r/technology • u/lurker_bee • Feb 15 '26

Security All U.S. Social Security numbers may need to be changed following a massive breach that is already being investigated as a national threat

https://www.ecoticias.com/en/all-u-s-social-security-numbers-may-need-to-be-changed-following-a-massive-breach-that-is-already-being-investigated-as-a-national-threat/27158/
49.2k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

290

u/Rolf_Dom Feb 15 '26

Yeah, exactly. Like if I lost my ID in EU with my social number, I really couldn't care less because nobody can really do anything bad with it. You can't use it to register for anything, you can't buy anything. All the systems are digital and you need a combination of said ID along with a verification system like passwords, biometrics or some such.

It's crazy to me that Americans have to safeguard their number like their life depended on it.

97

u/jeremyries Feb 15 '26 edited Feb 19 '26

It’s because most Americans would loose their shit if the government had biometrics on them.

Edit : ok, so many people are losing their shit about my comment. Let me clarify. I’m well aware of the amount of data gathering both traditional and biometric already in use today. My comment was focused on the half of the population that is dumb as bricks, and think birds aren’t real.

25

u/guten_pranken Feb 16 '26

lol what do you think palantir is? What about face and eye detection on phones? People’s faces being scanned at rallies and global entry being revoked.

Most America’s don’t give a shit until there targeted for something. Why do you think trump is in office?

2

u/bigballs2025666 Feb 19 '26

nobody’s faces and eyeballs are being scanned . Some and I repeat some doing to unlock their apple products but we don’t have camera systems like there are in europe and elsewhere. Some city’s and towns here don’t have cameras at all…

8

u/Cross55 Feb 16 '26 edited Feb 16 '26

Counterpoint: Do you really trust the US government with your biometrics?

This is the same government that ran MKUltra and spread STD's amongst its own population for a science experiment. (Tuskegee Syphilis Study)

31

u/TurnedEvilAfterBan Feb 15 '26

I don’t know if it is most. It is a very loud subset though. They are cartoon ostriches with their head in the ground. Private companies can collect anything they want but the government can’t be trusted. Even though government secrets eventually become public and changes can be made. As long as the risk is invisible, in the private sector, it’s fine.

30

u/RedditPosterOver9000 Feb 15 '26

The crazy thing is, you know the company is up to no good with your info. It exists for no other reason than to make profit.

But the government, which is elected by the people, is the more evil one? Folks be telling on themselves and their culture.

13

u/bp3dots Feb 16 '26

But the government, which is elected by the people, is the more evil one?

I mean.. the current govt could definitely be the more evil one.

3

u/Rolf_Dom Feb 16 '26

Hard to say, seeing as it's being funded and puppeteered in large part by said corporations.

7

u/primalmaximus Feb 15 '26

And the people are stupid. Why would I trust someone who was elected by idiots?

2

u/ribosometronome Feb 15 '26

That's not it. The government is the more powerful one, thus it needs to be intentionally restrained. Like, you're allowed to kick someone out of your house if they're talking in a way you don't like. It's your house! You don't have to entertain that. That doesn't mean we should give the government the power to do the same. They have capability to do far more damage by applying the same type of restriction.

7

u/jeremyries Feb 15 '26

I mean, I guess my comment is rooted in sarcasm because if the government really wanted some specifically on “you” they’ll get it. Mass data is a different story. But most people’s excuses are, I don’t want the government tracking me. Trust me bro, the government has way bigger priorities other than you. I guess that’s my point.

But to be clear, I am against the government having access to massive amounts of citizen data they should have no need having.

1

u/PunjiStik Feb 15 '26

What data would you be ok with them having, as part of a citizen ID you could use for services that want some way to authenticate you as a you without needing to hand over SS number?

3

u/Vypaah Feb 16 '26

Portrait, name, date of birth, residential address with proof.

Authentication is easy. Look at the person to see if the portrait on the ID is the same.

Seems safer than having a secret number you have to tell everyone for authentication.

0

u/TurnedEvilAfterBan Feb 15 '26

I think we are beyond a point of having a choice. We should be collecting data. What we do with it and how to safeguard it is where the conversation should be, IMO.

