Even though spending less on "security", European citizens are more secure!

[truedelphi]

If you have been following the headlines on the huge credit card losses relating to the Target fiasco, then you realize we are in the dark ages with regards to personal security here in the USA.

However citizens in other "advanced" nations really do have security. And yet their governments are not spending a declared 57 cents out of every National Dollar on safety, security and anti-terrorism, as our government does.

Weak US card security made Target a juicy target
Source: AP-Excite

By JONATHAN FAHEY

NEW YORK (AP) - The U.S. is the juiciest target for hackers hunting credit card information. And experts say incidents like the recent data theft at Target's stores will get worse before they get better.

That's in part because U.S. credit and debit cards rely on an easy-to-copy magnetic strip on the back of the card, which stores account information using the same technology as cassette tapes.

"We are using 20th century cards against 21st century hackers," says Mallory Duncan, general counsel at the National Retail Federation. "The thieves have moved on but the cards have not."

In most countries outside the U.S., people carry cards that use digital chips to hold account information. The chip generates a unique code every time it's used. That makes the cards more difficult for criminals to replicate. So difficult that they generally don't bother.

Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/2013122...KH4O2.html

[Cali_Democrat]

1. You're connecting defense spending and stolen card info.

Not sure I see the connection.

[truedelphi]

2. Right now, from so many websites that I go to,

Our military budget is rapidly being diverted from weaponry and armaments into surveillance.

And apparently none of that surveillance budget is being spent on anything immediately useful.

I mean, we have a multi-billion (perhaps trillion?) dollar facility, the size of five or six Pentagons, being unveiled off in Utah. Entire office parks are springing up in Washington DC, and the occupants in those new office parks are all security firms for our national surveillance efforts.

All to keep us secure, and process our emails and phone call meta data. Meanwhile, if we go to the store and do our bit as a consumer, we can be scammed by those hackers who understand how deeply flawed our "real security" happens to be.

Here is one such example of what hackers can do:

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/sex-drugs-and-the-biggest-cybercrime-of-all-time-20101111

I doubt much has changed in the several years since that article has been written.

And it wouldn't take much money to do as Europe is doing. Of course, when our government officials finally catch on that the public is demanding this, they will spend two hundred times what the European nations are spending to implement similar measures.

[Igel]

3. The implicit assumption is fairly clear.

The government is supposed to be in an all-encompassing protection business.

If a company needs security, the government provides it.

If a house needs security, the government provides it.

If the borders needs security, the government provides it.

Sort of makes nobody responsible for security but the government.


At the risk of overreaching, I'd also suspect that if the government did spend billions and billions of dollars on upgrading the credit card and ATM card infrastructure--new cards, software, card readers and other equipment--that there'd be hell to pay about government subsidies. Unless the entire system was nationalized (and we saw how that goes). Then would follow concerns about having the government provide all the software and equipment, making it easy for them to spy without even having to break any encryption schemes.