You’ve heard of the websites that can locate sex offenders near you. Maybe you’ve even used them to scope out your neighborhood. But are those websites giving you the full picture? What if some sex offenders are flying under the radar? According to a recently released study from Utica College, more than 16 percent of sex offenders attempt to avoid mandatory monitoring by manipulating their identity. They use multiple aliases, use various personal identifying information such as social security numbers or date of birth, steal identity information from family members, manipulate their name, use family or friends’ addresses, alter their physical appearance or move to states with less stringent laws. Finding ways to slide under the radar means registered sex offenders could live near schools and playgrounds, or even gain unapproved employment. In one case, 29-year-old Neil Rodreick enrolled in at least four schools in Arizona, posing as a 12-year-old boy. He was finally caught when one school was unable to verify the information on his paperwork. A parallel study conducted by Utica demonstrated that awareness of identity manipulation of sex offenders is low. Of 223 law enforcement agencies surveyed in 46 states, only five percent knew of an identity manipulation case within their jurisdiction. Close to half (40 percent) of respondents said that they had zero cases, indicating that some may not even be aware of this issue. Clearly, additional monitoring is needed. Experian offers sex offender monitoring that conducts an in-depth search of sex offender registries in all 50 states, Washington D.C., Puerto Rico and Guam to help find and identify sex offenders. It also provides notifications when a sex offender is living in or moves to a customer’s neighborhood, or if a sex offender registers under a different name using a customer’s address. Monitoring identity and credit information is also another way to stay aware of sex offenders using one’s personal credentials. Do you feel that current sex offender tracking is working? Are there other tools or systems states should be using to track them? Visit our website for more information on identity protection products you can offer your customers.
2011 was the 12th consecutive year that identity theft topped the list of FTC consumer complaints. Florida had the highest rate of complaints, followed by Georgia and California. Rank State Complaints per 100,000 population 1 Florida 179 2 Georgia 120 3 California 104 Learn how to detect and manage fraud activity while meeting regulatory requirements. Source: Consumer info.com infographic and FTC's Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January-December 2011.
Customers see a data breach and the loss of their personal data as a threat to their security and finances, and with good reason. Identity theft occurs every four seconds in the United States, according to figures from the Federal Trade Commission. As consumers become savvier about protecting their personal data, they expect companies to do the same. And to go the extra mile for them if a data breach occurs. That means providing protection through extended fraud resolution that holds up under scrutiny. Protection that offers peace of mind, not just in the interim but years down the line. The stronger the level of protection you provide to individuals affected in a breach, the stronger their brand loyalty. Just like with any product, consumers can tell the difference between valid protection products that work and ones that just don’t. Experian® Data Breach Resolution takes care to provide the former, protection that works for your customers or employees affected in a breach and that reflects positively on you, as the company providing the protection. Experian’s ProtectMyID® Elite or ProtectMyID Alert provides industry-leading identity protection and, now, extended fraud resolution care. ExtendCARE™ now comes standard with every ProtectMyID data breach redemption membership, at no additional cost to you or the member. With ExtendCARE, the identity theft resolution portion of ProtectMyID remains active even when the full membership isn’t. ExtendCARE allows members to receive personalized assistance, not just advice, from an Identity Theft Resolution Agent. This high level of assistance is available any time identity theft occurs after individuals redeem their ProtectMyID memberships. Extended fraud resolution from a global leader like Experian can put consumers’ minds at ease following a breach. If we can help you with pre-breach planning or data breach resolution, reach out to us via our contact form on our contact page.
