Group items tagged

It's funny. Was it just a month ago that we were enjoying the holiday respite, wondering what 2009 would have in store for us? Mind you, I didn't have any delusions. After the breaches, news events and regulatory issues of 2008, I didn't think we were going to turn the calendar page and emerge in a new world of a healthy economy and soaring consumer confidence. But neither did I think, four weeks later, we'd already have our first major security breach of the year - Heartland Payment Systems (HPY) and that it would so dominate our industry's attention. I get it, though, why we're so enamored of this case. It speaks to our biggest fears, first of all, that unknown electronic assailants can sneak into our systems and pry away our customers' names and critical information. Then there's the unknown enormity - we truly don't know how big this breach was. And, finally, it hits home. For you, the banking institution, you're the one left replacing your customers' cards and explaining why. For me, the banking customer ... well, mine is one of the banks doing the explaining. Needless to say, we're monitoring accounts closely. So, we were among the first to break the Heartland story when it first broke last Tuesday, and we've continued to follow it closely. After the initial media surge, where we saw news outlets and solutions providers tripping over one another to opine over what they think happened to Heartland and what it all means, here is what I believe we've learned so far from the case: 1) The Damage Goes Far Beyond the Breach. Heartland execs absolutely did the right thing by stepping forward last week and saying "We were breached," but the company has suffered for it ever since. The market responded to the news by gutting the company's value from over $14 per share last Tuesday to a low of just under $8 this week. Reputationally, you just can't measure the damage - Heartland is now synonymous with "breach," and that's a tough tag to shake. Unable to answer quest

Those who are superstitious may believe that bad things happen on Friday the 13th, but we will leave it to each individual and entity to formulate conclusions regarding the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (the HITECH Act), which Congress passed late on Friday, February 13, 2009, and President Obama officially signed into effect on February 17, 2009. The HITECH Act addresses various aspects relating to the use of health information technology (H.I.T.), including providing for federal funding by way of grants and incentive payments in order to promote H.I.T. implementation. This Alert focuses, however, on Subtitle D of the HITECH Act, which includes important, new and far-reaching provisions concerning the privacy and security of health information that will materially and directly affect more entities, businesses and individuals in more diverse ways than ever before. These changes are further elaborated upon below, but this Alert can only highlight certain prominent issues under the HITECH Act and is by no means a comprehensive review of this lengthy and complex Act. For questions and additional guidance on the HITECH Act, contact your Fox Rothschild attorney or the authors of this Alert. New Privacy and Security Requirements * Security Breach Notification Requirements: Security breach notification requirements under the HITECH Act go into effect 30 days after the date that interim final regulations are promulgated, which will be no later than 180 days after the date of enactment of the HITECH Act (August 16, 2009). Covered entities, business associates and vendors who handle personal health records are required to abide by breach notification requirements. Violations of this requirement by vendors would be treated as an unfair and deceptive act or practice in violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act. If a breach affects more than 500 individuals of a particular state, notice also must be provided to prominent media outl

Beware of web sites offering free money Iain Thomson in San Francisco vnunet.com, 04 Mar 2009 The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is warning of a rash of online scams offering payouts under the economic stimulus plan passed by Congress. Businesses and individuals are being targeted by the scammers using web sites and emails, the organisation warned. Recipients are typically offered 'grants' from the government, and must either surrender bank details to get the funds or make a small payment. Advertisement"Web sites may advertise that they can help you get money from the stimulus fund. Many use deceptive names or images of president Obama and vice president Biden to suggest that they are legitimate. They are not," said Eileen Harrington, acting director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Don't fall for it. If you do, you'll get scammed." Several variants have also been discovered that use malware to steal important data. These include pages that purport to offer links to sites that show how to get the federal funds. The pages are loaded with malware that can penetrate an improperly patched browser. "Consumers who may already have fallen for these scams should carefully check their credit card bills for unauthorised charges, and report the scam to the FTC," said Harrington.

Anatomy of a Data Breach Investigation: Alain Sheer, FTC Attorney February 17, 2009 The Heartland Payment Systems data breach is on everyone's mind, and the case is in the hands now of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) if it chooses to investigate. While the FTC will neither confirm nor deny a Heartland investigation, staff attorney Alain Sheer does offer his insight on: How the FTC investigates data breaches like Heartland's; The timeline and milestones of such an investigation; Details of the CardSystems data breach - which closely resembles Heartland's.

