By this logic, a pedifile that worked at a day care center who decides to open his own facility should have the right to do so because he is contributing to the betterment of society?

I think that if anyone is convicted of a crime pertaining to fraud that should not be allowed to engage in business in the same industry allowing them access to commit the same type of crime. Espeically in a case like this. Not only did he have access to be able to commit additional crimes, but people are sending in their personal information willingly. Your arguement was well thought out and very well worded, I am surprised that you didn’t see any type of conflict here.

http://www.blog...ng-out-would-ha

Everyone, just so you know, all they do is sign up for that 90 credit fraud alert for you every 90 days. They sign you up with their phone number and then call you if they get a call. Guess what? You can just sign up your own phone number and get the exact same service for free. Just add a recurring event to your Google Calendar to fill out the online form quarterly and you’re done. Not only is this cheaper, but you don’t have to give all of your confidential info (e.g. SSN) to a bunch of scammers (e.g. LifeLock).

We are immensely thrilled that you\’ve stumbled on to our webpage about id theft….

I registered for the service and the first thing I noticed is that they don’t take privacy seriously, anyone with basic information (email and zip) about a member can go to the ’secure” portal page and update the members profile. Once updated they can call an LifeLock agent as that person.

I called LifeLock about the issue and they said the profile page is only used once (lie). I had a friend update my account at a different location, hundreds of people know my email address and zip code and thousand more could find out in seconds. Very, very un-secure.

While this may not happen to 99% of members, it speaks to how LifeLock views security and privacy. If I could do the above, is my information…

… stored in protected areas?
… stored on secure servers?
… sitting in a box in the lobby?
… shredded after any printouts?
… available to reps over the internet?

Cheers

I agree with the last post. Give him a call. Ask him how he could do something like that. I think I will call my Dad and thank him for not turning me in when I did some of the things I did.

http://www.phoe...stick-scammers/

As for the slide-rule dorks on this site who wanna give LifeLock $10 a month or whatever, they kinda explain why the Revenge of the Nerds was just a movie. In reality, you guys are total losers.

John Doe, sorry for calling you a wuss. It’s “Smalley” and “Joe Johnson” who need to come clean. I didn’t mean to offend everyone who puts an anonymous message on a comment board. That’s what it’s for. But I don’t like faceless accusers so I’ll insist that “Smalley” and “Johnson” pull back the curtain before I respond to them again.

That makes him more legitimate in my eyes than you.

Are you afraid to actually talk to Ray?

Like I said. Legitimate people talk to legitimate journalists.

Ray -

You complain that no one is willing to talk to you. Legitimate people talk to legitimate journalists. I saw that LifeLock, Davis and Maynard all talked to the LA Times.

Legitimate journalists do not say “instead of blowing them all the time?” as you did on Howard Lindzon’s blog, nor do they speak disrespectfully to people when in public fora.

On his blog, Howard said in his very first post that he is an investor in LifeLock. In your eagerness to discredit him, you apparently missed that when you asked (actually, more like accused) him if he were.

You have been asked very direct questions here on Techcrunch and you have refused to answer them. I will repeat them here in case you failed to read them as well:

What was the motivation of your original source? No one is asking you to reveal him or her.

Did you check to see if a license had ever been fraudulently issued in Maynard’s name?

Did you speak to American Express regarding your accusations?

Did you read the settlements with the other defendants in the FTC issue to see if he had been treated more or less harshly?

Did you contact the Better Business Bureau or any third party to see what LifeLock’s record is with consumers?

Did you fact check any of your accusations with multiple sources?

For each of these questions: If yes, what was the result and why did you not report it? If not, why not?

I have been in business a long time and I have never seen a more personal, one-sided attack on a person or company.

Michael Arrington has a point when it comes to the motivations behind the people who started this. You cannot help but be questioned. The same logic that you use saying that someone is hiding something if they refuse to comment applies to you as well.

Scott

http://www.mark...se.do?id=744696

Think about this…

A customer calls Lifelock to give them sensitive personal information and the person they are giving it to has absolutely no controls placed over them as to security.

This company is headquartered in the state of Arizona, which has the absolute highest rate of identity theft in the country.

These reps will most likely be local.

Connect the dots folks.

I don’t take the no comment route like Maynard Jr., who refused to be interviewed by me.

The fact is, if Maynard Jr. had explained his side of things, I would have gladly included his responses in my article. I gave Maynard Jr. MULTIPLE opportunities to speak with me before the story ran.

If you’re still curious “what happened in Vegas,” I refer all of your questions on that matter to the Clark County district attorney’s office, namely Bernie Zadrowski. He’ll explain to you what really happened in Maynard’s case, if you don’t want to believe what I wrote about it.

Many of your questions seem rhetorical in nature, ie “what kind of journalist calls a corporate officer “bald and beefy?’” I honestly didn’t think you really wanted answers for questions like that. Also, on the American Express deal, you are speculating a lot with statements like, “by admitting on a public record that he owed the money when he had stolen an identity to get the account, he would have been admitting to a felony in a public record. That would seem to be a pretty stupid mistake.” It seems like you’re saying here it would be impossible for Maynard Jr. to make a stupid mistake!

I hope that clears stuff up for you. If you have any more specific questions, feel free to ask them. But you could consider sending me an e-mail, since Arrington’s readers are probably bored stiff with this conversation by now.

ray

How about answering some of the direct questions that were posed in this forum? You’ve had plenty to say about this until someone asks you a question. Why is that? Are you taking the “no comment” route? Seems pretty hypocritical. Could it be because you have no legitimate answers? That’s sure what it looks like.

ray

PLEASE tell me that the “news”, including an “investigative piece” isn’t being reported as fact, based on the assumption that what people say, (INCLUDING OUR PARENTS), is truthful and without personal agenda’s or motivation! I can only hope that a man’s reputation hasn’t been destroyed based on this belief.