Our guest blogger this week is Tom Bowers, Managing Director, Security Constructs LLC – a security architecture, data leakage prevention and global enterprise information consulting firm. The rash of large-scale data breaches in the news this year begs many questions, one of which is this: how do hackers select their victims? The answer: research. Hackers do their homework; in fact, an actual hack typically takes place only after many hours of first studying the target. Here’s an inside look at a hacker in action: Using search queries through such resources as Google and job sites, the hacker creates an initial map of the target’s vulnerabilities. For example, job sites can offer a wealth of information such as hardware and software platform usage, including specific versions and its use within the enterprise. The hacker fills out the map with a complete intelligence database on your company, perhaps using public sources such as government databases, financial filings and court records. Attackers want to understand such details as how much you spend on security each year, other breaches you’ve suffered, and whether you’re using LDAP or federated authentication systems. The hacker tries to identify the person in charge of your security efforts. As they research your Chief Security Officer or Chief Intelligence Security Officer (who they report to, conferences attended, talks given, media interviews, etc.) hackers can get a sense of whether this person is a political player or a security architect, and can infer the target’s philosophical stance on security and where they’re spending time and attention within the enterprise. Next, hackers look for business partners, strategic customers and suppliers used by the target. Sometimes it may be easier to attack a smaller business partner than the target itself. Once again, this information comes from basic search engine queries; attackers use job sites and corporate career sites to build a basic map of the target’s network. Once assembled, all of this information offers a list of potential and likely egress points within the target. While there is little you can do to prevent hackers from researching your company, you can reduce the threat this poses by conducting the same research yourself. Though the process is a bit tedious to learn, it is free to use; you are simply conducting competitive intelligence upon your own enterprise. By reviewing your own information, you can draw similar conclusions to the attackers, allowing you to strengthen those areas of your business that may be at risk. For example, if you want to understand which of your web portals may be exposed to hackers, use the following search term in Google: “site:yourcompanyname.com – www.yourcompanyname.com” This query specifies that you want to see everything on your site except WWW sites. Web portals do not typically start with WWW and this query will show “eportal.yourcompanyname, ecomm.yourcompanyname.” Portals are a great place to start as they usually contain associated user names and passwords; this means that a database is storing these credentials, which is a potential goldmine for attackers. You can set up a Google Alert to constantly watch for new portals; simply type in your query, select how often you want updates, and Google will send you an alert every time a new portal shows up in its results. Knowledge is power. The more you know about your own business, the better you can protect it from becoming prey to hacker-hawks circling in cyberspace. Download our free Data Breach Response Guide
By: Kennis Wong On the surface, it’s not difficult to define existing account fraud. Obviously, it is fraud perpetrated against an existing account. But the way I see it, existing account fraud can be broken down into four types. The first type is account takeover fraud, which is what most organizations think as the de facto existing account fraud. This is when a real consumer using his or her own identity to open a legitimate account, but the account later on get taken over by an identity fraudster. The idea is that when the account was first established, it was created by the rightful person. But somewhere along the way, the account and identity information were compromised. The fraudster uses the compromised information to engineer their way into the account. The second type is impersonation. Impersonation is somewhat similar to account takeover in the sense that it is also misusing the victim’s account. But the difference is that impersonation is more of a one or few times misuses of the account. Examples are a fraudulent use of a credit card or wire transfer. These are the obvious categories. But I think we should also think about these other categories. My definition of existing account fraud also includes this third type – identity fraud that was undetected during application. In other words, an account is established based on stolen identity. Many organizations call this “new account fraud”, which I don’t have a problem with. But I think it’s really also existing account fraud, because – is this existing account? The answer is yes. Is this fraud? Absolutely. It’s not that difficult, is it? Similarly, I am including first-party fraud in existing account fraud as well. A consumer can use his or her own identity to open an account, with an intention to default after the account is established. Example is bust out fraud. You see that this is an expanded definition of existing account fraud, because my focus is on detection. No matter at what point and how identity fraud comes in, it becomes an account in your organization, and that is where we need to discover the fraud. But at the end of the day, it’s not too important how to categorize or name the fraud - whether it's application fraud, existing account fraud, first party fraud or third party fraud, as long as organizations understand them enough and have a good way to detect them. Read more blog posts on existing account fraud.
