno, mebbe the BB franchise group in Atlanta is just better at it
than most.... but I'm still not going back because of the records thing...

-- Glenn R. Stone (glenns@eas.gatech.edu)
"The place of the government is to LEAVE THE PEOPLE ALONE!" 
                                              -- Leary
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 02:14:10 GMT
From: Scot Wilcoxon <sewilco@fieldday.mn.org>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: The UPS clipboard
Organization: Self
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 119, Message 6 of 7

>volpe@bart.nosubdomain.nodomain (Christopher R Volpe) writes:
>...
>Consider, also, that the signature may actually be the least valuable
>piece of information in that record.  How much could you tell about a
>competitor if you had access to their UPS shipping records?  In many
>cases, even the insured value of packages is recorded.
>...

Then let us not hear from the radio systems which Federal Express is using.
-- 
Scot E. Wilcoxon   	sewilco@fieldday.mn.org
			voice: +1 612-825-2607
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:38:34 -0500 (EST)
From: David O Hunt <bluelobster+@cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: RSA Algorithm
Organization: Computer Privacy Digest
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 118, Message 1 of 9


Could someone please explain the RSA algorithm to me - the part that REALLY
confuses me is how one key can remain public but not be useable to decrypt.

Thanks!

David
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 18:08:26 GMT
From: allen@tessi.com (Allen Warren)
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: UPS Digital Clipboards
Organization: Test Systems Strategies, Inc., Beaverton, Oregon
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 116, Message 5 of 11

Ed Ravin <eravin@panix.com> writes:

>I do this for most new groups that I join, just to see how far and wide
>they will scatter my name.  For example, the amount of mail I receive
>from other groups when I joined the Sierra Club is frightening -- fortunately,
>the stream of mail withered away when I renewed and scribbled "STOP SHARING
>MY NAME WITH OTHER MAILERS" on the renewal form.


I usually get a brick, wrap it in brown paper, and glue the envelope I get
from other groups on top of the brick, writing on the envelope 'Delivery
Refused'.  Since the sending company must then pay the extra postage on the
brick, I seldom get a followup from a company, although one company was stupid
enough to send me two more notices, so on the third (total) notice from them,
I wrapped up about four bricks in a small box and glued the envelope on the
top of this box.  I never got another notice from this company!

allen
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 23:02:01 GMT
From: John De Armond <jgd@dixie.com>
Newsgroups: comp.society.privacy
Subject: Re: UPS Digital Clipboards
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
X-Submissions-To: comp-privacy@pica.army.mil
X-Administrivia-To: comp-privacy-request@pica.army.mil
X-Computer-Privacy-Digest: Volume 1, Issue 119, Message 5 of 7

allen@tessi.com (Allen Warren) writes:

>I usually get a brick, wrap it in brown paper, and glue the envelope I get
>from other groups on top of the brick, writing on the envelope 'Delivery
>Refused'.  Since the sending company must then pay the extra postage on the
>brick, I seldom get a followup from a company, although one company was stupid
>enough to send me two more notices, so on the third (total) notice from them,
>I wrapped up about four bricks in a small box and glued the envelope on the
>top of this box.  I never got another notice from this company!

Your recipient never sees the brick.  The PO simply discards any BRM
that is obviously inappropriate.  There is also a cap on charges 
acrued to any single piece of mail, about 85 cents as I recall.  If 
you want to return BRM, stick about 4 ounces of paper in it and mail
away.  

The reason you didn't get a second solicitation from that company is
direct mail is EXPENSIVE.  Postage on a typical 4 ounce bulk mail
piece is about twenty cents.  A BRM (business reply mail) piece is
at a minimum 38 cents for the postcard.  More for added weight.
Then figure in the cost of printing and packaging the promotionals.
The advertiser does NOT want to mail to anyone who is not a candidate
to reply.

John
-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine(TM) | Interested in high tech and computers? 
Marietta, Ga                         | Send ur snail-mail address to 
jgd@dixie.com                        | perform@dixie.com for a free sample mag
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.