Finally the “experts” are coming out and saying what I’ve been saying all along:

the state employees, taxpayers and others unlucky enough to be on the <stolen> tape are actually at a very low risk of having their identities stolen

basically, these experts are saying:

You are much more at risk if someone goes through your garbage can than if you are part of a large data breach

And that, of course, makes a lot of sense.

The dude going through your trash is actually TRYING to find personal information about you. He is TRYING to steal your identity.

The dude breaking into your car to steal your radar detector? Well…. he’s just trying to steal your radar detector- or your stereo- or something else he can sell to the pawn shop.

There is no way THAT low-rent, low-tech, radar-detector-stealing thief has any clue what to do with the ‘storage device’ he stole. It might as well be a John Denver 8-track tape– or a Flashdance Betamax videocassette.

At the end of the day, “data” was not stolen. Some piece of plastic was stolen. Useless plastic tape.

And I’m willing to bet that it never, ever turns up.

Never.

Ever.

Wanna Bet?

 
  • I dunno

    It was still negligent and worthy of criticism and news coverage. Why are you trying to downplay this? Rationalization and denial are treatable conditions.

  • Don’t blame me- blame the experts who said these state employees are “at a very low risk of having their identities stolen.”

    It was a stupid policy- to be sure.

    But to say that “data was stolen” is just not true.

    A tape was stolen. A plastic (assuming) backup tape.

  • I agree with what Eric wrote about this, it was stupid to have that type of information handled the way it was. While it may be “low risk” an earlier Dispatch article quoted the vice president of state government relations for the Ohio Bankers League of saying, “Clearly, that is a pretty serious matter,” he said. “Banks work really hard to protect that information, and any sort of breach like this will have to put us (at) heightened awareness.”

    As far as saying that “data was stolen” is not true, there are quite a few headlines out there proclaiming “Data was stolen” and I don’t see any of them doing retractions yet with the information being released from the “experts”.

    While it is very possible whoever stole it wasn’t planning on using any of it now that it has become such a huge story someone that might know how to use it could very well end up with it. Until they either catch who did it or have it returned that will remain an unknown.

    ps…congrats on being number two on BNN.

    🙂

  • As a ps, even those experts gave a scenario that would be troubling:

    But there?s one wild card in the rapidly growing world of identity theft that could turn the theory upside down.

    ?Once the information is out there it can be sold on the black market to people overseas,? said Paul Stephens, director of policy and advocacy at the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.

    ?If I were to get a million names and Social Security numbers, I?d be selling them off,? Foley said. ?There?s going to be a black market.?

  • Of course it was stupid. But it certainly isn’t a “scandal”.

    No one took bribes or went on illegal vacations.

    It was an unlucky accident (car break in) coupled with a bad decision (give tape to intern) and a stupid policy (employee takes home backup tape).

  • I’d bet dollars to donuts that the thief hadn’t the foggiest idea what he had stolen until it showed up on the news. It’s quite likely he had already pitched it (why keep something that appears to have no value that ties you to a particular crime?).

    It was a poorly thought out policy, but this is hardly a “scandal” for Strickland. People saying so are trying to make hay for political gain. I’d be saying the same thing I’m saying now if it was a Reep it had happened to.

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:


Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!