HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Subject: Re: Job paperwork stuff
Organization: I.E.C.C.
Date: 22 Dec 92 12:38:31 EST (Tue)
From: johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us (John R. Levine)

>> Today was a bad day.  Our company was aquired by a much bigger company. ...
>> They said that they needed the ssn card copy and birth certificate ...

>Sorry you had such a bad day.  A few explanations are in order. 
>They wanted your social security card not to find out whether or not 
>you are a good citizen or not, they needed it for immigration law purposes.

No they don't.  The law says that newly hired employees must fill out an
I-9 form which requires documentation of eligibility to work.  Any of a long
list of documents will suffice -- I've used an expired passport.

But this applies ONLY to newly hired employees.  Existing employees don't
have to do anything.  The company being acquired doesn't mean that all the
employees were fired and re-hired.  The new personnel department was just
jerking people around.  In an environment like that, I'd look for a new
job as fast as possible, before they find an excuse to fire all the old
employees for real.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!iecc!johnl
Xref: sparky alt.privacy:2816 misc.legal:21985 alt.society.civil-liberty:7224
From: sean@cobra.dra.com
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.legal,alt.society.civil-liberty
Subject: Re: 1992 only: CA DMV workaround for SSN
Date: 3 Jan 93 15:14:17 CST
Distribution: usa
Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc.

In article <1993Jan3.061744.7177@mtu.edu>, pecampbe@mtu.edu (Paul Campbell) writes:
> Hmm..Privacy Act of 1974 specifically states who can and can't use it.

Laws can be amended.  I believe the privacy act has been amended about
four times since it was enacted, including in 1976 (or so?) when Congress
permitted states to use SSN's when issuing driver's licenses.

What is unclear to me is if states can then sell (or otherwise make public,
or some other non-governmental entity) the SSN they've obtained as part of
these permitted uses.  This is the classic conflict between the Freedom
of Information Act and the Privacy Act.

Missouri started requiring SSN's be verified as the Driver's Licenses Number
in April 1991 (I missed the law being passed in the Missouri legislature, so
I didn't get a chance to oppose it).  This seems to be spreading across the
country very quickly in the last five years or so.

Does anyone know what triggered this wave of SSN == DLN?  I noticed it started
shortly after the courts ruled the SSA could not verify SSNs for
non-governmental organizations such as TRW.  Is this an end-run around that
ruling, by having driver's license numbers the same as a person's verified
social security number?
-- 
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
Xref: sparky alt.privacy:2764 misc.consumers:21207
From: rrw@sunset.cse.nau.edu (Bob Wier)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: 26 Dec 92 20:07:00 GMT
Followup-To: alt.privacy
Distribution: na
Originator: rrw@sunset.cse.nau.edu

From article <1992Dec16.173930.28867@informix.com>, by lynns@informix.com (Lynn Schneider):
> If the junk mail gets too annoying, you can always get in touch with the
> Direct Marketing Association (don't have the number handy, but it's 
> "out there" to ask them to remove your name (or names! ;-) from their
> files.

  I have kind of an interesting story on this.  At least twice I have written
  this outfit asking that I be put ON lists (at one point I was retired and
  didn't have anything to do but read catalogs :-).  I never got ANYTHING!
  I wrote 'em a second time a couple of years later and this time got a 
  "preferances" form where I could indicate which types of products I was
  interested in.  Sent it back - NOTHING!  I don't even get RADIO SHACK
  catalogs.

  It looks to me like if you WANT to be on these kinds of list, they don't
  want you - probably they assume you are a "catalog hound" and you won't
  ever buy anything...

  Just one (kind of skewed) data point...

