by "Dusty Ventures" (dustyventures)
Published 09/09/2017 at 13:39
by "Dusty Ventures" (dustyventures)
Published 09/09/2017 at 13:39
No Tags
STARS: 8
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Using Social Security numbers for everything is dumb
"For Sweden" (rallybeetle)
09/09/2017 at 13:49, STARS: 2
This is why you should only use stolen Social Security Numbers
"Funktheduck" (funktheduck)
09/09/2017 at 13:49, STARS: 0
I’m just waiting to get an email or letter or something.
"Berang" (berang)
09/09/2017 at 13:56, STARS: 1
Don’t have time to watch, but I remember years ago when I lived in Colorado somebody took their employer to court for demanding his social security number (he left it blank when he applied) and the court ended up ruling that employers have no real right or reason to demand it, nor can they refuse applications without it. I’m not sure anybody remembers that though.
"TheTurbochargedSquirrel" (thatsquirrel)
09/09/2017 at 13:56, STARS: 5
Single points of failure are bad. Sequential ID numbers are bad. Using sequential IDs in a single point of potential failure is asking to get screwed.
"ranwhenparked" (ranwhenparked)
09/09/2017 at 13:56, STARS: 1
Yep, they were never intended for that. The supermarket I worked at in high school had employees punch them in to the time clock to track hours, seemed like a bad idea then, I mean, how hard would it have been for corporate to just issue employee ID numbers to everyone? We probably had one anyway.
"Chariotoflove" (chariotoflove)
09/09/2017 at 14:07, STARS: 0
I usually refuse to give my SSN to just anybody. They can’t force you. Yes, using them for normal ID stuff is stupid.
"CB" (jrcb)
09/09/2017 at 14:24, STARS: 0
Reading about Canada’s Social Insurance Number makes me feel a lot safer about our system. From Wikipedia :
Social Insurance Numbers can be validated through a simple check digit process called the Luhn algorithm .
046 454 286 <—- A fictitious, but valid SIN 121 212 121 <—- Multiply each digit in the top number by the digit below it.
If the result of this multiplication is a two-digit number, add the digits together and insert the result (the digital root ). Thus, in the second-to-last column, 8 multiplied by 2 is equal to 16. Add the digits (1 and 6) together (1 + 6 = 7) and insert the result (7). This can also be achieved by subtracting 9 from the product of the multiplication, ie. 8 multiplied by 2 is equal to 16, 16 - 9 is 7.
So the result of the multiplication is:
086 858 276
Then, add all of the digits together:
0+8+6+8+5+8+2+7+6=50
If the SIN is valid, this number will be divisible by 10.
Sounds like a much better system than sequential numbers. Plus, it’s discouraged from being used as a form of ID.
"BrianGriffin thinks “reliable” is just a state of mind" (briangriffinsprius)
09/09/2017 at 15:02, STARS: 1
I have an old chart on my wall they used to give to employees in my line of work. Give me the location and year of your birth, I can probably get your SSN within a few digits. Luckily now they’re randomized.
"Eric @ opposite-lock.com" (theyrerolling)
09/09/2017 at 16:16, STARS: 0
It doesn’t make it any safer, it actually makes it more dangerous because you can create valid numbers and validate the numbers (aside from the fact nobody can transpose digits or something when you’re giving it to them because it wouldn’t validate).
SSNs must be taken on faith, viewing the card (which nobody does), and/or hitting the credit file to verify.
The real problem with SSNs is how they were issued, the fact that they’re not guaranteed to be unique, and that people use them as a unique identifier (which is also not only discouraged, but banned by the act that created them).
"MM54" (mm54mk2)
09/10/2017 at 17:42, STARS: 0
Fun fact: The old social security cards say right on them that they are not for identification purposes.