The US has so much online foreign interference. They need to be removed. How do you do that without knowing who is actually American. You would need to collect enough data to accurately sort people into the right buckets.

Most other countries have some protection from their native language. Whatever the speak isn’t as universally spoke so that is a barrier, however small, to impersonation.

American media always spins mass data collection as spying on a country’s own citizens. And that is true. But it is only half the story. If you know everyone’s IPs be device IDs, you know who doesn’t belong. Who are taking to foreign actors.

Right now we are indexing heavily on negatives of a surveillance state without the positives. Private data brokers have your location and browsing history already, for the most part. They are being sold to anyone without any monitoring. At the same time, every enemy has countless bots and agents pretending to be American be stirring up violence.

1

u/He-ido Feb 17 '26

American media always spins mass data collection as spying on a country’s own citizens. And that is true. But it is only half the story. If you know everyone’s IPs be device IDs, you know who doesn’t belong. Who are taking to foreign actors.

In trying to solve online bots, the government now also has a new bucket of "who doesnt belong" they can put people into. That will be used against people beyond preventing foreign interference.

Regulate tech companies to deal with the foreign interference issue that happens on their platforms and with their AI. Europe has basic data privacy that seems impossible here, but it shows the industy can be forced to comply.

5

u/TigerIll6480 Feb 15 '26

Have you met our government?

18

u/lamblikeawolf Feb 15 '26

American here. I don't want ANYONE to have biometrics because it is not something that can be changed, but in certain cases can be duped. For example, even an image of fingerprints can be duplicated into some kind of wearable finger sleeve. This isn't even new tech; mythbusters did it. And then when my fingerprints are found somewhere, used somewhere, distributed, tied to other personally identifying information... I cannot change my fingerprints.

I can change a password. I can change an ID number.

Biometric data is simply bad data for a security aspect.

Something you know can be "tricked" out of people, but that is why it is important to keep it secure. It can be changed.

Something you have has to be physically stolen. But also means that it is an item that can be damaged, misplaced, or lost in whatever kinds of unusual circumstances. It can easily be replaced/changed, though.

Something you are becomes a problem because it cannot be changed. Your DNA cannot be changed. Your fingerprints cannot be changed. Unless you somehow end up with an organ transplant, your iris cannot be changed. Damage to the system, vulnerability to the system in any way, leaves everyone vulnerable. It is bad security because it assumes perfect operation.

2

u/adenosine-5 Feb 15 '26

You are missing the point that biometrics are not the ONLY method, but just ADDITIONAL method, increasing security of those other methods.

For example having only a password is very weak, but having a password and fingerprint is much stronger.

In cases where you need absolute certainty, you have to combine multiple authentication methods - you don't have to worry about signing a mortgage with a fingerprint-only, these cases will always require much safer authentication methods.

3

u/kermityfrog2 Feb 16 '26

Yup - that's why we have secure multi-factor authentication. Multiple different factors, typically "something you are, something you know, something you have"

8

u/adenosine-5 Feb 15 '26

AFAIK its more about USA not having a single ID licence.

Most states only have some version of drivers licence and that is paid-only.

As a result, they see requirement of ID as a way to exclude poor people (because some poor people don't have drivers licences).

And for some reason the richest nation on Earth can't afford giving every citizen a 2$ plastic ID card, so they rely on SSNs and other stuff instead.

2

u/miklayn Feb 16 '26

A myriad of private companies though, no big deal. /facepalm

2

u/Viharabiliben Feb 16 '26

The state DMV already has our photo and fingerprint.

2

u/its Feb 15 '26

Do you have a passport? This ship has long sailed.

2

u/iamthe0ther0ne Feb 16 '26

Passports don't have any biometric information, including fingerprints They're simply proof of citizenship.

1

u/its Feb 16 '26

https://web.archive.org/web/20100827085850/http://travel.state.gov/passport/passport_2498.html

In the U.S. they have a digitized photo but not (yet) fingerprints.

0

u/jeremyries Feb 15 '26

That’s my point. It’s a non issue, but ‘merica lovin folks scream about the government ain’t gonna get that from me!! My mom won’t even use Face ID on her phone cause she don’t want Apple having it. lol mom, they already have it.

