Identity Theft: Perspectives on How to Mitigate the Damage
Introduction
Identity theft is defined as an incident where someone “knowingly transfers, possesses, or uses, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, or in connection with, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local law. “Identity theft is the most rapidly rising type of fraud in the United States” (Finklea, 2009). One may have their identity stolen from them without even knowing so. This is because it is not necessary to make physical contact, or even make an acquaintance with a victim before assuming their identity. The crime of identity theft may be committed in a number of different ways, most commonly by obtaining personal information from non-secure websites. These actions will not only cause hardship for the victim, who will more than likely have money stolen from them; but it will also have an effect on an entire nation’s economy. “In 2004 one in every twenty-three adult Americans were victims of identity theft, resulting in costs of over $50 billion.” (Hazelah, Ismail, & Hashim, 2011). There are ways to fight identity theft and different nations take different approaches in order to defend against this offense.
American Perspective In the United States, insurance companies such as American International Group have established policies to cover companies that may be responsible in an occurrence of identity theft. “AIG has developed corporate identity protection, this policy is designed protect smaller companies from financial disclosure related to the threat of identity theft.” (Marshall, 2006). Although identity theft may be avoided, the victim may not always be at fault for the crime committed against him or her. “AIG covers legal liability damages, defense costs, notification costs, crisis expenses and identity theft recovery. Policy limits are between $100,000 and $5 million. One of the more unique aspects of AIG’s insurance policy is the fact that they cover liabilities that may occur when confidential information is threatened in any way. This includes non-secure computers or any type of disclosure of personal information; whether the individual at fault is the insured, the employee or by a third party.” (Marshall, 2006). AIG has taken a large step in the direction of compensating victims that have been harmed by identity thieves, but this still does not thwart off identity theft. Is the prevention of identity theft even possible? The country of Malaysia developed a system that was designed to prevent identity theft.
Malaysian Perspective
Malaysia has seen an increase in cyber criminals at an alarming rate due to its rapid growth and development. Most of the identity theft in the country is committed by illegal immigrants from nearby Asian countries, and most citizens are unaware of this epidemic that is spreading (Hazelah, Ismail, & Hashim, 2011). Malaysians have a Government Multipurpose Card (GMPC) known as MyKad that can be used as a validation tool and to verify identity. “MyKad has a microchip implanted that contains an individual’s personal information including access to bank accounts. The card is equipped with a photo identity and a fingerprint biometric.” (Hazelah, Ismail, & Hashim, 2011). Illegal immigrants may purchase stolen MyKad cards from the black market; although immigration officials and police officers are trained to detect fake cards, one fault with MyKad is that if a card is misplaced or stolen, financial fraud may still be committed by identity thieves. In these instances the victims are usually unaware of the crime being committed against them until their bank account has already been tampered with. The idea of an identity card with one’s personal information is a wise idea as long as citizens are cautious and aware of them. The MyKad identification card in Malaysia is the equivalent to a United States citizen’s wallet which contains a driver’s license, credit card and social security card so it is critical to keep this card protected.
Prevention through Technology
Both countries have different ways of dealing with identity theft. In America, “Red Flag Rules” have been designed to detect, prevent, and mitigate identity theft via the Internet where positive verification of identity is not possible. Malaysia is taking the proactive approach of using Government Multipurpose Cards, which are equipped with a photo ID and fingerprint biometric. The only true flaw with Malaysia’s GMPC is the carelessness of its citizens, whom misplace their cards. This problem could be resolved with classes to demonstrate how to keep one’s identity safe when dealing with the cards because criminal law in Malaysia does not recognize victims of identity theft. As a result, Malaysians are often unable to get help without being able to provide evidence that stands to prove their innocence.
Conclusion
The best course of action would be for all countries worldwide to use a national ID card similar to Malaysia’s MyKad card. It is better to prevent identity theft than to compensate for the damage. It should also be the responsibility of the national government to warn the general public about the dangers associated with identity cards. It is imperative that we minimize and eventually eradicate identity theft. It is the fastest growing type of fraud in the United States and it is negatively affecting our economy. Within the next decade America should follow suit as led by Malaysia and work to build a better system that will lead to less fraudulent activity and more identity security.
References

Hazelah, A., Ismail, N., & Hashim, R. (2011). Identity Theft Awareness among City Dwellers in Malaysia. Journal Of Information Assurance & Cybersecurity, 20111-8. doi:10.5171/2011.274080

Marshall, J. (2006). Identity Theft Policies Go Corporate. Financial Executive, 22(9), 33.

Finklea, K. M. (2009). Identity Theft: Trends and Issues: R40599. Congressional Research Service: Report, 1-27.