U.S. Customs Shares License Plate Data With Insurance Companies

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Does anyone know how this is even legal? They aren't just sharing the info with other agencies, they are sharing it with insurance companies. :confused:

It may come as little surprise that every time you cross the border, cameras record your license plate number and feed it into a database of driver locations. More disturbing, perhaps, is the fact that the government seems to share that automobile surveillance data with an unexpected third party: insurance companies.
Click to expand...
 
Funny. I know if you claim to only drive your car back and forth to work your insurance is a lot less, I wonder if they could use this data to start charging you more.
 
Could this be a good thing for the insurance to know your car was possibly stolen? I don't know much about car insurance, so someone can probably elaborate for me since I have no friggen clue.
 
It's not illegal. First of all, license plates are in the public view and you have a very small expectation of privacy to begin with. Furthermore, border checkpoints have even lower expectations of privacy.

Really, i don't see a problem with this at all. I mean, what kind of possible information could they get that could be used against you in an inappropriate way?
 
Wrong. Expecting the government to record license plates at a border crossing is borderline acceptable. However, distributing that information to corporations is not.
 
Modred189 said:
It's not illegal. First of all, license plates are in the public view and you have a very small expectation of privacy to begin with. Furthermore, border checkpoints have even lower expectations of privacy.

Really, i don't see a problem with this at all. I mean, what kind of possible information could they get that could be used against you in an inappropriate way?
Click to expand...

In addition, driving a moving vehicle is not a right either. Especially considering you drive on public roads (which are obviously made from government income from taxes). So of course there is nothing illegal about this.

Our only concerns are if this is advertisement money to send or what.... what business does the insurance companies have with it? Do they track your vehicle to see if it is being stolen or something?
 
Modred189 said:
It's not illegal. First of all, license plates are in the public view and you have a very small expectation of privacy to begin with. Furthermore, border checkpoints have even lower expectations of privacy.
Click to expand...
Bullshit.

Just because something is in public view doesn't mean its fair game for pro-active and concealed monitoring.

My conversation on a park bench allows me to see anyone in earshot and adjust the content of my conversation accordingly. If someone from 1/2 mile away is pointing a parabolic mic at my conversation, that's an invasion of privacy.

This is no different. They are proactively using technological aids and networking and concealment to acquire data on me and countless others. Something that would be impractical for some guy just strolling by to effectively observe.

Its frightening how much of a person's in private behavior can be determined by aggregating the details of their public behavior and that of their known contacts. People being just randomly exposed to individual pieces of what is exposed publicly can't do anything with it. But pro-actively aggregating it is a completely different ballgame.
 
trynberg said:
Wrong. Expecting the government to record license plates at a border crossing is borderline acceptable. However, distributing that information to corporations is not.
Click to expand...
I know, how is this even under dispute?

Government should not be providing information they collect on citizens to be used for profit by private industry without the citizen's consent (barring public information that is posted online for all to see, and my travel habits certainly should not fall under that category).
 
Sigh, lets get riled up over automating a process that has been used for decades. Customs has been checking your plates against NICB records for a long time. After all it isn't Customs job to prevent stolen vehicles from being exported from the country. Oh wait.
 
"Hello, Mr. Customer. We noticed you took multiple trips over the border last year. As such, we are identifying your vehicles as high risk and are upping your rates. We'll also share this information with other insurance firms should you decide to discontinue service with us. Have a nice day."

Except, they won't say that. You'll just notice your rates go up the next billing period.
 
jpm100 said:
Bullshit.

Just because something is in public view doesn't mean its fair game for pro-active and concealed monitoring.

--SNIP--

Its frightening how much of a person's in private behavior can be determined by aggregating the details of their public behavior and that of their known contacts. People being just randomly exposed to individual pieces of what is exposed publicly can't do anything with it. But pro-actively aggregating it is a completely different ballgame.
Click to expand...

Actually, what you do in public is MUCH more fair game than what you do in private, and what you do at a border crossing is even more fair game than that. Maybe more than anything else. Remember those cases regarding searching and seizing laptops and cell phones and the data contained in them? How about searches of your car and self with a much reduced level of requisite suspicion?

You may not like it (and I'm not saying you should), but that's how the law works these days in the US.

kydsid said:
Sigh, lets get riled up over automating a process that has been used for decades. Customs has been checking your plates against NICB records for a long time.
Click to expand...

