An American citizen’s social security number is the most essential piece of private information that they posses. The most glaring problem with the SSNs is that this highly sensitive personal information is so readily accessible. While there are some legitimate cases where an individual’s SSN is required for functions such as taxation, insurance, and employment, nearly all private organizations and businesses that require the information do so out of habit. There is always another kind of identification which may be used which is less threatening to someone’s financial security. The practice of collecting, sharing, and selling of customer’s SSNs for purposes beyond those that are truly necessary is widespread. These practices are the true high end problem of SSN identity fraud. Furthermore the tendency of mailing SSNs to private addresses leave the receiver in a high risk from low end identity fraud where by someone merely must steal a letter from a post box to obtain that individual’s SSN, full name, address, and possibly some other personal information.
A FTC report asserted that more than 8 million Americans were prey to a type of identity fraud in 2005, most those offenses stemming from the insufficiency of the safety of SSNs. Yet some government organizations have started to restrict the use of SSNs to curtail those profuse and upsetting figures. California was the first state to take the initiative to decrease the use and dissemination of SSNs in companies, medical care providers and colleges in 2001. It has now put into effect legislation that prevents those organizations from publicly post requiring a person to use their new ssn number to get a site; and printing and individuals. Numerous states have since passed legislation that mitigates using the amount as a primary key. When this finally happens, popular websites like social security number background check will probably be replaced with other sites that aggregate across a variety of different sources.
Yet the country to go the furthest to protect this vulnerable person details was Alaska, as it passed legislation hb 65 which comprehensively restricts the request, sharing, sale, and collection of SSNs for both personal and governmental organizations. The law also stipulated comparatively few exceptions for insurance, medical services, fraud prevention, or law enforcement. By severely restricting the collection, sharing and dispersing of SSNs Alaska has effectively reduced the threat of SSN misuse and identity fraud. Other states must follow Alaska’s avant-garde case must do this if the amount of identity fraud will be significantly reduced.