Identity theft

About: Identity theft is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 2284 publications have been published within this topic receiving 31700 citations.

Identity Theft and Consumer Payment Choice: Does Security Really Matter?

Abstract: Security is a critical aspect of electronic payment systems. In recent years, the phenomenon of identity theft has gained widespread media coverage and has grown to be a major concern for payment providers and consumers alike. How identity theft has affected consumer’s payment choice is still an open research question. We use the 2009 Survey of Consumer Payment Choice (SCPC) to study the effect of identity theft incidents on adoption and usage patterns for nine different payment instruments in the U.S. Our results suggest that certain types of identity theft incidents affect positively the probability of adopting money orders, credit cards, stored value cards, bank account number payments and online banking bill payments. As for payment usage, we find that particular types of identity theft incidents have a positive and statistically significant effect on the use of cash, money orders and credit cards and a negative and statistically significant effect on the use of checks and online banking bill payments. These results are robust across different types of transaction, after controlling for various socio-demographic characteristics and perceptions toward payment methods.

A touch of money [biometric authentication systems]

Abstract: This paper suggests the use of a new authentication system for credit cards based on biometric sensors that could dramatically curtail identity theft. The proposed system uses fingerprint sensors, though other biometric technologies, either alone or in combination, could be incorporated. It could be economical, protect privacy, and guarantee the validity of all kinds of credit card transactions, including ones that take place at a store, over the telephone, or with an Internet-based retailer. By preventing identity thieves from entering the transaction loop, credit card companies could quickly recoup their infrastructure investments and save businesses, consumers, and themselves billions of dollars every year.

Individual Cyber Security: Empowering Employees to Resist Spear Phishing to Prevent Identity Theft and Ransomware Attacks

Abstract: One of the most difficult challenges in information security today is phishing. Phishing is a difficult problem to address because there are many permutations, messages, and value propositions that can be sent to targets. Spear phishing is also associated with social engineering, which can be difficult for even trained or savvy employees to detect. This makes the user the critical point of entry for miscreants seeking to perpetrate cyber crimes such as identity theft and ransomware propagation, which cause billions of dollars in losses each year. Researchers are exploring many avenues to address this problem, including educating users and making them aware of the repercussions of becoming victims of phishing. The purpose of this study was to interview security professionals to gain better insight on preventing users and employees from succumbing to phishing attack. Seven subject-matter experts were interviewed, revealing nine themes describing traits that identify users as vulnerable to attack or strongly resistive to attack, as well as training suggestions to empower users to resist spear phishing attacks. Suggestions are made for practitioners in the field and future research.

Counteracting Identity Fraud in the Information Age: The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act

Abstract: The advent of the information age has created new challenges to the ability of individuals to protect the privacy and security of their personal information One such challenge is that of identity theft, which has imposed countless hardships upon its victims Perpetrators of this fraud use the identities of others to steal money, obtain loans, and generally violate the law The Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998 makes the theft of personal information with the intent to commit an unlawful act a federal crime in the United States with penalties of up to 15 years imprisonment and a maximum fine of $250,000 The Act designates the Federal Trade Commission to serve as an advocate for victims of identity fraud This article first examines the problem of identity fraud and the inadequacy of existing remedies, and then assesses the need for and likely impact of the Act, as well as issues relating to the effectiveness of its future enforcement

Human Identification Theory and the Identity Theft Problem

Abstract: I. Introduction Identity theft, already rampant, is among the fastest growing financial crimes in America.1 The best estimates2 place the number of victims in excess of 100,000 per year and the dollar loss in excess of $2 billion per year.3 The growth of identity theft appears to be geometric,4 reflecting the fact that the consumer-credit system has no effective defenses against it. Congress's first attempt to respond to the problem--the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act of 1998(5)--has had little effect. Several bills directed at identity theft are now pending in Congress6 and nearly all states have enacted their own legislation. But even the staunchest advocates of the proposed reforms admit that they will not solve the problem.8 Identity theft is out of control.9 Used broadly, "identity theft" refers to any impersonation of a specific individual.10 In the scheme most commonly referred to as identity theft--the one principally addressed in this article--the thief opens a credit account in the name of the victim.11 That account may be a credit-card account, an account for telephone or utility service, a lease of an apartment, or some similar credit extension.12 The thief obtains money, goods, or services, charges them to the account, and then disappears. This type of identity theft has two victims. First, the firm that extends credit (hereinafter the "creditor" or the "defrauded creditor") will lose the amount extended. Second, the person whose name is used (hereinafter the "victim" or the "impersonated victim") will be blamed for the fraud. Defrauded creditors have both legal and practical means for dealing with the problem. They are likely to employ such means as are cost effective, and pass the remaining costs on to their other customers. As developed further below, impersonated victims have neither legal nor practical means for dealing with the problem. This Article principally addresses their plight. Although the impersonated victim is not involved in the fraudulent credit transactions perpetrated by the identity thief and suffers no direct loss from those transactions, the victim usually suffers from various secondary effects. Thinking that it extended credit to the victim, the defrauded creditor initiates collection action against the victim. The action may include phone calls, written demands for payment, refusal to extend future credit, legal action, and perhaps most importantly, credit reporting. This often destroys the victim's ability to obtain credit from any source. In some cases, it may render the victim unemployable or even land the victim in jail.13 The impersonated victims in these scenarios are not liable for the obligations incurred in their names. Thus, the resulting credit reports are false. Nevertheless, those victims have no legal remedy for the false reporting if the credit-reporting agency followed "reasonable procedures."14 Federal law exempts both creditors and the credit-reporting agencies from liability for their false statements about the victims of identity theft. With certain exceptions not relevant here, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act provides: [N]o consumer may bring any action or proceeding in the nature of defamation, invasion of privacy, or negligence with respect to the reporting of information against any consumer reporting agency, any user of information [disclosed in a consumer credit report] or any person who furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency, based on information disclosed [through credit reporting] except as to false information furnished with malice or willful intent to injure such consumer.15 The credit-reporting agency's only duty is to "reinvestigate"--if and when the person reported on demands it.16 In practice, the credit-reporting agency "reinvestigates" by sending the victim's complaint and the disputed information to the creditor who initially furnished the information. …