THIS. If anyone thinks this is new...

blitzkommando said:
"Hello, Mr. Customer. We noticed you took multiple trips over the border last year. As such, we are identifying your vehicles as high risk and are upping your rates. We'll also share this information with other insurance firms should you decide to discontinue service with us. Have a nice day."

Except, they won't say that. You'll just notice your rates go up the next billing period.
Click to expand...
And what's wrong with that? If you ARE doing higher risk things with your car, isn't it fair that you pay a premium that represents that?
That said, that's not what they are doing. After all, they have been doing this for a long time, and I don't see any Mexican/American businessmen complaining about heir high rates because of their commutes.

This story just seems to me to be much ado about nothing...
 
Modred and kidsyd,

You two seem to be completely missing the point. The government running your plate against a database at the border = acceptable. Permanently recording that information and providing it to non-government corporate entities is in no way acceptable.
 
trynberg said:
Modred and kidsyd,

You two seem to be completely missing the point. The government running your plate against a database at the border = acceptable. Permanently recording that information and providing it to non-government corporate entities is in no way acceptable.
Click to expand...

Why? What in the WORLD can you do with my license plate at a border that I could POSSIBLY care about?
Well, besides facilitate paying me when my car is stolen and sold to mexican drug lords...
 
trynberg said:
Modred and kidsyd,

You two seem to be completely missing the point. The government running your plate against a database at the border = acceptable. Permanently recording that information and providing it to non-government corporate entities is in no way acceptable.
Click to expand...

No you missed the point that your license plate has been run by hand through NICB for decades by every police force and didn't bother to even read the MOU. Nor do you have any idea of how the system works so you have no proof it is storing the information for any purpose other than to organize and use matching algorithms.

If you had read the MOU you would know that at no point is the info released from government control, it is on government controlled and approved data networks and that it is not being stored permanently. However if you wish to continue to have a tinfoil hat without knowing how your government works that's your right too.
 
Modred189 said:
Actually, what you do in public is MUCH more fair game than what you do in private, and what you do at a border crossing is even more fair game than that. Maybe more than anything else. Remember those cases regarding searching and seizing laptops and cell phones and the data contained in them? How about searches of your car and self with a much reduced level of requisite suspicion?

You may not like it (and I'm not saying you should), but that's how the law works these days in the US.
Click to expand...
We're talking about Insurance companies, not the government on the scene that you are fully aware of, accessing your information in these locations without your knowledge. Its none of their business whatsoever.
 
jpm100 said:
We're talking about Insurance companies, not the government on the scene that you are fully aware of, accessing your information in these locations without your knowledge. Its none of their business whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Let's clarify this misconception. The government is not giving the insurance companies any information to do anything they want with it. The insurance companies are not accessing any government data. The NICB is partnered with the government to provide verification of the vehicle records upon request by the government. The government is not releasing your information from their control. The data and those authorized to access it are monitored and controled by the government and can be convicted of a Federal crime if they were to access it without a need to know, even if authorized access to the data.
 
kydsid said:
Let's clarify this misconception. The government is not giving the insurance companies any information to do anything they want with it. The insurance companies are not accessing any government data. The NICB is partnered with the government to provide verification of the vehicle records upon request by the government. The government is not releasing your information from their control. The data and those authorized to access it are monitored and controled by the government and can be convicted of a Federal crime if they were to access it without a need to know, even if authorized access to the data.
Click to expand...
From the article, the Memorandum of Understanding between US Customs and Boarder Protection and the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB), a organization made up of insurance companies, Contradicts your claims.

Firstly the permit information to be shared with the NICB. Secondly they allow the Sharing of that information with member insurance companies

Page 13 of the PDF Document said:
Section I.1 CBP agrees to make available to NICB electronic LPR (license plate reader) information on vehicles leaving or entering the United States.
Click to expand...

This far from CBP receiving a database from the NICB

Page 13 of the PDF Document said:
Section II.5 NICB agrees to restrict the dissemination of LPR information, on a need to know basis, to (a) ... (b) ... (c) Special Investigative units of the NICB member insurance companies ... engaged in theft prevention activity
Click to expand...
This is clearly permitting the sharing outside the NICB to the private companies. Yes, its "Special Units" for theft prevention. Except the companies can assign anyone on a whim to these units and they can 'unsee' what they've 'seen' And that's assuming they are following the rules.

I could have field day with Section III which allows the handling of data to be outsourced to a Data Processing Service (DPS) aka Data Center. I don't see a requirement that even be a domestic company.

