Private Eye Fails to Produce Evidence on Domino's Sharing Customer Database
A New York private investigator declared in a series of interviews some two weeks ago that Domino's Pizza was sharing its customer database. The Brooklyn private eye, Mr. Steven Rambam said he would send proof in news clips and a slide presentation of his but has failed to produce any such independent evidence, other than his own account of seeing such a list.
Mr. Steve Rambam, a senior director of investigative agency Pallorium, Inc., went on record with CNET and our journal saying, “Domino's has built the biggest consumer database in America, and the U.S. Marshals Service, the New York Police Department and collection agencies are using it to track people down."
But Domino's was quick and forthcoming in declaring that no, it does no such thing. Tim McIntyre, Vice President of Communications for Domino's Pizza, Inc., stated clearly, “We do not sell or give away our customer lists to anyone, despite what this individual claims. He's grossly misinformed.”
When the lack of evidence was first followed up in an email on September 12, Mr. Rambam wrote, "I just returned from overseas yesterday and don't have the time today to drop everything." Mr. Rambam responded to another email on September16, "I said that I'd look for it this week," he wrote.
A week and a half later, Rambam wrote, "I told you that I would try to find my file, if I had time—emphasis on "if I had time."
No independent evidence has been provided to this journal. Mr. Rambam later revised his statement, saying, “Domino's may not be 'selling or giving away' their entire customer file as a bulk data dump, but I have been reliably informed that significant portions of their data, most significantly: CNA [Customer Name and Address] connected to purchasers' phone numbers, does find its way into marketing and telephone number lists.”
When again asked to produce such information, Mr. Steven Rambam replied, “I have not had discretionary time to assist you and have been working non-stop since we spoke, which was less than a day after I returned from overseas.” Mr. Rambam later added, “What I said is that Domino's regularly releases info to law enforcement agents, etc., I believe (based on multiple personal observations), without requiring a subpoena. And, once again, you have never asked Domino's the correct question, which is "does ANY PORTION of your data end up elsewhere?"
Domino's has consistently and adamantly denied that it shares or sells its database in its entirety or in any portion, other than when law enforcement agents provide subpoenas or in criminal acts against its own stores.
Tim McIntyre this week once again has emphatically declared, “It does not surprise me that he [Rambam] could provide no tangible evidence to support his claims—because they are false. We do not give away or sell our customer lists to anyone. As we've said, there are occasions in which we work with local police agencies who want to tie an address to a specific cell phone number, and our cooperation in those cases have led to the arrest of drug dealers and murderers. In those cases, we provide the information under subpoena—not because we don't want to be cooperative, but to avoid ridiculous accusations like the one this guy made. We do not sell our lists or sell out the privacy of our customers.”
--
Related reading:
Actually, my response to Sniegowski was...
Actually, my entire response to Mr. Snegowski was, verbatim:
"...Mr. Sniegowski:
For the record:
I told you that I would try to find my file, if I had time --- emphasis on "if I had time". I have not had discretionary time to assist you and have been working non-stop since we spoke, which was less than a day after I returned from overseas. If you had been genuinely interested in my complete input - rather than contacting me as an afterthought, after your article was already run - you would have called BEFORE running your article and would have given me some time.
And, re what should I further comment / clarify? Domino's statement that they don't sell their db as a bulk data dump? Perhaps that's true...and I never said otherwise. What I said is that Domino's regularly releases info to law enforcement agents, etc., I believe (based on multiple personal observations), w/o requiring a subpoena. (IMO, right on, Domino's.) And, once again, you have never asked Domino's the correct question, which is "does ANY PORTION of your data end up elsewhere?" - i.e. name-address-telephone relationships (which I have reason to believe do migrate out of Domino's dbs).
Finally, if I had been inclined and able to drop everything to assist you in fleshing out your story after the fact, my willingness to assist you further dropped to nil after I learned 2 days ago that you were posting my private emails to your blog, completely w/o my knowledge or permission. Nice. ...".
My final word on the topic:
There is a big difference between "accusations" and personal observations. I stand by my statement (at the HOPE conference) that I have seen, on numerous occasions, "pizza data" being used to track down fugitives (by revealing a delivery address cross-referenced with a cell phone number). For my next public presentation of "Privacy Is Dead" I will make a point of acquiring examples of that data and putting it up on screen.
