Group items tagged

One of the more interesting panel discussions at the IDC Cloud Computing Forum on Feb 18th in San Francisco was about managing the complexities of security, privacy and compliance in the Cloud. The simple answer according to panelists Carolyn Lawson, CIO of California Public Utilities Commission, and Michael Mucha, CISO of Stanford Hospital and Clinics is "it ain't easy!" "Both of us, in government and in health, are on the front-lines," Lawson proclaimed. "Article 1 of the California Constitution guarantees an individual's right to privacy and if I violate that I've violated a public trust. That's a level of responsibility that most computer security people don't have to face. If I violate that trust I can end up in jail or hauled before the legislature," she said. "Of course, these days with the turmoil in the legislature, she joked, "the former may be preferable to the later." Stanford's Mucha said that his security infrastructure was built on a two-tiered approach using identity management and enterprise access control. Mucha said that the movement to computerize heath records nationwide was moving along in fits and starts, as shown by proposed systems likeMicrosoft (NSDQ: MSFT)'s Health Vault and Google (NSDQ: GOOG)'s Personal Health Record. "The key problem is who is going to pay for the computerized of health records. It's not as much of a problem at Stanford as it is at a lot of smaller hospitals, but it's still a huge problem." Mucha said that from his perspective security service providers in the cloud and elsewhere are dealing with a shrinking security parameter or fence, which is progressing from filing cabinets, to devices, to files, and finally to the individual, who under the latest Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) privacy rules has certain rights, including rights to access and amend their health information and to obtain a record of when and why their Protected Health Information (PHI) record has bee

Mary Kay Hoal tried everything she could to keep her daughter off of MySpace. She put password locks on the computer and blocked the site. Still, her daughter found ways to log on. Hoal's concerns stemmed from statistics that showed 29,000 registered sex offenders were on MySpace, one out of every five kids are sexually solicited online, and nine out of ten children are exposed to pornography online. When she looked for alternative safe sites for kids, she found none, so she decided to do something about it. Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here Click Here! The result is www.yoursphere.com, the only social networking site for kids and teens that's backed by the Federal Trade Commission through the site's Privacy Vaults approval. The site's Chief Technology officer worked at the California Department of Justice tracking anonymous online sex offenders, as well as the Megan's Law database. Moreover, it requires verified parental consent for a minor to join. Other features include: -- Requires verifiable parental consent to join -- Confirms the identity of the parent providing consent -- Confirms that the parent or guardian providing consent is not a registered sex offender -- Is exclusively for kids and teens through age 18. -- Exceeds COPPA (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) guidelines for protecting kids online through our approval by Privacy Vaults Inc. -- Whose policy is "no creepers allowed" -- lurkers are removed and banned. -- No fake profiles. (No one is anonymous on Yoursphere.com) "The bottom line is that we're the only place in the online world that that has taken extraordinary measures to help ensure the safety of its members and meets or exceeds standards set by the government," Hoal said. "Our opinion is that if it's a behavior that is illegal, immoral or unacceptable offline, then it's unacceptable online." About Mary Kay Hoal After researching the disturbing la

Times are tough, and we all continue to hear about the heightened risk of the insider threat. Granted, unauthorized insider access to data has always been a concern. But the concern is increased now because of the tremendous changes that we are seeing in the economy. The term "disgruntled employee" now has a whole new meaning because there are more and more folks concerned about 'What if my job disappears? What kind of information can I keep? What kind of information can I have access to?' As one who's dealt with the insider threat, I have some questions of my own: What do you really mean by an insider? In our borderless world, the terms "insider" and "outsider" overlap. "Insiders" are not just employees and staff, but also service providers, business partners, consultants, contractors -- any number of parties who may work for companies we deal with. What do we really mean by an authorized versus an unauthorized insider? If you take a look at the Societe Generale situation, allegedly a fraud was committed by an authorized user with privileges he was not supposed to have. How? Well, the horribly overused cliché is that if you work with a company long enough, eventually you will have access to everything, and no one will know it. Bottom line: As people change jobs within a company, we are not good at updating their roles and responsibilities. If you look at all the efforts that have been spent on identity and access management products, the biggest challenge is trying to understand: What are the roles and responsibilities you are trying to apply to people? How do you develop these roles and responsibilities and how do group them? How do you really deal with people who have to change roles and responsibilities? How do you add and delete roles and responsibilities as people change jobs?

Days after Visa seemingly confirmed that a data breach had taken place at a third payment processor, following on the recent breach disclosures by Heartland Payment Systems and RBS WorldPay, the credit card company now is saying that there was no new security incident after all. In actuality, Visa said in a statement issued Friday, alerts that it sent recently to banks and credit unions warning them about a compromise at a payment processor were related to the ongoing investigation of a previously known breach. However, Visa still didn't disclose the identity of the breached company, nor say why it is continuing to keep the name under wraps. Visa said that it had sent lists of credit and debit card numbers found to have been compromised as part of the investigation to financial institutions "so they can take steps to protect consumers." It added that it currently "is risk-scoring all transactions in real-time, helping card issuers better distinguish fraudulent transactions from legitimate ones." Visa's latest statement follows ones issued by both it and MasterCard International earlier this week in response to questions about breach notices that had been posted by several credit unions and banking associations. The notices made it clear that they weren't referring to the system intrusion disclosed by Heartland on January 20 and suggested that a new breach had occurred.

