Peter Clay wrote:
> Hmm. What's the evidence that national ID schemes reduce credit fraud
> (what people normally mean when they say "ID theft")? How does it vary
> with the different types of scheme?
> I've been opposing the UK scheme recently on the grounds of unreliable
> biometrics and the bad idea of putting everyone's information in a
> basket from which it can be stolen (in addition to the civil liberties
> reasons). My solution to the credit fraud problem is simple: raise the
> burden of proof for negative credit reports and pursuing people for
> money.

some number of organizations have come up with the term "account fraud"
... where fraudulent transactions are done against existing accounts ...
to differentiate from other forms of "identity theft" which involves
things like using a stolen identity to establish new accounts.

account fraud just requires strong authentication applied consistently
... doesn't require identification ... although there are cases where
identification is confused and is used as a supstitute for
authentication. part of the issue of confusing identification for
authentication ... is that it is typically quite a bit more privacy
evasive than pure authentication.

The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to