I'll chime in here too on this topic. As someone who has collected an impressive number of "we're very sorry that your personal information has been exposed, here have two years of free credit monitoring" forms, I'd really rather not give out anymore information. All of the organizations that were breached promised to be diligent and current on their protections. As the original poster could tell you, every organization at a certain level is being tested constantly. As someone said, you're going to be getting the testing done, it's just whether or not Brian Krebs writes the report.
It's not that I have anything to hide. And certainly other organizations have probably have more data on me. But for me, the question is "Does the benefit to the requesting organization (or myself via that org) outweigh the risks to me?" It's something that you should ask yourself every time you're asked for that data.
Trying to Help
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeanne Boyarsky
Thank you for starting this thread and to the person who posted the link to the PDF where it says you don't have to give it. It is important to speak up about privacy and security. If nobody pushes back, anything can be done under the name of security.
I just filled out the form and chose "No SSN." I understand why they want a criminal background check. I'm not a criminal. I have no problem with that. I don't have a common name so they can easily do that without my SSN. They haven't made a case for why they need my SSN so I'm not providing it.
I have a "real" security clearance for my job. For that I had no problem with providing my social. I understand why they needed it. And why they ask a whole slew of other personal questions. But even the United States government (Office of Personal Management) had a data breach in that space.
I'm a co-volunteer coordinator for the NYC FRC regional. I plan to publicize the "No SSN" option to our volunteers.
As an aside, my state charges $65 for a criminal check on top of the $8 national one. |