By: Kristan Frend I was recently pleased to see that the state I reside in, Minnesota finished in the bottom third of a state ranking. Luckily the rankings weren’t about overall health (#6), high school graduation (#3), or SAT scores (#2); instead it was the Federal Trade Commission’s state identity theft complaint ranks. Minnesota has just 49.2 complaints per 100,000 population, whereas the highest ranked state, Florida, as 114.8 complaints per 100,000 population. The top three states leading identity theft consumer complaints (per 100,000 population) included Florida, Arizona, and California. Besides warm sunshine and top-tier golf courses, what do these three states have in common? According to the February 2011 RealtyTrac U.S. Foreclosure Market Report™, all three rank in the top 5 states for foreclosure, and two of the three (Florida and California) rank #49 and #50 in unemployment rates, according to a March 2011 report released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. On a national level unemployment rates and identity fraud incidence rates both improved from 2009 to 2010. From 2009 to 2010, unemployment rates went from 10.0% to 9.4% while according to Javelin’s 2010 Annual Identity Fraud Survey Report, identity fraud incidence rates fell from 4.8% to 3.5%. While it may be inaccurate to state that economic distress causes higher rates of identity fraud, there does seem to be a natural correlation between economic downswings and fraudulent activity. As we move further into 2011, it will be interesting to see if identity fraud incidence rates will continue to decrease as unemployment and economic outlook is on the upward swing.
By: Kristan Frend According to the 2011 Identity Theft Assistance Center Outlook (ITAC), new forms of small business identity theft are emerging. This shouldn’t be a surprise that criminals view small business accounts as a lucrative funding source. What is surprising is that the ‘new’ form of small business identity theft consists of the U.S. Postal Inspection Service reporting a surge in criminal rings using small business information from stolen mail, check writing software and other tactics to counterfeit checks. That’s the new wave of small business identity theft??? I consider this one of the least sophisticated types of fraud that can easily be eliminated by small business owners not leaving mail unattended. Reading this report makes me realize that we have a long way to go in identifying and reporting the more sophisticated types of small business fraud. As I’ve mentioned before, the industry has come a long way in advancing consumer fraud solutions. Yet, as fraud has migrated into business accounts, we as an industry still have a ways to go in reporting the latest business fraud trends and tracking statistics. I’m adding this to my wish list for 2011… What’s on your wish list? On a side note, I’ve noticed nearly all of the articles posted in our blog include no reader comments. I’d like to think that this means our readers are too busy to add comments and/or our articles are so well-written that they answer all of your questions. One can dream right? Seriously though, as we approach 2011 and plan our topics, we’d love to hear from you- if you can think of any topic you’d like us to cover more in depth, please let us know.
By: Kennis Wong In the last entry, I mentioned that consumers’ participation in protecting their own identity information is an important aspect of an identity theft prevention program to minimize fraud loss. Large financial institutions are starting to take charge in educating their customers, but others are having a hard time investing in such initiatives. I do understand that it is difficult to establish a direct linkage of revenue and positive return on investment for this type of activities. Business may view customer education of identity protection as a public service but not a necessity. After all, if my customer loses his identity information, it doesn’t necessarily mean that identity fraud will happen to my very own organization. But educating customers about identity protection and fraud trends can be a marketing tool and can increase customer loyalty, in additions to actual fraud prevention. Although consumers may not be aware of all the precautions they can take to protect their identity, undoubtedly identity theft is a hot topic in the media today. If there are two banks providing about the same service, but one of them goes an extra mile to provide me education on preventing identity theft, I would go with that bank. Also, as a financial institution, if my customers understand identity protection more, they would understand why I am putting some procedure in place and would be glad to comply with them. For example, they would be more patient when spending another minute in answering knowledge-based authentication questions, so that for their own protection, the bank can assure they are the true identity owners. Consumers can also actively monitor their credit report, whether through the bank or through other third party vendors. When consumers receive fraud alert from activities that could be a result of identity theft, they can actively contact the financial institutions about the situation. The sooner the identity fraud is discovered, the better off for both the consumers and the businesses.