- Bob Wier

  ---------- insert favorite standard disclaimers here ----------
                   College of Engineering
      Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff Arizona
  Internet: rrw@naucse.cse.nau.edu | WB5KXH | fax:602 523 2300
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.legal,alt.society.civil-liberty
From: pecampbe@mtu.edu (Paul Campbell)
Subject: Re: 1992 only: CA DMV workaround for SSN
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 06:17:44 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.184448.4628@netcom.com> tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney) writes:
>If you wish to renew your California drivers license, but do NOT want
>to give them your SSN, then there is a way around it...
> 
>BUT ONLY BEFORE THE END OF THE YEAR!!!
> 
>You only need to provide the SSN this year for new licenses.  Renewals
>need the SSN starting 1 January.  You are also allowed to renew your
>license any time, but will need to take a written test if you renew
>more than six months before your scheduled renewal date.
> 
>Therefore:  If you go in to the DMV before the end of the year,
>you can renew your drivers license without having to give the SSN.

That's interesting..didn't the Privacy Act specifically prohibit any
agency other than the Social Security Insurance people from requiring
you to submit your social security number?

Hmm..Privacy Act of 1974 specifically states who can and can't use it.

It states that any time there is a blank for your social security number,
there MUST be a disclosure notice attached. Did they have one?

Specifically, 5 USC 552a requires that they tell you 3 things:

1:  Whether disclosure of your Social Security Number is required or optional,

2:  What law authorizes them to ask for your Social Security Number, and

3:  How your Social Security Number will be used if you give it to them.

AND it says that ONLY the Federal government can make use of the number
mandatory.

Well, why in the world are you worried then? It's voluntary every time,
or the Calfornia DMV is acting unlawfully.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: joet@dcatlas.dot.gov (Joe Trott)
Subject: Re: Cat Paws
Organization: U.S Dept. of Transportation
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 20:15:58 GMT

n36c@pnet16.cts.com (Rm1 Straight) writes:

>I was just wondering if there is anyway I can keep cats from lounging on
>my car.

There is a product available called "Indoor/Outdoor NO" that is highly
offensive to pets.  DO NOT SPRAY IT DIRECTLY ON YOUR CAR!  You might try
spraying it in the area _around_ where you park your car, or spray it on
some rags to tie on or near your car.
You will probably find it in the pet section of your local grocery store,
and pet shops are likely to have it too.  I believe it is made by Hartz.
It does stink (the closest I could stand to sniff it made me think of the
smell of new plastic, only *much* stronger).

-JTT
From: feinstei@vax.sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Guerilla Privacy Defense Alert!
Date: 23 Dec 92 00:28:29 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University

guerilla privacy defense

How fast do you think privacy would jump to the top of the national 
agenda if someone found out the social security number of some prominent
Congressperson or social figure, some respected pillar of society, got
a bunch of credit in their name, and ran those cards up from here to
Peoria? What if some other prominent person's medical history, video
rentals, or financial details were displayed on a full-page advertisement
in the Chicago Tribune? What if several visible, hysterical, public
beheadings of privacy were brought to view everyday? What if those 
people who know how fragile privacy is got together and used their 
knowledge to make _other_ people aware. Hmmm... Does Clarence Thomas
rent pornos? Wouldn't it be fun to find out? 

The backlash would make your head spin. I predict that if this starts
happening folks will realize the importance of privacy and civil liberties
in a hurry.

Visualize Whirled Peas,
Josh      a.k.a. feinstei@sonoma.edu

[note: the above was conceived solely as a mental exercise, and 
should not be misconstrued as a call to action. hee hee hee.]
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: Another step for the US national ID number
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 15:51:24 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <103399@netnews.upenn.edu> kaplan@sol1.lrsm.upenn.edu (Peter Kaplan -Yodh) writes:
>From today's (12/30) Wall Street Journal Tax Report column:
>
>WANT A PASSPORT?  Be ready to put your Social Security number and
>any foreign home address on the application to help the IRS collect
>taxe from Americans living abroad.  Persons refusing to comply
>will be reported to the IRS.  Similar rules apply to alien applicants
>for US residence.
	It takes some gall for the U.S. to require people living abroad
	to pay taxes.  Not only do you get none of the domestic "services" 
	of the U.S. government but you also get the added bonus of being
	the target for retaliation against the government for its stupid,
	heavy handed, imperialistic foreign policy.  What a deal!
	What a government!  We should all be so proud. NOT!

							smg
From: palmer@icat.larc.nasa.gov (Michael T. Palmer)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Thieves have your number (SSN as DL in VA)
Date: 24 Dec 92 13:24:47 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: icat.larc.nasa.gov

young@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Sally Young) writes:

>A few years ago when my wallet was stolen, the thief tried to set up an 
>account at Stern's using my SS#, one of those instant credit deals where 
>they would get merchandise sent to them...

