Big Brother is Watching You

[Vrede too]

I don't know the specifics of Seth Milner's bitchin', but as general rule I shun all financial e-registrations unless the consequent inconvenience is great. Even supposedly secure systems get hacked all the time.

[O Really]

Yes, and less secure get hacked more. But Seth was complaining about them wanting his phone number to send a security text - as if they'd send a message that would turn into a tracker or maybe implant thoughts in his mind while he talked. I'm thinking, these people (SSA) have your SSN, your address, your employer, your earnings, your birthdate... and he thinks somehow they'll do something bad to him because they can call/text him?

[Vrede too]

To be fair, giving out your cell number does open you up to more abuse of all types, some potentially serious. If Seth thinks that SSA itself is going to abuse him, I doubt it. No one wants to mess with tens of millions of cranky retiree voters.

[Seth Milner]

What do you think, SSA is going to send you robo marketing calls? Sell your number to time share solicitors? Do you think if the evil NSA or whoever wants your number they can't find it?

You're being purposely obtuse. Of course I'm not concerned with those possibilities. There are cell phones by the gazillions out there that are not registered in the owner's name; mine being one of them; it's a pay as you go. Of course, the NSA can track conversations from them, but knowing WHO is conversing is their concern. Now, by "EXECUTIVE ORDER", SSA is "required" to obtain SS recipient's cell numbers so as to "verify their identities" before they can log into their SS accounts. Not owning a phone or refusing to provide your number, essentially locks you out of the privilege of viewing your SS account online. Now think about that a moment . . . wouldn't you say that is a sneaky-assed way to collect cell numbers, especially since home landlines do not have text capabilities? What happened to security questions, like what was the name of your Mama's first pet billy-goat's sister, or some silly shit like that? In my opinion, it's simply another way for more government control.

I don't know the specifics of Seth Milner's bitchin', but as general rule I shun all financial e-registrations unless the consequent inconvenience is great. Even supposedly secure systems get hacked all the time.

If you'd read what I posted, you'd know. I can't believe you still childishly "ignore" what I post. Anyway, I too shun financial e-registrations; I also do not do automatic log-in to my email accounts.

....Seth was complaining about them wanting his phone number to send a security text - as if they'd send a message that would turn into a tracker or maybe implant thoughts in his mind while he talked. I'm thinking, these people (SSA) have your SSN, your address, your employer, your earnings, your birth date... and he thinks somehow they'll do something bad to him because they can call/text him?

Are you taking Vrede lessons? Or are you speaking from experience? I don't give a rip about them texting me; it's the principle of their not allowing people to access their accounts unless they have a cell phone that the government can gain access to!

To be fair, giving out your cell number does open you up to more abuse of all types, some potentially serious. If Seth thinks that SSA itself is going to abuse him, I doubt it. No one wants to mess with tens of millions of cranky retiree voters.

Good answer! As stated, I'm not worried about myself; I can handle my affairs without the government's help.

[O Really]

Are you taking Vrede lessons? Or are you speaking from experience? I don't give a rip about them texting me; it's the principle of their not allowing people to access their accounts unless they have a cell phone that the government can gain access to!
.[/color]

Well, you have access to your account, just not through the SSA website. But BTW, the Social Security Administration is the government.

[Seth Milner]

Are you taking Vrede lessons? Or are you speaking from experience? I don't give a rip about them texting me; it's the principle of their not allowing people to access their accounts unless they have a cell phone that the government can gain access to!

Well, you have access to your account, just not through the SSA website. But BTW, the Social Security Administration is the government.

A branch of the government; a branch that is in a position to share/glean information; the point of my tirade.

[Vrede too]

If described correctly, that does seem weird that one can access the account with a cell phone but not online. I wonder what the rationale for that is?

Why are you whining about me, Seth Milner? I'm partially, at least, on your side here. No good deed . . .

[Seth Milner]

If described correctly, that does seem weird that one can access the account with a cell phone but not online. I wonder what the rationale for that is?
That's not it. They send you a text with a code word/number to use to access your account online.

Why are you whining about me, Seth Milner? I'm partially, at least, on your side here. No good deed . . .
I'm not whining about you, Vrede; I was only describing the reply from O Really that bore similarities to many of yours.
I appreciate your "defense" of my tirade against Big Brother.

[O Really]

I'm not defending the pain in the ass requirement, but it's no different from a lot of places that you register an email address and/or phone number to verify your access later. You (somebody) enters a username and a password. Could be anybody who stole your info. They send a verification number to your email or text your phone for you to use. That way they're reasonably sure that the person who registered is the person accesses the data (or at least has killed off that person and already stolen his identity). I get an email or text from American Express every time there's a transaction without the card being present (like I ordered something online). I get an email from the bank every time I add a new billpay person. What would make the SSA account process a pain is having to do it everytime, but really, how often does one need to access it? And they can't use a landline because it doesn't have text capability. I'll bet there is an email option on the SSA site, though. Could be wrong, but I think it's likely.

[Vrede too]

It is every time.