Physician groups press FTC for exemption from Red Flag Rules With a May 1 deadline for compliance looming, the American Medical Association (AMA) has asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to suspend the application of the Red Flag Rules to physicians and publish a new rule so that physicians have an opportunity to provide comments. In a March 9 letter to the FTC, AMA Executive Vice President Michael D. Maves wrote that the AMA "strongly believes that the FTC did not provide physicians with an opportunity to review and comment on this Rule." Controversy. Under the Red Flag Rules, which were finalized in October 2007 under the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), financial institutions and creditors must develop and implement written identity theft prevention programs. FACTA provides a broad definition of "creditor" as "any entity that regularly extends, renews or continues credit." The FTC has interpreted this definition to include health care providers and physicians. The AMA and several other medical trade associations have taken the position that physicians were not intended to be subject to the Red Flag Rules, but the FTC has held firm in its interpretation, in spite of the objections. In a Feb. 4 letter to the AMA, the FTC reiterated its position that "the plain language and purpose of the Rule dictate that health care professionals are covered by the Rule when they regularly defer payment for goods or services." The FTC also has taken the position that application of the Red Flag Rules to physicians will reduce the incidence of medical identity theft and will not impose a heavy burden on health care professionals. Rulemaking process. In addition to its claim that health care providers should not be classified as creditors, the AMA also has argued that the physician community was not informed that it would be subject to the Red Flag Rules.

When the CISO asks to speak to you with that look on his face, you know the news isn't good. We were contacted by one of our third-party vendors, whom we had hired to do analysis on our website traffic. It appears that we have been passing sensitive information to them over the Internet. This sensitive information included data, such as customer names, addresses and credit card information. Because we are a public company, there are many regulatory guidelines that we have to follow like Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) and the Payment Card Industry's (PCI) data security standard. Fortunately for us, our vendor has retained a copy of everything that we have sent to them. Unfortunately for us, it was six months of information totaling over a terabyte. Since our website is international, the legal department needed to obtain outside council to assist us in this matter. It will be a few days until I receive the data from the vendor.

A defunct payment gateway has exposed as many as 19,000 credit card numbers, including up to 60 Australian numbers. The discovery by a local IT industry worker was made by mistake and appears to be caused by a known issue with the Google search engine, in which the pages of defunct web sites containing sensitive directories remain cached and available to anyone. The cached data, viewed by iTnews, includes 22,000 credit card numbers, including CVVs, expiry dates, names and addresses. Up to 19,000 of these numbers could be active. Most are customers in the US and Britain although some are Australian. The credit card numbers are for accounts held with Visa, Mastercard, American Express, Solo, Switch, Delta and Maestro/Cirrus. Within the address bars of the cached pages are URLs of companies, including UK retailers of laboratory supplies, sports and health goods, apparel, photo imaging and clothing.

It was only a matter of time! Auditor accuracy being examined in lawsuit may signal change in PCI and other compliance processes.

When CardSystems Solutions was hacked in 2004 in one of the largest credit card data breaches at the time, it reached for its security auditor's report. In theory, CardSystems should have been safe. The industry's primary security standard, known then as CISP, was touted as a sure way to protect data. And CardSystems' auditor, Savvis Inc, had just given them a clean bill of health three months before. Yet, despite those assurances, 263,000 card numbers were stolen from CardSystems, and nearly 40 million were compromised. More than four years later, Savvis is being pulled into court in a novel suit that legal experts say could force increased scrutiny on largely self-regulated credit card security practices. They say the case represents an evolution in data breach litigation and raises increasingly important questions about not only the liability of companies that handle card data but also the liability of third parties that audit and certify the trustworthiness of those companies. "We're at a critical juncture where we need to decide . . . whether [network security] auditing is voluntary or will have the force of law behind it," says Andrea Matwyshyn, a law and business ethics professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School who specializes in information security issues. "For companies to be able to rely on audits . . . there needs to be mechanisms developed to hold auditors accountable for the accuracy of their audits." The case, which appears to be among the first of its kind against a security auditing firm, highlights flaws in the standards that were established by the financial industry to protect consumer bank data. It also exposes the ineffectiveness of an auditing system that was supposed to guarantee that card processors and other businesses complied with the standards. Credit card companies have touted the standards and the auditing process as evidence that financial transactions conducted under their purview are secur