I can sympathize.  When a waiter at an Atlanta restaurant lifted my card
number and gave it to someone, that someone tried to buy airline tickets to
Orlando (to sell to yet someone else).  Fortunately, the waiter did NOT
also have my SSN to give to the other crook, because it is doubtful the
travel agent would have been as suspicious if the crook had rattled off the
correct SSN to go with my name and card number.  As it is, the police caught
some of the bast#$ds at the airport.  All happened this summer.


>Don't lose altitude unecessarily.

Hear, hear!  And don't jump out of perfectly good airplanes just because
you have a backpack full of silk.

-- 
Michael T. Palmer, M/S 152, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681
Voice: 804-864-2044,   FAX: 804-864-7793,   Email: m.t.palmer@larc.nasa.gov
RIPEM Public Key now available  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail
From: feinstei@vax.sonoma.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Job paperwork stuff
Date: 23 Dec 92 00:16:29 GMT
Organization: Sonoma State University

In article <22DEC199208394217@vax.sonoma.edu>, gallaghe@vax.sonoma.edu (Mycal) writes:

> [stuff deleted about company wanting lots of info]> 
> Well there is good news.  I guess in the process of fighting personell
> about using my ssn for medical insurers, I unknowingly created a mind
> virus.  Half the company asked me for the letter I wrote, and followed
> suit.  This created quite an uproar,  I even had to talk to our (not
> the new company that bought us out) CEO.  After explaining to him
> my objections, he talked to the new company's CEO.  So it seems for
> now it has been taken care of.  They won't send our SSN's to the helth
> insurer, we will be issued others.  They don't need a copy of our birth-
> certificate or ssn card.

This reminds me of in _Star_Wars_ when Ben Kenobi and Luke Skywalker and
R2D2 and C3PO were headed into the spaceport in the landcruiser. The
Imperial Stormtroopers stopped them and Ben muttered, "we don't need a
pass" and the Stormtrooper said, "you don't need a pass" and Ben muttered,
"these aren't the 'droids you're looking for" and the Stormtrooper said,
"these aren't the 'droids we're looking for" and waved them on.

It just goes to show you that it *is* possible to win, in fact I just won
a battle myself wrt changing my student identifier to a randomly generated
number. wu'hu! 

> 
> So just letting you know if you stand up to your company about using this
> kind of information they will usually back down.  This is the third time
> I have gone through this and won!   It does seem to be getting harder 
> every time though :(
> 

Of course it does, there are big bucks at stake. There are fortunes 
to be won, and you and I are the mules turning the wheels of the 
drivers' carts. It ain't gonna be easy.

> keep fighting,
> mycal

peace
josh
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Terminal monitoring/CERT/etc/etc
From: CHD@HERMES.ECE.ARIZONA.EDU (Chris De Young)
Date: 21 Dec 92 20:54:57 MST
Distribution: world,local
Organization: --
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

It seems to me that people are losing sight of the fact that they
are voluntarily using a service which they are not required to use, be it a 
computer system, a telephone line, or whatever.  If you aren't
satisfied with the service, you aren't required to use it; don't get
your panties all bunched up because you think you're entitled to something
that [whomever] never agreed to provide.

The only time you have a real claim, in my opinion, is when the service
is provided to you with an explicit agreement about privacy.  Otherwise,
look at the service as it's offered and take it or leave it.

Finally, specifically regarding computer systems, it all comes down to
whether or not you trust your system management.  If a system manager
who knows what he or she is doing wants to read your mail, monitor your
terminal, look at your files, whatever, they can do so and they won't
likely get caught (except *maybe* by another system manager).
Trust them, or fire them, or move to a different system (or none at all).