What's the basis for your assertions?
 
jpm100 said:
From the article, the Memorandum of Understanding between US Customs and Boarder Protection and the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB), a organization made up of insurance companies, Contradicts your claims.

Firstly the permit information to be shared with the NICB. Secondly they allow the Sharing of that information with member insurance companies
Click to expand...

For a singular purpose. You'll see that there is a prohibition from using the data in a commercial manner.

This far from CBP receiving a database from the NICB
Click to expand...

It has to be done according to the requirements of the MOU, its a contract not a blanket approval to do whatever they want


This is clearly permitting the sharing outside the NICB to the private companies. Yes, its "Special Units" for theft prevention. Except the companies can assign anyone on a whim to these units and they can 'unsee' what they've 'seen' And that's assuming they are following the rules.

I could have field day with Section III which allows the handling of data to be outsourced to a Data Processing Service (DPS) aka Data Center. I don't see a requirement that even be a domestic company.
Click to expand...


No it says it is allowed should CBP allow it and only with CBP's written approval and knowledge as to exactly how a DPS is involved. It does not say they are currently sharing it with any DPS.

What's the basis for your assertions?
Click to expand...

My credentials wouldn't really change your mind would they? And boy the news section is starting to feel like the soapbox.
 
kydsid said:
For a singular purpose. You'll see that there is a prohibition from using the data in a commercial manner.
Click to expand...
The prohibition is to not sell the data directly. The prohibition is not to prevent private companies from using it.

It has to be done according to the requirements of the MOU, its a contract not a blanket approval to do whatever they want

...

No it says it is allowed should CBP allow it and only with CBP's written approval and knowledge as to exactly how a DPS is involved. It does not say they are currently sharing it with any DPS.
Click to expand...
We basically have a system in place that allows the sharing of information within restrictions. The problem is proving how those restrictions have been violated would be next to impossible. It would just take some boss that xxx individual is part of their theft prevention unit, either before or after the fact. What is the penalty anyway? Nasty letter, a trivial fine? And that would be assuming someone wants to prove they have been violated. Not that this is new, we have an administration that willfully and admittedly cherry picks prosecutions.

My credentials wouldn't really change your mind would they? And boy the news section is starting to feel like the soapbox.
Click to expand...
I was actually talking about sources. As for your credentials, you already were being misleading once already. Hopefully that's because you were talking out your ass and not some deliberate measure. But its definitely is a form of a credential.
 
Modred189 said:
Why? What in the WORLD can you do with my license plate at a border that I could POSSIBLY care about?
Well, besides facilitate paying me when my car is stolen and sold to mexican drug lords...
Click to expand...

Mexico isn't the only border, there, genius. Going to Canada every day isn't exactly high risk, unless you want to get a barrage of "eh's" shot your way.
 
jpm100 said:
The prohibition is to not sell the data directly. The prohibition is not to prevent private companies from using it.
Click to expand...

That is not what the document says. Commercial does not strictly mean the sale of the information. The useful purposes are outlined in the MOU and law. Obviously your bias makes you think they can do whatever else they want with it but the MOU and laws are pretty clear. I can't help explain it further.


We basically have a system in place that allows the sharing of information within restrictions. The problem is proving how those restrictions have been violated would be next to impossible. It would just take some boss that xxx individual is part of their theft prevention unit, either before or after the fact. What is the penalty anyway? Nasty letter, a trivial fine? And that would be assuming someone wants to prove they have been violated. Not that this is new, we have an administration that willfully and admittedly cherry picks prosecutions.
Click to expand...

You need more time around law enforcement databases.



I was actually talking about sources. As for your credentials, you already were being misleading once already. Hopefully that's because you were talking out your ass and not some deliberate measure. But its definitely is a form of a credential.
Click to expand...
[/quote]

I was not misleading. I was exact and deliberate in what I said. You can choose to not believe what I said. The companies do not get your info to do with what they please. Select investigative departments within an insurance company do not equal being given data as you were presenting it.
 
Vicinity said:
Mexico isn't the only border, there, genius. Going to Canada every day isn't exactly high risk, unless you want to get a barrage of "eh's" shot your way.
Click to expand...
Correct, and FAR more people commute across that border, but that doesn't really address my point.
 
kydsid said:
Sigh, lets get riled up over automating a process that has been used for decades. Customs has been checking your plates against NICB records for a long time. After all it isn't Customs job to prevent stolen vehicles from being exported from the country. Oh wait.
Click to expand...

Except that's not all they are doing, if you read the article.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top