Starting in August 2016, Social Security is adding a new step to protect your privacy as a mySocialSecurity user.
This new requirement is the result of an executive order (from who?) for federal agencies to provide more secure authentication for their online services. Any agency that provides online access to a customer’s personal information must use multi-factor authentication.

When you sign in at ssa.gov/myaccount with your username and password, we will ask you to add your text-enabled cell phone number.
The purpose of providing your cell phone number is that, each time you log in to your account with your username and password,
we will send you a one-time security code you must also enter to log in successfully to your account.

Each time you sign into your account, you will complete two steps:

Step 1: Enter your username and password.
Step 2: Enter the security code we text to your cell phone (cell phone provider's text message and data rates may apply).
The process of using a one-time security code in addition to a username and password is one form of “multi-factor authentication,”
which means we are using more than one method to make sure you are the actual owner of your account.

So, the question is whether the added security is worth the hassle. I don't know. It definitely is harder to highjack 2 devices than one . . . unless SSA gets hacked, in which case the hackers have theoretical access to both your devices.

If you do not have a text-enabled cell phone or you do not wish to provide your cell phone number, you will not be able to access your "mySocialSecurity account".

If you are unable to or choose not to use mySocialSecurity, there are other ways you can contact us.

I guess how much hassle these "other ways" are is important. We are talking mostly about old people. Another thing to consider is how protected all this is from the NSA and LEOs. All else equal, I'd rather not give my cell number to the government.

[Seth Milner]

I'll bet there is an email option on the SSA site, though. Could be wrong, but I think it's likely.

It's like they're requiring SS recipients to acquire a cell phone.
The new rule goes into effect August 1st. . . . we'll see.

All else equal, I'd rather not give my cell number to the government . . . We are talking mostly about old people.

Bingo.
I know many old folks who don't have nor want a cell phone . . . some don't even have or want a frickin' computer!

I just saw this a bit clearer: "The process of using a one-time security code in addition to a username and password...."
Maybe it's only going to be a one-time thing; I may have over-reacted; however, I'm still not keen on giving them my cell number. . . period.

[O Really]

I ask again, to either, both, or all of you - exactly what do you think the government is going to do with your cell number?

[Seth Milner]

I ask again, to either, both, or all of you - exactly what do you think the government is going to do with your cell number?

Re: Big Brother is Watching You

[O Really]

Unless you are willing to acknowledge just being paranoid, that's not a responsive answer. So they're "watching." What do you think they're going to do with your cell number?

[Seth Milner]

Unless you are willing to acknowledge just being paranoid, that's not a responsive answer. So they're "watching." What do you think they're going to do with your cell number?

I dunno . . . what DO they do with cell numbers? I mean after all, cell phones operate on over-the-air frequencies; why does the government have gigantic listening telescopes that cannot pick up landline conversations?

[O Really]

I've had my cell number since about mid-90's or so. Through at least three different carriers. Probably more than a thousand people have my number, including (but not limited to) Lawyers and Doctors, and Feds - oh my! Theoretical risk notwithstanding, I don't get robo calls, I don't get marketing calls, I do occasionally get a call the filter calls "spam" but it's usually as innocuous as an alma mater wanting money. I figure the phone is largely for my convenience, and I use it so people can get in touch with me, whether by text, voice, or email. Sorry guys, you're going to have to work harder to scare me.

[O Really]

Here's the Executive Order you asked about. It's Section 3 that's resulted in your heartburn.
Most people (particularly the paranoid) would read that EO and think it's a good idea.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ansactions

[Vrede too]

I ask again, to either, both, or all of you - exactly what do you think the government is going to do with your cell number?

As a nonviolent radical activist and otherwise miscreant , probably more than it would ever do to Seth Milner. That bad things can happen is well known, either directly or through hacking. I'm not saying what I would do re SSA, I'd have to look at the alternatives and I've already expressed appreciation for the enhanced security. It's just a general rule for me to keep e-things private as much as I can.

[Seth Milner]

Here's the Executive Order you asked about....

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-of ... ansactions

Damn smart-ass lawyers! A body can't even have their own ass-burn in peace!

I could have looked it up; but I was too lazy; besides I knew you had to have your moment of glory! Carry on.

[O Really]

Oh, the ol' "...bad things that can happen..." bugaboo. OMG, if I spent much time thinking about the bad things that can happen, I probably wouldn't get out of bed - or wouldn't get into the bed. /sarcasm. While it's not only reasonable but necessary to take precautions with ones personal information online, the issue that started this line was about giving a cellphone number to an agency that has all your personal information already. And in Seth's case, a burner phone at that! I don't do things inherently careless, like putting my whole life on Facebook and posting (paraphrased), "I'm going to go off on vacation for two weeks and wouldn't you know it, my alarm system is on the blink and the neighbors are all gone, too. I'm glad all the guns are safely stowed away in a closet in the basement." On the other hand, I'm not going to live like it is 1916 just on the ridiculously small chance of some of those "bad things that can happen" coming my way. BTW, do you suppose that if the feds are interested in harassing non-violent activists and general miscreants that there is information they can't discover? Sure, if they're really out to get you, then paranoid is not only the way to go but is a survival skill. For the rest of us, though, not so much.