Student ID system must be changed

From Jan. 26 to Feb. 6, more than 3,000 students' Bursar records became vulnerable when a person used an unprotected IU server to download audio music and video files. These students' security was compromised because of the use of Social Security numbers as student identification numbers. The University must find an alternative way to identify students if it wants to protect their privacy.\n The Social Security numbers and other information that were compromised could be used to apply for credit cards or get bank records, ruining students' credit ratings for life. The University did not even let the affected students know their bank accounts and credit cards were compromised until two weeks after the security breach. That is plenty of time for anyone holding the information to get into bank accounts and get credit card numbers. If students had alternative student ID numbers, this situation would not have been as serious. \n But the Bursar's office is not the only place where Social Security numbers are being compromised. Professors use them to help students identify test scores and to post class lists. When students apply for admission to the University, their Social Security numbers are the first blank they must fill out on the application, even before their names. \nYes, Social Security numbers might be an easy way for the University to keep track of students, but there is an alternate system. The University could generate student ID numbers and assign them to students. This already exists as an option for those students who do not want their Social Security numbers used as their student ID numbers.\nThe University must implement a plan of action for emergency situations such as these. If student records are compromised, action should be to help those students secure a good credit rating and correct the damage. But the security breach should also be a warning to students that they need to keep track of their records; the incident could be even more serious in the future.\nStaff vote: 14 - 0\nOnline vote: 92 - 25 - 1