When the director of IT at a Boston-based, midsize pharmaceutical firm was first approached to participate in a data leakage audit, he was thrilled. He figured the audit would uncover a few weak spots in the company's data leak defenses and he would then be able to leverage the audit results into funding for additional security resources. "Data leakage is an area that doesn't get a lot of focus until something bad happens. Your biggest hope is that when you raise concerns about data vulnerability, someone will see the value in allowing you to move forward to protect it," the IT director says. But he got way more than he bargained for. The 15-day audit identified 11,000 potential leaks, and revealed gaping holes in the IT team's security practices. (Read a related story on the most common violations encountered.) The audit, conducted by Networks Unlimited in Hudson, Mass., examined outbound e-mail, FTP and Web communications. The targets were leaks of general financial information, corporate plans and strategies, employee and other personal identifiable information, intellectual property and proprietary processes. Networks Unlimited placed one tap between the corporate LAN and the firewall and a second tap between the external e-mail gateway and the firewall. Networks Unlimited used WebSense software on two servers to monitor unencrypted traffic. Then it analyzed the traffic with respect to company policy. Specifically, Networks Unlimited looked for violations of the pharmaceutical firm's internal confidentiality policy, corporate information security policy, Massachusetts Privacy Laws (which go into effect in 2010), Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and Security and Exchange Commission and Sarbanes-Oxley regulations. Auditor Jason Spinosa, senior engineer at Networks Unlimited, says that while he selected the criteria for this audit, he usually recommends that companies take time to determine their policy settings based on their risk

The FBI and Virginia State Police are searching for hackers who demanded that the state pay them a $10 million ransom by Thursday for the return of millions of personal pharmaceutical records they say they stole from the state's prescription drug database. The hackers claim to have accessed 8 million patient records and 35 million prescriptions collected by the Prescription Monitoring Program. "This was an intentional criminal act against the commonwealth by somebody who was trying to harm others," Gov. Timothy M. Kaine (D) said. "There are breaches that happen by accident or glitches that you try to work out. It's difficult to foil every criminal that may want to do something against you." Although the hackers had threatened to sell the data if they did not receive payment by Thursday, the deadline passed with no immediate sign that they followed through. ad_icon State officials say it is unclear whether the hackers were able to view the patient records, as they have claimed. If the theft is real, it would be the most serious cybercrime the state has faced in recent history.

The U.S. Department of Justice's indictment of Albert Gonzalez on Monday seems to have all the elements of a Hollywood crime drama: A hacker gains access to millions of credit and debit card numbers and has the power to take down a nation. Too bad for Tinseltown, the attack itself was about as sexy and a pile of routers. According to the indictment, Gonzalez, 28, gained a foothold into the systems of credit card processors such as Heartland Payment Systems ( HPY - news - people ) and retailers like OfficeMax ( OMX - news - people ), Barnes & Noble ( BKS - news - people ) and TJX Cos. ( TJX - news - people ) using an amateur hacking technique called "wardriving," which uses wireless access points to find vulnerable networks from which to launch attacks. Once connected to those private networks, Gonzalez used a well-known technique called "SQL injection" to trick Web applications into forking over private information that gave him deeper access into networks. Even though it sounds complicated, techies liken this kind of hack to simply turning the front doorknob to get into a house.

U.S. authorities announced what they believed to be the largest hacking and identity theft case ever prosecuted on Monday in a scheme in which more than 130 million credit and debit card numbers were stolen. Three men were indicted on charges of being responsible for five corporate data breaches in a scheme in which the card numbers were stolen from Heartland Payment Systems, 7-Eleven Inc and Hannaford Brothers Co, federal prosecutors said in a statement. The suspects also hacked two unidentified corporate victims, the U.S. attorney's office in New Jersey said in the statement. Prosecutors allege Albert Gonzalez, 28, of Miami, and two unnamed Russian coconspirators targeted large corporations by scanning the list of Fortune 500 companies and exploring corporate websites before setting out to identify vulnerabilities. The suspects would seek to sell the data to others who would use it to make fraudulent purchases, the statement said.

It's become the familiar refrain this year. Each time we see a major data breach related to payment card data, the breached entity says 'Gee, well we were told we were PCI compliant - how could this happen?' The PCI marketing machinery then gets into motion, reminding us all that PCI compliance is but a snapshot in time - not a warrantee against future breaches. Meanwhile, tens of thousands of consumers have their personal information exposed to potential compromise. They probably don't know or care what PCI is. They just want to know 'Why wasn't I protected?' Fair question, and it deserves an answer.

