EU Agency Advises Against Using Search, Browsing History For Credit Scores 38
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Record, written by Catalin Cimpanu: The European Union's lead data protection supervisor has recommended on Thursday that personal data such as search queries & internet browsing history should not be used for the assessment of credit scores and creditworthiness. The recommendation comes from the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), an independent agency attached to the EU that advises policymakers "on all matters relating to the processing of personal data."a document published on Thursday. In addition, the agency advises that providers of financial and credit services should also not be allowed to use health data, such as cancer data, as well as any special category of personal data under Article 9 of the GDPR for the calculation of credit scores. The EDPS recommendations follow a recent blog post for the International Monetary Fund, where researchers see the possibility of using the data from your browsing, search, and purchase history to create a more accurate mechanism for determining the credit rating of an individual or business.
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
You know, there's VIDEO of Ashli Babbit and the rest of her mob breaking down a door with obvious intent to physically attack people.
She wasn't just "in an unauthorized area". She was there as part of a large group of people, many of whom were armed, who had enough numbers to cause mayhem even if none of them had been armed, and whose collective words and actions indicated intent to cause immediate physical harm to both people and property. As for her personally, she tried to lead the charge on behalf of th
Demasiado tarde (Score:2)
I think it's quite likely the equivalent of locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen. Mining for and harvesting your personal data yields much more profit than any crypto setup.
I wouldn't be completely surprised to learn my credit card company sells information to insurance providers, letting them know I enjoy an occasional fast food meal.
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's quite likely the equivalent of locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen. Mining for and harvesting your personal data yields much more profit than any crypto setup.
I wouldn't be completely surprised to learn my credit card company sells information to insurance providers, letting them know I enjoy an occasional fast food meal.
That may be true in countries/states that don't seek to regulate & limit the use of personal data. It looks like some countries/states, e.g. the EU, China, South Korea, & California, are moving towards making personal data collection less profitable for corporations & less problematic for citizens.
Current widespread web surveillance strategies & techniques make it close to impossible to use the broad internet without being profiled & having our personal data traded between corporations
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's quite likely the equivalent of locking the barn door after the horse has been stolen. Mining for and harvesting your personal data yields much more profit than any crypto setup.
Sounds like another of those "do nothing because it's too late" arguments. The general feeling in the advertising industry seems to be that information more than a month old is basically useless and that even basic permanent information (like date of birth) is only useful in interpreting the dynamic information. I'm sure credit rating is a bit slower than that, but think about a hard working person today, on the end of their tether, barely making enough to feed their family and with their car, heating and
2 million person conspiracy (Score:3)
> I wouldn't be completely surprised to learn my credit card company sells information to insurance providers, letting them know I enjoy an occasional fast food meal.
1.7 million people work in health insurance in the US alone.
How the rating works is pretty well known, if you care to find out. Or just look at an application for medical insurance - that's the info they use.
The maximum number of people who can keep a secret for the extended period of time is about five. So any secret conspiracy involving m
Re: (Score:2)
That's one of those numbers that doesn't sound right at all, unless "work in health insurance" includes every nurse, doctor and health worker in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
> all, unless "work in health insurance" includes every nurse, doctor and health worker in the US.
According to the Department of Labor, the number of *healthcare practitioners* such as doctors, nurses, and radiologists will INCREASE by more than that in the next 10 years. Just the number of NEW jobs ADDED will be 2.4 million.
https://www.bls.gov/ooh/health... [bls.gov]
Healthcare and social assistance is 20 million workers.
Just outpatient healthcare alone (ambulatory care) is nearly 8 million.
https://www.bls.gov/iag [bls.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
This is why I love the UKs NHS and hate with a vengeance the people who want to privatise it, every aspect of privatisation brings expensive bureaucracy and profiteering.
Going to the doctor is free (other than a small capped prescription cost of $20ish for drugs), going to hospital is free.Healthcare is generally not a cost that British people worry about.
Not sure if serious or sarcastic (Score:2)
I'm not quite sure if you're being serious or if you're parodying people who think like that. If this is a parody and I take it seriously maybe I'll look silly, but oh well.
First, you're suggesting that more national government involvement means LESS bureaucracy? ROTFL. That's fucking hilarious.
10% of your GDP, 10% of everything anyone makes, is not "free".
Flying to the US so you can actually see a doctor some time in the next six months is REALLY not free.
The lowest-cost way for someone to be able to go t
Re: (Score:2)
So I guess you don't know that Americans pay a hell of a lot more and often have nasty policies that don't cover as much as what the NHS will treat you for, that's a simple fact, UK NHS is lean.
Corporations can be plenty bureaucratic, this thread after all is about how many millions of people it takes to deal with medical insurance. In the UK that's closer to zero because most of us don't do medical insurance, why should we when the NHS is free to us.
