One year ago, President George W. Bush signed into law the Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act in response to the growing proliferation of Internet scams, such as phishing, pharming and other ploys aimed at stealing consumers' private information electronically. One year later, however, the evidence suggests that this new law has done nothing to reduce identity theft or fraud.
Rather, the number of publicly known identity theft cases has increased dramatically over the past year. Since January of 2005, there have been over 63 data  -security breaches exposing nearly 50 million identities. And there will be more, according to industry insiders.
ChoicePoint, LexisNexis, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and CardSystems are just a few examples of recent security breaches that led to the loss of sensitive consumer information. Some security experts -- albeit mostly in the software industry -- believe that laws such as the Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act and the CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 have proven to be ineffective in the fight against Internet crime.
Instead, they say companies must take responsibility for implementing new protective technologies that address these vulnerabilities head on. Others argue that the federal government has to fix what does not yet work in its ID theft legislation.
ITPEA at a Glance
The Identity Theft Penalty Enhancement Act (ITPEA) establishes penalties for identity theft committed in connection with the commission of a felony. From a legal standpoint, the new law merely updates existing penalties and brings identity theft into the electronic age. Perhaps its most stringent scare tactic is to prescribe a two-year jail term for anyone convicted of using somebody else's identity in connection with a felony. In essence, it doubled the incarceration penalty.
The law connects identity theft to violations of various sections of the Social Security Act and the false acquisition of others' Social Security and veterans' benefits. The law also makes it more difficult for judges to issue more lenient penalties.
Because some courts do not consider the totals from all counts for the purpose of imposing sentences, the change in the new law results in longer prison sentences by those courts. Also, the law prevents judges from placing any person convicted of such a violation on probation.
According to Marc Hubbard of the Texas law firm of Munsch Hardt Kopf & Harr, the ITPEA and the CAN-SPAM Act were primarily intended to make for easier prosecution and punishment of the perpetrators, once caught. (continued...)
|
Rackspace: It makes a difference when you focus on support.
House Lawmakers Push Ban on Peer-to-Peer Software
GAO: Los Alamos Computer Security Has Weaknesses
Computer Security Firm Fortinet Plans IPO This Week
Flat Shipments Hurt Dell Despite Increased Earnings
New Pogoplug 'Personal Cloud' Does Social Networking
Apple Tablet Rumored Delayed as Publisher Gears Up
Smartphones: A Bigger Target for Security Threats
FBI Says Hackers Targeting Law Firms, PR Companies