There is another side to this, though, at least when it comes to credit scoring.
My last serious involvement with this area was about 20 years ago, when automated credit scoring and automated Customer Case Management were first becoming a thing, and the big selling point then was that the more data you collected the more personalised a product you could offer.
So if someone shows up as a good credit risk, they're likely to get a better interest rate/higher credit limit than otherwise they might, and if they're seen as a bad credit risk, then the interest rate goes up.
This sounds unfair, though I've never quite seen that, in that lending someone money is always a gamble, literally, and I'm certainly more likely to lend money to a friend I know will pay me back than I am to a friend I know is a bit of deadbeat, just as I'm likely to be more willing to bet on horse with a good track record than one who keeps losing races.
The difference between me and the credit card company, though, is that it's my money, so if my deadbeat friend needs the money badly enough and I can afford it, I'll do all I can to help out, knowing that I probably won't see the money again. But the credit card company are lending out other people's money to people with whom they have no bonds of friendship, so they're no more likely to lend than is a local shop likely to advance credit to a customer they don't know (or to someone they do know who has previously failed to clear their slate).
But the point is that, automated credit scoring or not, a bank or a credit card company has to have some means of assessing how risky it is to lend money -- other people's money -- to somebody, and their default position without having any data on someone is going to be to refuse.
They don't want to have to turn people down -- they make no money that way -- and people in need of credit wouldn't have applied in the first place if they didn't want it, so to my mind everyone wins if, because of the data the credit card people hold, someone in need of a loan gets one.
The alternative, we need to remember, to not being able to borrow money from the credit card company is generally, if you need the funds badly enough, to borrow from a payday loan company or a loan shark, or to do without something either you or your family quite possibly desperately need.
So the more data that's available about you, the more likely you are to get the loan you so urgently want.
The credit scoring system won't charge you high interest rates simply because they want to gouge you, though it may feel like that, but because they know, from experience, that there's an n% chance someone with your profile will default on this unsecured loan, so they build that into the interest rates to cover the bad debts they know they'll have to write off.
I'm not defending the credit card and insurance companies (or anyone else), but I do point out there's another side to the story,
To my mind, the far larger concern is about how companies use your data without your permission, but that's a whole different story. It's fortunately a matter that far easier to deal with, if there's the political will, which is why the legal data protection regimes are different on the two sides of the Atlantic Ocean.