And, again, "we do not give away or sell our customer lists to anyone" leaves quite a bit of wiggle room. If Domino's would say "NO PORTION of our customer data exists anywhere but in our files", then that would be a more significant statement.
In the future, I will endeavor to ignore niche bloggers on deadline. Do the expressions "tempest in a teapot" and "what makes you think that anyone really cares" (including me) perhaps apply to this article?
STEVE ROMBOM
Steve Rombom made that up out of whole cloth. He is a fraud. See http://steverombom.org
Relevant?
Rambam sued the creator of that website, Alan J. Weberman, for defamation a few years ago and was awarded $1,000,000. He then seized a number of Weberman's websites. This must be the latest incarnation of the seized sites. But is this in any way relevant to the discussion?
Rambam credibility
On the facts of this case, the credibility of the parties is relevant.
I do find Mr. Rambam to be credible on this issue, particularly since a review of public databases shows that he has been saying much the same thing about the Domino's database since at least 2006 and Domino's has not previously challenged the accuracy of Rambam's statements despite those statements being made in public conferences.
As to Mr. Rambam's arrest, one would think that having been through that experience, Mr. Rambam of all people would be wary of private companies that betray the trust of their customers by giving data to the feds, especially when it is contrary to an explicit privacy policy.
The circumstances of Mr. Rambam's dispute with the FBI and the US Attorney's Office should give serious concern to any citizen, and the prosecutorial abuse in that matter is illustrative of why we need to be wary of giving up civil liberties in the belief that the Government wouldn't go after an innocent person.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
franchisee data base mining
Let's not lose sight of the issue. Rambam states he has seen database information given to police without a warrant. The issue of who 'owns' the database has serious repercussions for franchisees. let's look at a few:
This is a bigger issue that helping out the local police catch a bad guy. It would be interesting to hear more about how franchisors are using franchisee databases. Anyone have stories to share?
Good point - different conclusion
"As to Mr. Rambam's arrest, one would think that having been through that experience, Mr. Rambam of all people would be wary of private companies that betray the trust of their customers by giving data to the feds, especially when it is contrary to an explicit privacy policy."
Good point though I come to a different conclusion. It is important that data remains open and available to the citizens, and not just "the feds". The last 8 years have shown that we have to be able to examine data and come to our conclusions. The FBI especially seems to put their own unique interpretation on information. We have to be able to "check their work".
All of the news stories I've found say Rambam was briefly arrested, but never actually charged with anything, and Wikipedia reported an AP story that the prosecutor that ordered the arrest of Rambam to try to intimidate him was "dismissed from the underlying case". At the end of Rambam's presentation to the H.O.P.E. meeting, which is available on Google Videos (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3079242748023143842&ei=CKPjSKybN46qrgLr_9iHBA&q=steven+rambam) he discusses that case. If his version is accurate it seems that he stood up to the FBI to protect a client and the FBI tried to punish him for not letting them get their way.
I also find Rambam's claims credible though possibly outdated by a few months. Domino's may have cleaned up their act and stopped sharing the data and their latest statement may now in fact be truthful.
Motive Brings Light to Allegations
Follow the money.
Rambam is rewarded for stretching the truth about dbase security. Bringing in big names like Domino's and Papa John's makes his story sound more credible.
Job of Rambam
Mr. Rambam is not an IT person, he is a PI. As such he is not "rewarded" for discussing dbase security. In fact his public disclosure of Domino's Pizza practices was a side comment in a lengthy presentation dealing with the availability of personal data as a result of information voluntarily provided (albeit unwittingly) by investigatory targets.
If anything, it was not in the pecuniary interest of Mr. Rambam to disclose sources and frankly that is one of the reasons I believe him. Moreover, I actually watched the video of the 2 hour seminar he gave in 2006 at a San Diego conference and he seems factually accurate and professional in demeanor.
Furthermore, Mr. Rambam in the Q&A section stated the obvious: in the new technological climate, there is a tradeoff between obtaining benefits and surrendering personal privacy.
That seems to be a common-sense truth.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
I have seen it happen
I just attended a 4 hour seminar taught by Steven Rambam for the Arizona Private Investigator's Association. Steven mentioned Domino's, and their recent claims on your website that they "never" share customer information. Bull! I was not the only person today that had a story of using Domino's or pizza data. The reporter handled this very badly and ran a story as soon as he had Domino's pro forma denial and without doing any real research. He could attend any investigator or police convention and meet dozens of people who would support Steven Rambam's claims.
Job of reporter
The issue of whether Mr. Rambam or Domino's Pizza is telling the truth is a matter which readers can decide. I personally have read both of their statements and believe Mr. Rambam.
The job of a reporter is to report. A reporter is not a private investigator. The job of a reporter is not to tell people what to think (except if you work for MSNBC or the NY Times).
The reporter did his job as a reporter. You may not like what he wrote, but the job of a reporter is not to "attend any investigator or police convention and meet dozens of people." Indeed if X felt that there were "dozens of people" who would corroborate his story then X could have suggested the reporter contact those people.
Having dealt with the media myself, I always provide the reporter with such corroboration as I am able to provide. In some cases, confidentiality concerns may preclude provision of much corroboration. In other cases, witnesses may be reluctant to provide statements (even off-the-record or not-for-attribution) to a reporter.
Mr. Rambam does not grasp why his statement should be so controversial, nor why Domino's Pizza would deny the accuracy of the statement with such vehemence.
As noted, I believe Mr. Rambam is telling the truth and that Domino's is lying. However, I fully understand the reaction of Domino's Pizza and the uncharacteristically forceful response of the franchisor public relations department suggests that this is indeed a serious allegation and a legitimate news story.
A reporter covering a news story gave both sides an opportunity to state their case. That is what a reporter does. What conclusion the reader draws from the story is for each reader to decide.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
You are correct
This is not a serious website.
Conclusory statements are not serious
Well, since you put it that way, I yield to your dispositive logic.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Amen
Paul states:
that matter is illustrative of why we need to be wary of giving up civil liberties in the belief that the Government wouldn't go after an innocent person.
My reply:
Amen.
FuwaFuwaUsagi
Posting Guidelines
Guest,
Please be aware of our Posting Guidelines . The article explores sharing a database with outside agencies. This is a technical journal on franchise issues. Readers are small business operators who in this case are simply concerned about understanding database security allegations of a franchise chain rather than discussing personalities or lifestyles.
Mr. Blue MauMau
Moderator
Rambam makes valid points
The guest poster refers to a website which does make the guest poster look to be a bit of a nutcase, not to mention someone who can't decide how to spell the name of his arch-enemy.
I don't agree with Rambam on the propriety of using customer databases, but Rambam himself appears to be an intelligent and credible source.
(And anyone who is friends with Kinky Friedman is likely to be a bit of a character anyway... at least he's not friends with Solomon, which indicates Rambam doesn't associate with Texans indiscriminately. But I hear that Solomon and Friedman did play with M-80s in kindergarten, apparently that's a Texas rite of passage)
The only discussion I see of the pizza allegations is in a conference from 2006 , and it is difficult to see the power point slide. (Go to the segment that starts around 29:00 into the presentation).
Rambam's presentation is very informative, and an eye-opener for anyone who does not realize just how little personal privacy remains.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Releasing information to law enforcement without a subpoena
"What I said is that Domino's regularly releases info to law enforcement agents, etc., I believe (based on multiple personal observations), w/o requiring a subpoena. (IMO, right on, Domino's.)"
--
I believe that you saw this happen. I also think it's a local issue that Dominos HQ knew nothing about.
What I don't understand is why you think it's o.k. for law enforcement to search consumer records without a subpoena. That's pretty sick.
Zor reputation subjective
Some people do care. And they eat pizza.
BMM has strong readership within the franchise industry and among media outlets, and that is why Domino's was so strong in statements to BMM.
The issue here is the reputation of the franchisor. Mr. Rambam believes that the franchisor reputation is enhanced by being known as a company which sells customer data to outside agencies. From an objective perspective, perhaps Rambam is correct and all franchisors should connect their databases to make sure the government is able to have maximum knowledge of the private lives of everyone in the country.
But metaphysical truth is not relevant here. Customer perception is.
In recent times, we find a basis for the concern of Domino's Pizza as to American's unease with the erosion of privacy, particularly by the use of private actors to circumvent constitutional restrictions on the government. The very fact that McNealy's quote caused such furor and that Poindexter was forced to resign demonstrates that many pizza-eaters disagree with Ramban and those familiar with American and world history have legitimate concerns .
It is true that a new generation raised on Facebook and similar technology does have significantly less concern about privacy. Perhaps in a few years privacy will be regarded as a quaint notion of a bygone era and like Winston Smith we shall embrace Total Information Awareness.
...then again, maybe when the racy photos exchanged by horny teenagers and those videos of using the beer bong surface when applying for a job... well, privacy might come into fashion once more.
In the meantime, there are a significant number of consumers who simply want to eat a pizza without being concerned about Rambam's benevolent Big Brother.
Such consumers may be naive, misguided, and unappreciative of the benefits of an omnipresent government. But they are still a potential market of pizza-eaters.
Domino's is in the business of selling pizza.
It has responsibility first and foremost to its franchisees, who don't want to get in the middle of controversy.
Paul Steinberg
Franchisee Attorney, New York City, Ph: 212-529-5400
Caring Enough to Change
Guest writes: "what makes you think that anyone really cares" (including me) perhaps apply to this article?"
Guest also wrote: "For my next public presentation of "Privacy Is Dead" I will make a point of acquiring examples of that data and putting it up on screen."
The obvious conclusion is that guest cared enough about this article to change his behaviour at public presentations.
Michael Webster PhD LLB
Franchise News
P.S.
In fact, if Domino's makes such a statement, I will revise my presentation to include it.
S.R.
Evidence First Before Mouth Opens
You would have thought that acquiring examples would have been important before you went shooting your mouth off to CNET.com about Domino's dbase practices.
Re: Evidence First Before Mouth Opens
Rambam probably means new information. I attended his "Privacy Is Dead" presentation at the PallTech skiptracing seminar in June 2007 and he did show us Dominos' data and also demonstrated how to use pizza order data for skiptracing a fugitive. All of Rambam's examples were well documented and the seminar lasted more than 3 hours. Rambam didn't appear to be shooting off his mouth. I have been a detective for 17 years and I learned some new tricks from Rambam. I and some of the other people attending the seminar had used Dominos and Papa Johns data and we were familiar with the methods discussed by Rambam. It is not fiction and I think that Mr. Maumau is covering for the franchiser with his article. As Rambam points out, Dominos' still has not issued a complete denial, and they probably won't.
Rambam's Slide on Domino's Is Incorrect
Dear Anonymous Guest in Support of Rambam,
The information in a presentation Privacy Is Dead, Get Over It by Steve Rambam regarding Domino's Pizza is incorrect and misleading. Here is the reason why.
Mr. Rambam presents a Powerpoint slide 29 minutes into a Google video that incorrectly has the title "Domino's Pizza (yes, really)."
Mr. Rambam declares in the video, "Domino's Pizza: All kidding aside, this is one of the best investigative database lists in America." He goes on, "I know of at least six law enforcement agencies that use the Domino's data to track fugitives." But then he does not give the names of those agencies.
As proof, the slide provides a very narrow news clip in USA Today dated May 4, 2006 where the words are illegibly small to the viewer. The quote below is taken from the article, where it is displayed in large font:
But the words above in Rambam's slide from a May, 2006 article cannot be found through a Google search for that date. Those exact words are used in an earlier Associated Press article by Kelly Wiese, published in USAToday Tech news, dated two years earlier - April 27, 2004.
Rambam ignores the quote in the article from Domino's.
Emphasizing how important this issue is to the pizza chain, Domino's quickly denies such an allegation while other national chains provided no response. The quote above also shows that the pizza firm has been consistent for years in denying allegations regarding its customer list.
Giving the wrong date and not providing the article's actual quote from Domino's is sloppy, at best. At worst, his presentation is intentionally misleading.
Many people who call themselves Rambam are not
anything like The Rambam. They are just poseurs,--
Richard Solomon, FranchiseRemedies.com, has over 45 years experience with franchise litigation and crisis management. He is a graduate of The Citadel and The University of Michigan Law School