I live in the UK, quick check online - 2 weeks until firs
Re: (Score:2)
> So I guess you don't know that Americans pay a hell of a lot more
You've just replied to TWO of my posts in which I said the system currently used in the US is stupid, that it increases costs for no gain. I said that TWICE. Those are the posts you are replying to.
> I live in the UK, quick check online - 2 weeks until first appt slots
I live in Texas and my typical wait time is 15 minutes.
Typical duration of the flu is about 7 days. So you can see a doctor a week after you no longer need to. I can see
Re: (Score:2)
So, about that:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42... [bbc.com]
In the US you get as much health care as you can afford, poor people's health care differs considerably from rich peoples. In the UK you won't go bankrupt because of healthcare, it's unheard of. The tax we pay is not extreme
Re: (Score:2)
The maximum number of people who can keep a secret for the extended period of time is about five. So any secret conspiracy involving much more than that is going to come out.
The only perfect secret is the one between you and the personalities in your own psyche, but hopefully all your renditions align.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not well known. It's well known to a few people. The rest of the people working just punch numbers into a computer and follow what the computer spits back.
What the computer spits back is a black box.
That black box can take in information from many places - data sharing agreements are often priv
Re: (Score:2)
Where I hadn't lived since '05. And I haven't owned an American car since the early '80s. The accidents were my dad's.
Turns out that somehow a data broker decided tha
Re: (Score:2)
I recall being younger, and less jaded, imagining the employees of insurance companies and bankers were persons cut from a better cloth than I... try and remember the difference between your lot and kings, it is likely only your unfortunate placement on the timeline.
Re: (Score:1)
advises against (Score:2)
personal data such as search queries & internet browsing history should not be used for the assessment of credit scores and creditworthiness.
Banks and credit reporting companies:
"Yeah, we'll get right on that."
Re: (Score:2)
To be clear when this agency issues an opinion like this they are saying that if you do it you might well be in violation of data protection rules and quite likely to end up in court if you argue the point.
Additionally even if it turns out you are right it's quite likely that the EU will just change the rules anyway, so don't bother unless you enjoy regulatory scrutiny and pissed off politicians looking your way.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed - some people are just stuck in a mindset where the "law" should be mostly clear instead of incredibly subjective and up to government interpretation on an accused-to-accused basis.
Yes, shocking. Imagine a place where instead of having secret courts, agencies responsible for law enforcement just published their opions about what is and isn't allowed in the open for just anyone to read. Outrageous; the EU needs to learn from American courts [newrepublic.com] where the constitution can just be suspended and nobody needs to know.
Google time! (Score:2)
"How to pay off every loan without fail all the time, every time, or kill your lender's family in their sleep."
Re: (Score:2)
Credit score based upon how well one pays their taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
Health data (Score:2)
That is why you use the Tor browser when researching any medical issues....
Browser histories are like library checkouts... (Score:2)
they're both potentially VERY misleading because neither addresses INTENT and neither knows the beliefs of the person being analyzed.
Did Bob read "Mein Kampf" because he is a closet neo-nazi, or because he is looking for ammo to use to dissuade his young nephew from becoming one, or because Bob is a history nut?
Did Joe read "Catcher in the Rye" because he is interested in why so many nutjobs read it and what they see in it, or because he is a nutjob who is likely to kill?
Did Emily skim a cookbook because sh
Re: Browser histories are like library checkouts.. (Score:2)
What ifs and hearsay (always) leads to bad thoughts about a person, which leads to gossip, which then often leads to unjustified bad things happening to an innocent person.
When these assholes read my browsing history, I want them to see "To whoever reads this, your mom is a fat drugged out whore, and your dad masturbates in the public park bathroom that's located next to the playground." (and variants thereof)
This just gave me an idea to write a script to do such queries so the search history the credit sp
GDPR? (Score:2)
Re: GDPR? (Score:2)
Yes exactly. Two days ago some IMF researchers published a research paper suggesting that if banks looked at browsing histories, they could discover people who truly were safe loan recipients but whom traditional credit scores would judge as risky. They said this would result in a more efficient economy.
The news in this current story is that the GDPR officials are saying, "don't do that since it would violate GDPR".
... duh? (Score:1)
As an American (Score:2)
I've been very confused by the recent spate of stories about government agencies promoting the rights of consumers. I'm even a little embarrassed.
For the most part, we don't do that here. Instead, we champion monopolies and consolidation while telling anyone who will listen about Free Markets.
Here, consumers are seen as necessary evils, to be used in any way that might increase profits, and defending against such use is the "personal responsibility" of the individual consumer, even if they are young, naiv
Inferences from browsing (Score:2)
What the EU should be saying (Score:2)
"Stop stalking people online you fucking creep!"
Like "think of the children" is used push through fascist ideas, "assesing credit scores" is being used as justification to engage in creepy stalking behavior.