Network Solutions Hack Compromises 573,000 Credit, Debit Accounts Hackers have broken into Web servers owned by domain registrar and hosting provider Network Solutions, planting rogue code that resulted in the compromise of more than 573,000 debit and credit card accounts over the past three months, Security Fix has learned. Herndon, Va. based Network Solutions discovered in early June that attackers had hacked into Web servers the company uses to provide e-commerce services - a package that includes everything from Web hosting to payment processing -- to at least 4,343 customers, mostly mom-and-pop online stores. The malicious code left behind by the attackers allowed them to intercept personal and financial information for customers who purchased from those stores, Network Solutions spokeswoman Susan Wade said.

Heartland Payment Systems chief executive Robert Carr remembers what it felt like when he first heard about the massive data breach at his company earlier this year. "I wanted to throw up. It was devastating," says Carr, recalling how he felt upon realizing that one of his worst fears had come true. "People had asked me for years 'what keeps you awake at night' and I would keep telling them it was the fear of a data breach," he told Computerworld. Five months after Heartland announced what some think may be the biggest data breach ever, Carr is working over-time to limit the fallout from the incident, and the damage to the company's reputation.

The problem with securing data and insuring its safety is that there is simply so much more stored electronically these days that opportunities for outside hackers or insiders to steal valuable, confidential information off a company's computer systems are growing exponentially, according to those in the insurance industry who make it their business to cover this expanding exposure. Indeed, "you can take out more data in a thumb drive now than people could take out in a super-computer 10 years ago," according to Kevin Kalinich, co-national managing director for Professional Risk Solutions at Aon. The risk of a data breach is very real for companies large and small across almost any industry, noted Mr. Kalinich. He cited a report from the University of California, Berkeley, that more data has been aggregated and stored in the last three years than in the entire history of mankind. He also noted that between 75 and 85 percent of Fortune 2000 companies have suffered a "material data breach," meaning there is a growing market for those selling insurance coverage for liability and repair costs, as well as loss control services. Companies that take an "it won't happen to me" approach to securing data need only look at news headlines to see that organizations are often hit by breaches, and as more data is being stored electronically, the potential for, and impact of possible breaches increase. Princeton, N.J.-based credit and debit processing company Heartland Payment Systems reported that it had been compromised in 2008 in a breach that involved up to 100 million records, which would be tops for number of records accessed in a breach. The Heartland incident would displace the 2007 breach of TJX, in which over 45.6 million credit and debit card numbers were stolen. The TJX breach, in turn, took the record set by a breach of CardSystems Solutions in 2005.

A New Jersey credit-card processor disclosed a data breach that analysts said may rank among the biggest ever reported. Heartland Payment Systems Inc. said Tuesday that cyber criminals compromised its computer network, gaining access to customer information associated with the 100 million card transactions it handles each month. The company said it couldn't estimate how many customer records may have been improperly accessed, but said the data compromised include the information on a card's magnetic strip -- card number, expiration date and some internal bank codes -- that could be used to duplicate a card. Heartland, of Princeton, N.J., processes transactions for more than 250,000 businesses nationwide, including restaurants and smaller retailers. Avivah Litan, an analyst at research company Gartner, called it the largest card-data breach ever, based on her conversations with industry executives. Previously, the largest known breach occurred when around 45 million card numbers were stolen from retail company TJX Cos. in 2005 and 2006. Robert Baldwin, Heartland's president and chief financial officer, said it was too early to say how many records were accessed and that calling it the largest-ever breach would be "speculative." Representatives of Visa Inc. and MasterCard Inc. alerted Heartland to a pattern of fraudulent transactions on accounts the processor handled sometime last fall, Mr. Baldwin said. But an internal investigation and audits failed to detect a security breach. Last week, however, a forensic investigator discovered evidence of the breach. Mr. Baldwin said Heartland was targeted with malicious software that was "light-years more sophisticated" than malevolent programs commonly downloaded from the Internet.

The ranking member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee told the chief executive of Heartland Payment Systems that she was "astonished" a breach the company's information system lasted for nearly 1½ years without being detected. At a panel hearing Monday on protecting industry against growing cyber threats, Sen. Susan Collins, R.-Maine, asked Heartland CEO Robert Carr to explain how this delay happened. Carr responded that a breach is usually detected when the processing payer is notified of fraudulent use of cards, and that didn't occur until the end of 2008. "Isn't there software in the systems to detect such a breach?" Collins asked.

Near field communication (NFC) seems to become the rising technology enabling us to pay with our mobiles in the future. Startups like Square and some programs from brands like Starbucks and Google Wallet kick off a new era where mobile payments becomes popular today.