By: Kennis Wong As a fraud management professional, naturally I am surrounded by fraud prevention topics and other professionals in the field all the time. Financial, ecommerce, retail, telecommunication, government and other organizations are used to talking about performance, scoring models, ROI, false-positives, operational efficiency, customer satisfaction trade-off, loss provisioning, decisioning strategy or any other sophisticated measures when it comes to fraud management. But when I bring up the topic of fraud outside of this circle, I am always surprised to see how little educated the general public is about an issue that is so critical to their financial health. I met a woman in an event several weeks ago. After learning about my occupation, she told me her story about someone from XYZ credit card company calling her and asking for her Social Security number, date of birth and other personal identifying information. Only days after she gave out the information that she realized things didn’t seem right. She called the credit card company and got her credit card re-issued. But at the time I talked to her, she still didn’t know enough to realize that the fraudster could now use her identity to start any new financial relationship under her name. As long as consumers are ignorant about protecting their identity information, businesses’ identity theft prevention program will not be complete and identity fraud will occur as a result of this weak link. To address this vulnerability and minimize fraud, consumers need to be educated.
Quite a scary new (although in some ways old) form of identity theft in the headlines recently. Here’s a link to the article, which talks about how children’s dormant Social Security numbers are being found and sold by companies online under the guise of CPN’s – aka credit profile numbers or credit protection numbers. Using deceased, “found”, or otherwise illicitly obtained Social Security numbers is not something new. Most identity theft prevention programs consider deceased and non-issued ranges as identity theft red flags under the FACTA Red Flag guidelines. In fact, Experian’s and any good identity verification tool is going to check against the Social Security Administration’s list of numbers listed as deceased as well as ensure the submitted number is in an SSA valid issue range – providing fraud alerts if not. A child’s valid but dormant Social Security number, however, would not flag as either. The two things I find most troubling here are: One, the sellers have found a way around the law by not calling them Social Security numbers and calling them CPN’s instead. That seems ludicrous! But, in fact, the article goes on to state that “Because the numbers exist in a legal gray area, federal investigators have not figured out a way to prosecute the people involved”. Two, because of the anonymity and the ability to quickly set up and abandon “shop”, the online marketplace is the perfect venue for both buyer and seller to connect with minimal risk of being caught. What can we as consumers and businesses take away from this? As consumers, we’re reminded to be ever vigilant about the disclosure of not only OUR Social Security number but that of our family members as well. For businesses, it’s a reminder to take advantage of additional identity verification and fraud prediction tools, such as Experian’s Precise ID, Knowledge IQ, and BizID, when making credit decisions or opening accounts rather than relying solely on consumer credit scores. Knowledge IQ’s knowledge based authentication offers out of wallet questions that may help ensure you’re dealing with the true consumer.
By: Ken Pruett I want to touch a bit on some of the third party fraud scenarios that are often top of mind with our customers: identity theft; synthetic identities; and account takeover. Identity Theft Identity theft usually occurs during the acquisition stage of the customer life cycle. Simply put, identity theft is the use of stolen identity information to fraudulently open up a new account. These accounts do not have to be just credit card related. For example, there are instances of people using others identities to open up wireless phone and utilities accounts Recent fraud trends show this type of fraud is on the rise again after a decrease over the past several years. A recent Experian study found that people who have better credit scores are more likely to have their identity stolen than those with very poor credit scores. It does seem logical that fraudsters would likely opt to steal an identity from someone with higher credit limits and available purchasing power. This type of fraud gets the majority of media attention because it is the consumer who is often the victim (as opposed to a major corporation). Fraud changes over time and recent findings show that looking at data from a historical perspective is a good way to help prevent identity theft. For example, if you see a phone number being used by multiple parties, this could be an indicator of a fraud ring in action. Using these types of data elements can make your fraud models much more predictive and reduce your fraud referral rates. Synthetic Identities Synthetic Identities are another acquisition fraud problem. It is similar to identity theft, but the information used is fictitious in nature. The fraud perpetrator may be taking pieces of information from a variety of parties to create a new identity. Trade lines may be purchased from companies who act as middle men between good consumers with good credit and perpetrators who creating new identities. This strategy allows the fraud perpetrator to quickly create a fictitious identity that looks like a real person with an active and good credit history. Most of the trade lines will be for authorized users only. The perpetrator opens up a variety of accounts in a short period of time using the trade lines. When creditors try to collect, they can’t find the account owners because they never existed. As Heather Grover mentioned in her blog, this fraud has leveled off in some areas and even decreased in others, but is probably still worth keeping an eye on. One concern on which to focus especially is that these identities are sometimes used for bust out fraud. The best approach to predicting this type of fraud is using strong fraud models that incorporate a variety of non-credit and credit variables in the model development process. These models look beyond the basic validation and verification of identity elements (such as name, address, and social security number), by leveraging additional attributes associated with a holistic identity -- such as inconsistent use of those identity elements. Account Takeover Another type of fraud that occurs during the account management period of the customer life cycle is account takeover fraud. This type of fraud occurs when an individual uses a variety of methods to take over an account of another individual. This may be accomplished by changing online passwords, changing an address or even adding themselves as an authorized user to a credit card. Some customers have tools in place to try to prevent this, but social networking sites are making it easier to obtain personal information for many consumers. For example, a person may have been asked to provide the answer to a challenge question such as the name of their high school as a means to properly identify them before gaining access to a banking account. Today, this piece of information is often readily available on social networking sites making it easier for the fraud perpetrators to defeat these types of tools. It may be more useful to use out of wallet, or knowledge-based authentication and challenge tools that dynamically generate questions based on credit or public record data to avoid this type of fraud.
