News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:900 social insurance numbers stolen from Revenue Canada v... by leoedin on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:08AM (#7586550)
I agree that the short and commonly used numbers that are often considered to be proof of ID are no longer suitable. When a computer can easily guess every possible combination of numbers in a set in seconds, it's not really sensible to use it for validation.

However, even if we all had a unique 4096 bit private key with which we identified ourselves, it would still essentially be a number and it would certainly be able to be stolen. Stealing a number is more or less the same as stealing a private key or stealing a classified electronic document - it's the unauthorised access and copying of information. Society has broadly come to accept that this is considered stealing.

Re:900 social insurance numbers stolen from Revenue Canada v... by Nikker on Monday April 14, 2014 @11:14AM (#7586592)
"Stealing" a number does not exist. Learning what the number relates to by way of breaking the law should be.
Re:900 social insurance numbers stolen from Revenue Canada v... by leoedin on Tuesday April 15, 2014 @04:09AM (#7590836)
You're arguing about the definition of the word steal, and your definition is not the widely accepted one. You're facing a long and uphill struggle.