From roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Sat Jun 10 10:30:30 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k5AGUUjb012347; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:30:30 -0600 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l.rootsweb.com [66.43.16.22]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AGUUom028407 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:30:30 -0600 Received: from roots-l.rootsweb.com (roots-l [127.0.0.1]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k5ADskFI021229 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:54:46 -0400 Received: (from roots-in@localhost) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.8/Submit) id k5ADskIj021228 for roots-approved@rootsweb.com; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:54:46 -0400 Received: from lists5.rootsweb.com (lists5.rootsweb.com [66.43.27.41]) by roots-l.rootsweb.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id k5ADrHFI021149 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 09:53:17 -0400 Received: (from slist@localhost) by lists5.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) id k5AGSoXf011613 for roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:28:50 -0600 X-Envelope-From: ChristieTrapp@aol.com Sat Jun 10 10:28:50 2006 Received: from mail.rootsweb.com (mail.rootsweb.com [192.168.65.34]) by admin.rootsweb.com (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k5AGSojb011602 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:28:50 -0600 Received: from imo-m17.mx.aol.com (imo-m17.mx.aol.com [64.12.138.207]) by mail.rootsweb.com (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k5AGSnCk027565 for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:28:50 -0600 Received: from ChristieTrapp@aol.com by imo-m17.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r7.5.) id e.275.b1eff85 (14457) for ; Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:28:42 -0400 (EDT) From: ChristieTrapp@aol.com Message-ID: <275.b1eff85.31bc4d3a@aol.com> Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 12:28:42 EDT To: ROOTS-L@rootsweb.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mailer: 9.0 Security Edition for Windows sub 5318 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 192.168.65.34 Sender: roots-in@roots-l.rootsweb.com Subject: [ROOTS-L] San Diego TV station seeks to have government censor SSDI In a message dated 6/10/2006 5:01:08 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, ROOTS-L-request@rootsweb.com writes: From: "Glen Todd" Subject: Re: [ROOTS-L] San Diego TV station seeks to have government censor SSDI If they really wanted to secure things, they could just star out the last three or four digits in the public listings. That would give enough information to confirm the identity without being 'liftable'. That could be done without touching the database itself at all, but just the display code. That way also a full number could be entered and checked, but numbers couldn't be browsed. Glen Blanking out the last 4 digits wouldn't be enough. I know for a fact that my husband and his 3 children all have the same social security number EXCEPT the last four digits along with probably thousands of other people with the first five numbers. So blanking them out wouldn't help companies who issue credit cards, or a government agency checking the SSDI stop identity theft. Christie