Up to 21,000 Floridians may have been affected by a data breach at Wyndham Hotels & Resorts last year, prompting Attorney General Bill McCollum to ask consumers to keep a close eye on their credit statements. According to a statement released today, Wyndham reported to the Attorney General's Office that it contacted affected consumers in December and notified them that unauthorized access to Wyndham systems had potentially compromised their personal data on their debit and credit cards. The data breach has since been disabled. McCollum encouraged consumers to report any suspicious activity on their accounts to law enforcement. Affected consumers are encouraged to take precautionary steps, including obtaining a free fraud alert from one of the credit reporting agencies. Anyone who believes they may be a victim of identity theft should also request that the national credit bureaus place a fraud alert on their credit reports. Consumers should notify banks and creditors involved of questionable charges or accounts, keep records of all telephone calls and follow up in writing with credit bureaus, banks and creditors.

Social media is on the rise, and so are the privacy and security risks. Is it time to dial back on the whole Web 2.0 'friend' thing? The social media honeymoon is officially over. While it may not yet be time to fly to Reno for a quickie divorce, you might want to start thinking about sleeping in separate bedrooms for a while. Example du jour: Over the weekend, a rogue application spread across Facebook, warning users about bogus errors in their profiles. Clicking on the "Error Check System" app causes it to send false warnings to your entire FB posse, per the unofficial AllFacebook blog. There doesn't seem to be any payload associated with that app besides driving traffic, but the potential for abuse is obvious. But a bigger problem on social nets is an old familiar one: spam. So far, spam only accounts for about 5 to 25 percent of all e-mail passed on social networks, versus 90 percent of regular e-mail, says Adam O'Donnell, director of emerging tech for Cloudmark, which filters spam for some large social nets (but won't identify which ones). As more people start tweeting about what their cats ate for lunch and share their Facebook profiles with near-total strangers, though, that number will only grow. The type of spam on social networks is different too, says O'Donnell. Think fewer fake Viagra come-ons, more social engineering scams. In other words, the junk you get on social networks is more likely to be aimed at stealing your credentials or your identity -- and thus much more dangerous than garden-variety spam.

Data breaches are running at record levels, according to the San Diego-based Identity Theft Resource Center, a non-profit that tracks cybercrime. ITRC says it recorded 342 data breaches from Jan. 1 through June 24, up 69% from the same period in 2007. But, like the origins and perpetrators of so many individual data breaches, mystery also lies behind the aggregated numbers. "I'm not sure that this says breaches are increasing," ITRC founder Linda Foley tells Digital Transactions News. "What we know is the reporting of breaches is increasing." A handful of states now require some disclosure of data breaches to authorities, Alaska being the most recent. And some companies that have been hacked are starting to report breaches voluntarily, Foley says. While data breaches can compromise all manner of personal and business records, they often involve credit and debit card data and bank-account information. ITRC lists five major categories of breached entities, with the so-called banking/credit/financial sector accounting for 10% of 2008's breaches. Businesses, which include physical and Internet retailers, insurance companies and other private enterprises, accounted for 36.8%. Schools accounted for 21.3%; government and military facilities, 17%; and health-care facilities, 14.9%. IRTC also categorizes breaches by how they happened, such as through hackings-break-ins into computers and related systems, insider thefts, data lost in physical transit, and by other methods. The number of 2008 hackings through late June in the banking/credit/financial category was 10-double the five for all of 2007. The estimated number of records compromised as a result was 227,864. In 2007, the reported number of compromised records at financial institutions through hackings was 83,500. But Foley says not to put too much stock in the records numbers because so many breached organizations don't know or fail to report the number of compromised records when they report a bre

Eight years ago, a woman we'll call Sarah discovered that she was not biologically related to the father she had known all her life. Sarah, her mother revealed, was "donor-conceived." Her parents, after trying without success for a pregnancy of their own in the late 1970s, turned to a fertility center, where Sarah's mother was artificially inseminated with sperm from an anonymous donor. At the time sperm banks did not offer detailed donor profiles. Upon discovering the truth, Sarah was told what her parents had been told about her biological father: He was a medical student, possibly of Scandinavian ancestry. Sarah, who describes her family as "loving and stable," was shocked. Today she is also sick. A year before finding out about her conception, she began to experience severe, unexplained bladder problems. She has been seeing doctors at Johns Hopkins; so far they haven't figured out the cause. Recently married, Sarah worries that she may pass the illness on to future children. The medical history of her biological father could provide a crucial piece of the diagnostic puzzle. But in the early days of artificial insemination, clinics often shredded or burned files to ensure donor anonymity and client privacy. Sarah's father's identity may be locked away in storage somewhere, or it may have been destroyed. Although aware of the likely futility of her search, Sarah still continues-writing the clinic, nurses, her doctor-in the hope that someone can help. Faced with stories like this, the fertility industry and a few state governments are trying to come up with a way to ensure that future donor-conceived children will have access to their fathers' medical files. A national registry, for example, could allow banks to monitor how many times a man donates semen and how many children are born from his seed, to share updates about medical issues and to facilitate long-term research on health outcomes. But any such registry poses a threat to the p

