Home > Identity Theft > Obama’s Data Security Plan: Do As I Say, Not As I Do

Comments 0 Comments

“If we’re going to be connected, then we need to be protected,” President Obama proclaimed at the Federal Trade Commission on Monday. In wide-ranging remarks, the president expressed what should be a self-evident truth, but is not yet a reality in the new digital age: “As Americans, we shouldn’t have to forfeit our basic privacy when we go online to do our business.”

He is dead right. But having spent the past decade focusing on these issues, I’m not ready to take a “Birdman” victory lap through the canyons of midtown Manhattan just yet. In fact, I find myself thinking about the parallels that exist between the president’s remarks on privacy and cybersecurity and those scenes in the Academy Award-nominated film, the ones between Michael Keaton’s character Riggan Thomson and Birdman, the alter-ego only he can see and hear. There was a lot of talk about policy, but very little in the way of a road map.

A recent report on data security practices, programs and defenses at the Department of Homeland Security points toward what may well be a horrible train wreck to come. According to the report, “Widespread weaknesses in the federal government’s information security practices represent a significant vulnerability that could be exploited by adversaries, creating a potential threat to national security and American citizens.”

Listed among the DHS fails are many incidents, including one from 2013, when hackers got into the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers network and downloaded “information about 85,000 dams…and the potential fatalities that could be caused by a breach.” Another example, “The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) stored sensitive cybersecurity details for nuclear plants on an unprotected shared drive, making them more vulnerable to theft.” And perhaps even more alarming, “In February 2013, hackers…breached the Federal Communications Commission’s Emergency Broadcast System to broadcast warnings in Michigan, Montana, and North Dakota about a zombie attack.” Successful attacks on Centcom’s Twitter account and the breach at the White House further make the point that the government is not crushing it when it comes to cybersecurity.

What About Those Weak Links?

One of the key initiatives being proposed in next week’s State of the Union address is a Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights. This will be the second one, the first having been originally unveiled at a White House ceremony that I attended in 2012. I had liked the song the president was singing then, and this time around the second verse is pretty much same as the first. Obama will now ask Congress to codify privacy protections in a law that features seven guiding principles designed to empower consumers by giving them some agency regarding the way companies collect, confirm, protect and disseminate their personal data.

While the president is to be commended for finally moving the issues of identity theft protection, consumer privacy and cyber-security to the front burner, I can’t help noticing a crucial issue omitted in Obama’s remarks. Most agencies of the federal government don’t currently meet the guidelines that Obama will discuss on Jan. 20, and there doesn’t seem to be a plan of action to make the change we need, the change we want to see or even a change for the better.

Given the political make-up of the “new” Congress, is there any chance meaningful laws will follow on the heels of President Obama’s lead in these areas?

With the exception of putting the spotlight on America’s cybersecurity issues, one of the most crucial proposals made by Obama this week is the call for the passage of a federal breach notification law. State legislatures have filled the void by enacting an inconsistent patchwork of both strong and weak breach notification laws that have different requirements and create uncertainty and confusion in the business and nonprofit communities. If Obama’s plan becomes the law of the land, consumers would be guaranteed notification that their personally identifiable information was involved in a breach within 30 days of it happening, although exceptions can be made. While it would appear to pre-empt tougher state notification laws, the proposed legislation does permit state authorities to enforce consumer privacy protection laws that the federal bill does not cover.

“Each of us as individuals have a sphere of privacy around us that should not be breached,” the President said, “whether by our government, but also by commercial interests.”

Having proposed a few breach notification ideas over the past few years, including a federally-mandated Breach Notification Box that would let consumers know an organization’s data safety record at a glance, I couldn’t help but notice that there was no “there” there in this sketch of our nation’s new plan for a safer and more secure future. Indeed, the federal government doesn’t even meet the requirements outlined in his proposal.

And there’s the rub. Obama is calling for, “a single, strong national standard so Americans know when their information has been stolen or misused,” but federal agencies were not specifically mentioned and, in my opinion, one has to at least wonder if the federal government will try to take a pass.

Meeting Tougher Standards

According to a Government Accountability Office report last year, fewer than 30% of federal agencies comply with the proposed Personal Data Notification and Protection Act. The United States Postal Service, the Energy Department, the State Department and a few other agencies of note have suffered significant breaches of highly sensitive personal information over the past few years, and not one of them informed the individuals affected within the stipulated one-month period now advocated by the White House.

There are rules in place that make it necessary to inform Homeland Security of a breach, but no national law in the wider world of American consumers and employees. Legislation exists that would deal with this issue, requiring government agencies to inform breach victims within 72 hours In fact, it was passed in the House last year, but the Senate never voted on it. One wonders if the administration will use this opportunity to push the envelope regarding federal agencies and breach notification when he outlines America’s plan to provide better data security for its citizens next week.

It’s a new thing for a president to telegraph in such a granular way what he’s going to say in the State of the Union Address. Let’s hope the president was doing it by way of a market test, and that early reactions—including this one—to the remarks he made this week at the FTC and Department of Homeland Security will help him make a good idea into a real plan, and get Congress to pass the necessary laws to put it into effect.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its partners.

More on Identity Theft:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team