IRS Data Security Still a Concern 54
Lucas123 writes "Computerworld has a story about the possibility and the potential ramifications of an IRS data loss similar to the UK's recent mishap. According to one World Bank executive, it could have already happened, 'and we don't know about it.' While the IRS does offer data encryption to its workers, more than half of its 94,000 employees have permission to take taxpayer information to locations outside the IRS offices. In the 2007 filing season, roughly 128 million individual tax returns were filed. In addition to the basic personal information on those forms, an IRS breach could also jeopardize the banking information of the 46% of filers who requested direct deposit refunds. This is not the first time that IRS security has been called into question, and the Department of Treasury's progress in that arena is dubious. [PDF]"
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Ron Paul... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A side effect is that all the leftover currency could be given away as free origami paper.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Ron Paul... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Ron Paul... (Score:4, Insightful)
Really? I'm pretty sure you've never looked at a tax form before.
The problem is that the IRS was created to solve a problem (social security) which will be a moot pint in 50 odd years unless something else is done.
Re: (Score:2)
Why take data out of office? (Score:5, Insightful)
It seems to me that most of the data breaches from large corporations and government come from just this - employees taking data files out of the office and losing them. Why of why don't employers simply insist that data stays on the premises? Surely keeping data in a secure physical location is the first step to safeguarding it.
Re:Why take data out of office? (Score:5, Insightful)
Traveling laptop your #5 problem ... (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope your board members recognized the four more important problems as well. Your top five problems:
(1) Management allowed (2), (3), (4), and (5).
(2) The accountant allowed (3) and (5).
(3) You have one and only one system capable of running a critical application.
(4) This critical application is not being run on enterprise grade hardware.
(5) The accountant wanted to take the system on holiday.
If your board only addressed the laptop/holiday add:
(0) Board allowed (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) as appropriate.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The alternative of course is to force the business to bring all their data to the IRS. Not sure anyone really wants that.
The IRS has begun implementing whole disk encryption which is a good step.
An additional step would be to ensure the data leaving on the laptop is only appropriate data for the case(s) the auditor is leaving for and not
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. What I was thinking of are those stories of X million customer records being lost when some idiot loses a laptop or DVD. What possible reason could there be for carrying that much data off-site? (Backups excepted obviously)
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe a white hat will break into IRS ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because computers don't kill. Well consumer stuff, at least not yet.
Re: (Score:2)
Precisely. And even if poorly-operated personal computers resulted in the deaths of their operators and innocent bystanders as often as motor vehicles do, it wouldn't matter. The GP doesn't realize that certification means squat. Having a piece of paper that says you know or understand something often has surprisingly little relevance to what you actually know or understand, it just means that you could convince someone in authority, at
Direct deposit (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
A phishing attempt that included one's name, address, bank & tax details would be very convincing indeed.
Alex
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Many merchants who accept paper checks turn them into "electronic checks" which debit your checking account directly at the next clearing session (usually 10pm to 5am). The account number and the amount are the only two required pieces of information, but who receives the money is well known. This is the mechanism used by automated payment for utility bills, subscriptions, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
You understand incorrectly. A name, routing number, and account number would give a criminal enough information to send through fraudulent transactions to that account.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Direct deposit (Score:4, Informative)
An ACH transaction != financial identity. If I have that information about you and have access to the payment system, I can fraudulently send out ACH items and hope to collect enough to make it worthwhile before I'm shut down. This information, however, does not allow me to open a loan or credit account in your name. It sucks, but it's not identity theft.
I'm sure that the UK does also have some sort of an electronic transaction system, but I've got no idea about what it is and how it works. You guys have a different style of banking than we do in the US. We have a few major, major players, but also a very large number of small "community banks" and credit unions. The ACH network in the United States was set up as a clearinghouse to basically send transactions to a large number of different banks. If I understand things correctly, the UK doesn't have the smaller financial institutions like we do, so the electronic transaction systems may work differently there (to say nothing of the regulations defining how they work!).
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Direct deposit (Score:4, Interesting)
Not that I would recommend it: we, at the check company, were taught certain red flags, things to watch for that may indicate a fraudulent order (and a good CSR won't let it on that they suspect you), and I won't go into those details here. And the penalties are pretty stiff if you are caught.
The devil is in the e-file (Score:4, Insightful)
And of course any subpoena, court order, or National Security Letter presented to Intuit has full access to all your data, including aggregation (database "join" on SSN, phone, address, etc.) with various data brokers who market their services aggressively to Department of Homeland Security, etc. With the IRS itself you have some protection; with the e-file cabal you nave none.
What happens? (Score:3, Insightful)
Banking Data? - Already on Checks (Score:3, Insightful)
From TFA "That translates to a lot of personal and banking details maintained by the IRS." - Those banking details are the same ones you hand out every time you write a check.
The information included on the return for direct deposit is 'exactly' the same information printed on the front of a check in human readable format.
If ANY of those households paid with a check to any retail establishment (where the clerk probably makes less than $10.00 an hour) then they have already released this information themselves.
I understand data security and the problems of taking confidential data out of the workplace, but the banking details portion of this story needs to be taken with several grains of salt.
Just because you have a banks routing number and a checking account number, this does not mean you can turn that into cash at an ATM.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed that such concerns can be over-dramatised or exaggerated, but the current state of affairs is such that the advancement or implementation of new technologies is often a few steps ahead of someone sitting down to analyse all the possible issues, and even more steps ahead of public awareness. That can be too slow a time line, especially when you factor in the time require
Ask any 5 IRS employees... (Score:4, Insightful)
A question and you are likely to get 10 different answers that may or may not be correct.
How the IRS is allowed to operate the way it does is beyond me. How the tax laws are allowed to remain so confusing and frustrating is beyond me. But, obviously it is not cost effective to those that matter to fix it.
If the tax laws were cleaned up, then maybe IRS employees might be able to handle many more individuals per specialist. If the tax laws were cleaned up, then maybe the IRS would be able to do all of its work at work. Just maybe.
InnerWeb
Scare Reporting (Score:5, Informative)
Full Disclosure: I work for the IRS, and have a business need to take OUO or SBU data outside of the campus where I work from time to time.
Glossary:
The article here is pure scaremongering, though it does at least touch on some of the procedures the Service used to secure taxpayer data. The article makes the following points.
When a laptop is issued, it gets whole disk encryption that can't be turned off by the user. Similarly, when the IRS issues other portable devices, they get the same. The rule, of course, is that you don''t hook up anything the IRS doesn't own to anything it does, so personal thumb drives and home networks should not be an issue, and we make the point every time we issue hardware. Similarly, the article talks about unencrypted drives on Campus machinery, but if someone has penetrated the physical security of the Campus and actually swipes one of these hard drives, things have already gone horribly wrong.
If the IRS lost a great whacking load of SBU data, of course it would be a disaster, this is nothing new, and is obvious. The article makes it seem like it's inevitable or in immediate danger of happening, and this just isn't true.
Re: (Score:1)
you don't expect us to believe that do you?
IRS far more frightening than IRS data leaks (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's the difference? At least you can shoot the "bad" mugger.
Yeah, well ... (Score:2)
The IRS' data store is always a concern, whether they lose track of it or not.