Sen. Rockefeller challenges Experian credit bureau CEO
Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington on Aug. 3, 2011.
Photo by AP
Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., who has a reputation for going after data brokers, sent a letter to the CEO of Experian when he learned that one of the credit bureau's recent acquisitions had sold Social Security numbers to identity thieves.
KrebsOnSecurity has been conducting an investigation of a number of surreptitious sales among companies and countries. Former Washington Post writer Brian Krebs and his readers were able to backtrack from “sourceid” metadata attached to consumer records being sold online. The data led to an American company, USInfoSearch.com, whose CEO in turn blamed a third company, Court Ventures, with whom they had signed an information-sharing agreement.
Court Ventures, which “aggregates, repackages and distributes public record data, obtained from over 1,400 state and county sources,” was bought by Experian about a year ago.
U.S. Info Search's CEO says that the people selling this extraordinarily sensitive information accessed Experian's records by posing as a U.S.-based private investigator. They are based in Vietnam.
U.S. Info Search found out about the leak only because it was contacted by the Secret Service, which had obtained a grand jury subpoena against the company. In other words, there's a possibility that Experian might be prosecuted. Acquisitions come with liabilities.
Rockefeller is demanding answers from Donald Robert, Experian's CEO. What seems particularly worrying to Rockefeller, as Natasha Singer reported in The New York Times, is “whether Experian as a company has appropriate practices in place for vetting its customers and sharing sensitive consumer data with them, regardless of the particular line of business.”
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.