Well, here we are nearly at the beginning of November and the Red Flags Rule has been with us for nearly two years and the FTC’s November 1, 2009 enforcement date is upon us as well (I know I’ve said that before). There is little value in me chatting about the core requirements of the Red Flags Rule at this point. Instead, I’d like to shed some light on what we are seeing and hearing these days from our clients and industry experts related to this initiative: Red Flags Rule responses clients 1. Most clients have a solid written and operational Identity Theft Prevention Program in place that arguably meets their interpretation of the Red Flags Rule requirements. 2. Most clients have a solid written and operational Identity Theft Prevention Program in place that creates a boat-load of referrals due to the address mismatches generated in their process(es) and the requirement to do something with them. 3. Most clients are now focusing on ways in which to reduce the number of referrals generated and procedures to clear the remaining referrals via a cost-effective and automated manner…of course, while preventing fraud and staying compliant to Red Flags Rule. In 2008, a key focus at Experian was to help educate the market around the Red Flags Rule concepts and requirements. The concentration in 2009 has nearly fully shifted to assisting the market in creating risk-based authentication programs that leverage holistic views of a consumer, flexible tools that are pointed to a consumer based on that person’s authentication and risk profile. There is also an overall decisioning strategy that balances risk, compliance, and resource constraints. Spirit of Red Flags Rule The spirit of the Red Flags Rule is intended to ensure all covered institutions are employing basic identity theft prevention procedures (a pretty good idea). I believe most of these institutions (even those that had very robust programs in place years before the rule was introduced) can appreciate this requirement that brings all institutions up to speed. It is now, however, a matter of managing process within the realities of, and costs associated with, manpower, IT resources, and customer experience sensitivities.
As I wrote in my previous posting, a key Red Flags Rule challenge facing many institutions is one that manages the number of referrals generated from the detection of Red Flags conditions. The big ticket item in referral generation is the address mismatch condition. Identity Theft Prevention Program I’ve blogged previously on the subject of risk-based authentication and risk-based pricing, so I won’t rehash that information. What I will suggest, however, is that those institutions who now have an operational Identity Theft Prevention Program (if you don’t, I’d hurry up) should continue to explore the use of alternate data sources, analytics and additional authentication tools (such as knowledge-based authentication) as a way to detect Red Flags conditions and reconcile them all within the same real-time transaction. Referral rates Referral rates stemming from address mismatches (a key component of the Red Flags Rule high risk conditions) can approach or even surpass 30 percent. That is a lot. The good news is that there are tools which employ additional data sources beyond a credit profile to “find” that positive address match. The use of alternate data sources can often clear the majority of these initial mismatches, leaving the remaining transactions for treatment with analytics and knowledge-based authentication and Identity Theft Prevention Program. Whatever “referral management” process you have in place today, I’d suggest exploring risk-based authentication tools that allow you to keep the vast majority of those referrals out of the hands of live agents, and distanced from the need to put your customers through the authentication wringer. In the current marketplace, there are many services that allow you to avoid high referral costs and risks to customer experience. Of course, we think ours are pretty good.