Equifax Trial offer

OceanSound

mije1983 wrote: »

Both ColdIron and the quote you posted says address weren't compromised though? Where does it say Equifax say addresses were?
In fact, you even emboldened your quote that says this.

Where does it say Equifax say addresses were?

Hopefully, ColdIron can tell us.:)
The sources I've found only say addresses weren't compromised.

mije1983

OceanSound wrote: »

Hopefully, ColdIron can tell us.:)
The sources I've found only say addresses weren't compromised.

Which is exactly what ColdIron said though?

ColdIron wrote: »

They did seem quite proud not to have lost my address.

masonic

For those who seem to be confused, let me repost ColdIron's fairly clear statement verbatim with some emphasis:

ColdIron wrote: »

I lost all confidence in Equifax when they wrote to me last year to tell me they had a security breach and they had revealed my name, DoB and telephone number in a cyberattack (in the USA as I recall). They did seem quite proud not to have lost my address. They offered me access to Equifax Protect/WebDefend to monitor my account (I have never had a formal agreement with them) which required me to disclose, you've guessed it, my address

I don't blame ColdIron for not wanting to tell Equifax his address immediately after they lost all his other information.

OceanSound

mije1983 wrote: »

Which is exactly what ColdIron said though?

You are just picking and choosing bits. Read the concluding part:

...I have never had a formal agreement with them) which required me to disclose, you've guessed it, my address

THat's how come I'm asking, was the lack of compromise of his address due to him not joining Equifax (to access credit reports).?
Where is the evidence to support his conclusions?

masonic

OceanSound wrote: »

THat's how come I'm asking, was the lack of compromise of his address due to him not joining Equifax (to access credit reports).?
Where is the evidence to support his conclusions?

He was invited to join Equifax after the breach, which is what his post states. His reluctance to share his address with a company who just lost his other information is quite understandable, at least to the rest of us.

mije1983

OceanSound wrote: »

You are just picking and choosing bits.

Yes, the relevant bits. You are reading into something that hasn't been said and making your own hypothetical conclusions.

OceanSound wrote: »

THat's how come I'm asking, was the lack of compromise of his address due to him not joining Equifax (to access credit reports).?
Where is the evidence to support his conclusions?

Actually, what you said was...

OceanSound wrote: »

So, I'm thinking, both you and Equifax cannot be correct. Either addresses were compromised or they wern't.

Therefore implying that one or the other had said addresses were compromised when neither had.

OceanSound

masonic wrote: »

For those who seem to be confused, let me repost ColdIron's fairly clear statement verbatim with some emphasis:



I don't blame ColdIron for not wanting to tell Equifax his address immediately after they lost all his other information.

COldIRon not disclosing his address to equifax would not have protected him for certain. Ask RG2015. (Both groups were affected)

masonic

OceanSound wrote: »

COldIRon not disclosing his address to equifax would not have protected him for certain. Ask RG2015. (Both groups were affected)

Of course it would not have protected him for certain. But having Equifax process more of his data would increase his risk of that data going astray in the future.

OceanSound

masonic wrote: »

Of course it would not have protected him for certain. But having Equifax process more of his data would increase his risk of that data going astray in the future.

Then how come he didn't say 'I would never have a formal agreement with them....'. In fact he said 'I have never had....'.
For future, he should've used 'I would never have'.

ColdIron

OceanSound wrote: »

Hopefully, ColdIron can tell us.:)
The sources I've found only say addresses weren't compromised.

I'm not sure what you are getting at but it's very simple. They say they did not compromise my address. As far as I am aware they did not compromise my address. All the articles state that addresses were not compromised

The sources I've found only say addresses weren't compromised.

On this I think we can all agree, I'm certainly not disputing it

I did not take up their Protect/WebDefender offer as it required me to disclose one piece of data that everybody agrees had not, hitherto, been compromised

Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me

Blimey, what a palaver