After being cancelled or suspended, mobile phone numbers are "frozen" for about three months and then re released to the market by operators for new users to use. This "secondary release" is a common practice to activate limited idle number resources, but it also exposes users' personal information to risks. According to media reports, new users with "second number" found that they could easily log in to the previous owner's Taobao and Alipay accounts through mobile phone verification code; Some people often receive express messages from strangers, consumption records from unknown platforms, and even various debt collection calls... Cancelling a phone number does not mean the automatic unbinding of the app account bound to that phone number, which brings a series of security risks that are of concern. There are many help posts on the internet about "how to cancel a network account with one click", and the problem has always existed, but it has not been "properly resolved". When the physical space gives way to the digital world, a mobile phone screen carries most of the life scenes, and the identification, annotation, and management of individual information become the premise for people to travel freely in the mobile Internet field. Due to its unique feature of real name authentication, mobile phone numbers are used by various apps as the basis for user registration, and have gradually evolved into a "digital ID card" that connects personal identity, financial accounts, and social relationships beyond the meaning of a communication address. Therefore, solving the problem of "secondary broadcasting" essentially involves resolving the issue of "identity ambiguity" in the virtual world and re anchoring "who is you". Who will solve this problem? Let's rephrase it. Changing a user's phone number is like moving in the physical world. If each app is not unbound in a timely manner, it is equivalent to leaving the house key and its contents for the "next home". As the executor of "secondary account issuance", communication operators are essentially handing over the keys of old users to new users. For users who have not changed their locks, the risks of this move are obvious. At present, "changing locks" is mainly solved by users themselves. Through the "One Network Access" service launched by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the binding of 25 major Internet applications can be queried and unbind one by one. But according to past data, the average number of mobile apps per young internet user in China is about 80. For those users who cannot remember which apps they have registered for, it is like planting a "time bomb" and can only wait for new users to detonate it. As the person who hands over the "key", communication operators clearly have an obligation to inform users of the many risks involved, and from a contractual perspective, they should also provide users with products and services with clear ownership and no disputes. However, from an operational perspective, operators have no or even no right to know how many apps a user's phone number has registered for. This means that to avoid the risks brought by "secondary account release", higher-level solutions are needed to promote necessary connections between different databases and to clearly define the rights and responsibilities. For example, communication operators share their "secondary broadcasting" mobile phone numbers with relevant network platforms, and the databases of various apps are modified in a timely manner, or dual identity authentication methods such as email and facial recognition are added to re anchor the "uniqueness" of user identities. Of course, this needs to be done under the supervision of relevant departments to prevent new risks of information leakage. At the same time, preventing the "one click clearing" of life, browsing, consumption, location and other information bound to mobile phone numbers is related to the use and security of people's virtual assets. In the era of mobile internet, it is not an exaggeration to describe mobile phone numbers as a new type of infrastructure in digital life, which also means that solving the problem of "electronic identity ambiguity" has considerable "publicness". Data will not disappear over time or automatically like matter. So, the so-called "freeze period" before account release should not be "frozen at once", but should be regarded as the "migration period" of user data on various platforms. The length of time should be based on the completion of data migration to ensure that users' data assets are truly protected accurately, securely, and effectively. (outlook new era)