-Chris
chd@ece.arizona.edu
From: olga@csiatl.Gwinnett.COM (olga from the volga)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Job paperwork stuff
Keywords: invasion, privacy, ssn
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 08:29:20 EST

gallaghe@vax.sonoma.edu (Mycal) writes:

> 
> Hi,
> 
> Today was a bad day.  Our company was aquired by a much bigger company.
> So today we got a visit from there personel department.  The stuff that
> the personel droids wanted was outragious.  They wanted every line, every
> space, every bubble filled out on every form they had.  Also they wanted
> a copy of our ssn card, a copy of our birth certificate, and our first
> born (just kidding there.)
> 
> They said that they needed the ssn card copy and birth certificate for
> there records back east so they could show the government that we were
> good american citizens.  They wanted the ssn number of our children and
> spouse.  They even had a place to put our race in,  they said that we didn't
> have to fill this out since they would get it off the birth certificate or
> the administrator would fill it out.


Sorry you had such a bad day.  A few explanations are in order. 
They wanted your social security card not to find out whether or not 
you are a good citizen or not, they needed it for immigration law 
purposes.  I don't support this creepy law, but that is why they 
asked you for it.  As far as a private company using your SSN with 
insurers, unfortuately there isn't any privacy law at all to protect you. 
The Privacy act does not cover private companies in this manner.  Sure 
wish it did. 

> 
> Needless to say a few of us couldn't beleve this and after fighting with
> the personell droid and a number of calles back east, about two hours later,
> (this lady musta thought I was a real asshole) they decided they didn't need
> the birth certificate copy, nor the copy of the ssn card.  Well luckly
> since there was so much confusion be cause of all this, we didn't get 
> the paper all filled out, and we are supposto send them monday, and the
> droid went home tonight.  So we are going to be unsupervised on filling
> these papers out :)
> 
> Race :  Human (somewhat)
> 
> Also I have this neet leter that I am going to send there personell dept,
> that states that they are only to use my ssn for tax related purposes, and
> not to give it to health insurers and the like.  I threw in the bit about
> the US law about privacy and ssn and denial of service just for good mesure.
> (which I have the relivant text at home, I guess I should post it, later)
> But they won't get anyone elses in my families ssn number, no way.
> (they get mine on the W-4)
> 
> Any way just though I would let you know what is up in the my corner of 
> the world in reguards to privacy, and what I am doing to fight for it.
> 
> 'tell next time
> 
> mycal


They sound like a bunch of jerks to me!

olga@csiatl.gwinnett.com
YOW
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: an781@anon.penet.fi (Fury)
Subject: Anonymous messages
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: alt.privacy
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 04:27:25 GMT

 
 
	how private are they?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
From: young@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Sally Young)
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Thieves have your number (SSN as DL in VA)
Date: 23 Dec 92 21:44:56 GMT
Followup-To: alt.privacy
Organization: U.Penn

A few years ago when my wallet was stolen, the thief tried to set up an 
account at Stern's using my SS#, one of those instant credit deals where 
they would get merchandise sent to them...

The Stern's clerk caught the problem and called me.  She advised me to
contact the major credit rating companies (sorry, I no longer have the
names
and numbers; maybe somebody has them) and instruct that NO charge accounts
be opened without contacting me first.

Forgot all about it.  Recently *I* applied for instant credit someplace, 
and wondered why I was being turned down...  it hit me later as to why.

But when my wallet was (UGH) lifted earlier this month, I was glad I had
had that reminder...   Been enough grief dealing with the hassle without 
worrying that someone was using my SS# to open up a phony account...