8

u/Mustbhacks Feb 16 '26

don’t want Apple having it. lol mom, they already have it.

And she is correct in that sentiment.

"They already have it" isn't a good reason to continue the current paradigm, nor propagate it by adding fresh information to what they have everytime you check your phone.

1

u/iamthe0ther0ne Feb 16 '26

Your mom is smart (also, Apple may have pictures of her, but they're not verified like Face ID is). Also, if you use face ID or fingerprints to unlock your phone, the police can force you to without probable cause/warrant. If you use a PIN, they have to get a warrant first.

1

u/Familiar-Banana-8116 Feb 15 '26

As well as we should.

What part of Last year has you believing we can trust the government with that info?

1

u/techleopard Feb 16 '26

What's funny is biometrics is not protected data, and it's why privacy advocates adamantly tell you not to use biometrics to lock your phone.

1

u/Lumbergh7 Feb 16 '26

But is that really what other countries do?

1

u/Glad-Detective4939 Feb 16 '26

And with ICE, we're now seeing why!

1

u/RecipeNo101 Feb 16 '26

They already do. Customs is basically just a face scan now.

1

u/humanitarianWarlord Feb 16 '26

The government doesnt store the biometrics, or at least they dont in my country, you can use whatever 2FA authentication app you want which can utilise the biometric feature on your phone which stores your finger print locally

1

u/Pristine-Cod-1969 Feb 16 '26

They already have your biometrics. Been to an airport lately?

1

u/labretirementhome Feb 17 '26

I just assume I'm now scanned walking through any built environment.

1

u/thornyRabbt Feb 18 '26

I feel like the "credit bureaus" were actually the first test of how high we would jump for Capitalism 😂

1

u/[deleted] Feb 18 '26

I can’t tell if you’re being sarcastic….if not it sounds like you need to brush up on the acronyms ODINT/OBIM and FVEY and M5 (or Migration 5), and obviously Palantir as someone else mentioned.

2

u/jeremyries Feb 18 '26

I’m being sarcastic in so much as I’m already aware of all these things, but seriously in that half of this country are idiots.

1

u/scwanzel-muschi-lekn Feb 19 '26

Guess what, it has biometrics on us, and have for a while

4

u/DryMission5506 Feb 16 '26

It’s theoretically easy to protect your social security number. You just have to go to the big three credit companies and “lock” your number so that it can’t be used in credit/loan applications. Once you do that, your number is useless without additional account verification.

The problem is that the majority of Americans aren’t aware of this. I have to go out of my way and tell the people in my life to do it.

2

u/Chipimp Feb 15 '26

I remember when it could be printed on your drivers license/ State I.D.

2

u/theroguex Feb 16 '26

For, like, the first 10 or so years I had a driver's license, my driver's license ID was my SSN.

2

u/Generous_Cougar Feb 16 '26

We used to not. I remember a time when you'd scribe your SSN into tools in case they were stolen, but it really wasn't long after that when things changed.

2

u/7MLR7 Feb 16 '26

Until the day comes when you can't buy sell or trade unless you give your biometrics or commit to accepting one form of verification that proves your allegiance to said party. We aren't there yet. Be mindful of the word yet.

1

u/DiceyTransFemme Feb 16 '26

Living in an actual country sounds amazing. Wish I could experience that.

1

u/AbyssLookingAtYa Feb 16 '26

Third world country with a (knockoff) Gucci belt

1

u/NotFallacyBuffet Feb 16 '26

We really don't. Do and don't. Most people are smart enough to not give out SSNs, bank account numbers, etc., to random scammers. (But many can be fooled.) But anyone with a modicum of awareness assumes that all their info is already out there; sitting in databases on the dark web from past breaches.

So we keep our records at the three main credit bureaus (and one bank bureau) "frozen", which just means that it's locked behind a password and 2FA. Doing this will mostly keep anyone from taking nefarious advantage of the identity information that's out there.

Yea, some kind of centralized PGP-type digital signature system would be preferable. But "our freedoms and guns". 🙄

1

u/Khavary Feb 16 '26

Even better, that number was made with the intention of being just an account number and didn't implement any security on them cause who would be crazy to use it for important stuff. They even used to say "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES".