free credit protection as well as identity protection pin numbers. they want to protect taxpayers now but chose not to before the hack. earlier this year ther is inspector general recommended dozens of security upgrades to the irs computer sim but the irs failed to implement them. there s no guarantee the upgrade would have prevented the attacks but the ig says it certainly would have helped. thanks a lot. cyber security analysts say why all of us need to start worrying. i the internal revenue servicep vulnerable, we re all vulnerable, right? that s right. right now the federal government has a major untaking because all of their systems are vulnerable. saul the office of personnel management or the opm hacked where background checks and clearances were taken. irs, time and time again, we re seeing a lot of these large scale breaches and the federal government is way behind. even the commercial sector which is also being prepared right now.
first, the only two investors in the transaction, ac and ikb were institutions with significant resources and extensive experience in the cdo market. second i never told the portfolio selection agent that paulson & company would be an investor in the transaction or take any long position in the deal. although i don t recall the exact words i used, i recall informing aca that the fund was expected to buy credit protection on some of the senior traunchs in this deal. this meant paulson was expected to take some position in the action. moreover from the early stages of the transaction in january 2007 to its completion several months later, none of the offering documents provided to aca indicated the fund would be an equity investor. if ac was confused, it had every opportunity to clarify the
my role in it. i appreciate the opportunity to answer those questions, and i want to make a few points absolutely clear. first, the only two investors in the transaction, aca and i kbwere institutions with extensive experience in the cbo market. second, i never told ata, the portfolio selection agent that paulson and company would be an equity investor in the ac-1 transaction or would take any loan position in the deal. although i don t recall the exact words i used, i recall for aca that paulson s fund was expected to buy credit protection on some of the senior tranches on this deal. this meant that paulson was expected to take some short position in the transaction. moreover, from the early stages of the transaction in january 2007 to its completion several months later, none of the offering documents provided to aca indicated that paulson s fund would be an equity