Don't lose altitude unecessarily.
young@ben.dev.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: doctor1@cbnewse.cb.att.com (patrick.b.hailey)
Subject: Re: drug dealers on the h
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 20:52:21 GMT

In article <Dec.18.10.37.54.1992.25185@romulus.rutgers.edu> vanembur@romulus.rutgers.edu (Bill Van Emburg) writes:
>While I *hate* to defend Dan Quayle on *anything*, we really should
>try to be fair.  Perhaps this tea *does* contain trace amounts of
>cocaine or the substances from which cocaine is derived.  But really,
>can you equate this with snorting some fine white powder?  Do you
>really think the effect is anywhere near as strong??

Try to be fair?  Dan Quayle has the right to choose what drugs he'll use,
what form he'll use them in, what dosage he'll take.  He also has almost
complete assurance that what he's taking is what he thinks he's taking.

No one else in the U.S. has this right, UNLESS they choose to use deadly
nicotine or alcohol - the two drugs that are more likely to kill their
users than any other drugs.

I think the criticism is fair.

   Thanks awfully,
             Patrick
From: sean@cobra.dra.com
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
Subject: Re: Police/Investigator methods of searching for individuals
Date: 22 Dec 92 01:42:37 CST
Organization: Data Research Associates, Inc.

In article <BzMG16.Htu@Novell.COM>, norsk@mobius (Doug Thompson) writes:
> For every loan an individual as applied for, there is the SSN.
> Since she is an agent of the court, she can get credit agencies to
> give all the information connected to a SSN except for finiancial
> info. Addresses for all loan apps, phone numbers, etc become available.

Being an officer of the court has very little to do with this.  So called
"Directory Information" (addresses, phone numbers, property ownership, etc)
isn't considered credit information.   There is no restriction to who
companies may sell/give/exchange that type of information (except what the
company may impose on itself).  It has more to do with the fact her
employer (who happens to be a court, but could have been any other business)
has purchased access to a company's private database.  She would be in
more trouble for theft of services, than for any "invasion of privacy" if
she misused the information in the database.

Of course this really points out that "Big Brother" has been privatized,
when even an officer of a court gets better information from a private
company's database than from government records.
-- 
Sean Donelan, Data Research Associates, Inc, St. Louis, MO
Domain: sean@sdg.dra.com, Voice: (Work) +1 314-432-1100
Newsgroups: alt.privacy
From: johne@PROBLEM_WITH_INEWS_GATEWAY_FILE (John Eaton)
Subject: Re: Job paperwork stuff
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:06:54 GMT
Organization: Hewlett-Packard VCD
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

John R. Levine (johnl@iecc.cambridge.ma.us) wrote:
: 
: But this applies ONLY to newly hired employees.  Existing employees don't
: have to do anything.  The company being acquired doesn't mean that all the
: employees were fired and re-hired.  
----------------------------------------------
They don't have to but that's the smart way to do it. Buying an existing corp
will also buy you all of their past liabilities both known and unknown. The
best way is an "Assests only" deal where you buy everything they own and
hire all of their employees. It looks the same from the outside but protects
the new owners from lawsuits from before the merger.

Businesses hate the idea of individuals getting new identities because they
know how effective it is when you want to stiff someone.


John Eaton
!hp-vcd!johne




Newsgroups: alt.privacy,misc.consumers
From: jgd@dixie.com (John De Armond)
Subject: Re: Junk mailers dirty tricks
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 21:56:51 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
Distribution: na

niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) writes:

>>Third class requires 
>>only that the offering not be fraudulent, that you properly zipsort, 
>>that the size is correct, that you bundle properly and that your check for 
>>the postage not bounce.

>My wife works in the circulation of a free weekly newspaper that is
>heavily dependent on advertising and has almost weekly hassles with
>the USPS over the mailing charges.  In addition to that, there are
>audits at least twice a year to verify that the circulation counts
>add up to what is claimed (no fraudulent addresses.

Yep, and it is almost assuredly 2nd class and/or non-profit.  If not, then 
someone's screwing up somewhere at that paper because 2nd will save them 
a bunch.

Third class does NOT involve audits.  I'd not fool with it if it did, and
would go 1st class.  Not worth the hassles for my relatively small
circulation.

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.
Newsgroups: alt.privacy