In Deloitte's sixth annual Global Security Survey, people are the problem. "[P]eople continue to be an organization's greatest asset as well as its greatest worry," Adel Melek, global leader of security and privacy services at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, said in the report. "That has not changed from 2007. What has changed is the environment. The economic meltdown was not at its peak when respondents took this survey. If there was ever an environment more likely to facilitate an organization's people being distracted, nervous, fearful, or disgruntled, this is it. To state that security vigilance is even more important at a time like this is an understatement." On one level, that couldn't be more obvious: It's not as if anyone worries about squirrels hacking servers; security has always been about people. (Robots, the report says, are unlikely to replace the human workforce during the lifetime of anyone reading the report. Finally, some good employment news.) Yet despite the obviousness of the problem, the obvious solution -- complete denial of access -- doesn't work. People use computers and computers are more useful when connected and it just gets worse from there. That may explain why identity and access management remained top of mind for survey respondents. Deloitte's survey, drawn from major financial companies around the globe, focuses on governance, investment, risk, use of security technologies, quality of operations, and privacy. It includes some good news -- external breaches have declined sharply over the past year -- and troublesome news -- fewer companies say they have the commitment and funding to address regulatory compliance. In terms of risk, specifically information systems failure, people are identified as the most significant vulnerability. "Human error is overwhelmingly stated as the greatest weakness this year (86%), followed by technology (a distant 63%)," the report states. It attributes the rising risk to increased adoption of new techno

Until now, lawsuits seeking to recover significant damages based on the loss of, or unauthorized access to, sensitive personal information have not been especially successful for plaintiffs. Most companies suffering data breaches have escaped by offering affected consumers inexpensive credit monitoring services. But two recent cases show plaintiffs a way to expose many previously safe companies to substantial claims for damages. Any company that thinks there are no risks in employing less than best practices for data privacy and security needs a wake up call. The headlines are all too familiar. Some well known consumer services company (or less known wholesale data processor) announces that millions of individual records containing names, Social Security numbers, account numbers and other sensitive information were left in a dumpster, saved to a stolen, unencrypted laptop, or stored on a misplaced USB drive or backup tape. The press is terrible, the company's stock takes a temporary plunge, and sometimes the Federal Trade Commission enters into a consent decree where the company promises to never do it again. But when affected individuals or groups of consumers tried to sue for damages, they seldom recover significant amounts. These cases have not often succeeded because the plaintiffs have been unable to prove actual pecuniary losses resulting from the security breach. Sure, if identify theft occurs the affected individuals can suffer significant emotional trauma, loss of time, etc. But Courts have been unwilling to award damages for anxiety, fear, and other emotional harm that can result from a data breach, for the risk of future identify theft, or for actual identity theft when the plaintiff could not prove that the theft occurred as a direct result of a data breach at a particular source. Most companies facing claims based on data breaches have been able to settle cheaply by offering to provide credit monitoring services, which most consumers do not use, resu

Last week, a commercial Twitter spamming tool (tweettornado.com) pitching itself as a "fully automated advertising software for Twitter" hit the market, potentially empowering phishers, spammers, malware authors and everyone in between with the ability to generate bogus Twitter accounts and spread their campaigns across the micro-blogging service. TweetTornado allows users to create unlimited Twitter accounts, add unlimited number of followers, which combined with its ability to automatically update all of bogus accounts through proxy servers with an identical message make it the perfect Twitter spam tool. TweetTornado's core functionality relies on a simple flaw in Twitter's new user registration process. Tackling it will not render the tool's functionality useless, but will at least ruin the efficiency model. Sadly, Twitter doesn't require you to have a valid email address when registering a new account, so even though a nonexistent@email.com is used, the user is still registered and is allowed to use Twitter. So starting from the basics of requiring a validation by clicking on a link which will only be possible if a valid email is provided could really make an impact in this case, since it its current form the Twitter registration process can be so massively abused that I'm surprised it hasn't happened yet. Once a Twitter spammer has been detected, the associated, and now legitimate email could be banned from further registrations, potentially emptying the inventory of bogus emails, and most importantly making it more time consuming for spammers to abuse Twitter in general. If TweetTornado is indeed the advertising tool of choice for Twitter marketers, I "wonder" why is the originally blurred by the author Twitter account used in the proof (twitter.com/AarensAbritta) currently suspended, the way the rest of the automatically registered ones are? Pretty evident TOS violation, since two updates and 427 followers in two hours clearly indicat

The Heartland data breach is an opportunity for the US government to standardise data breach notification laws. Bill Conner, chairman, president and CEO of Entrust, claimed that following the revelation that more than 100 million credit cards could have been compromised, the government needs to continue to move quickly to standardise data breach notification laws and call for technology, such as encryption and stronger authentication, that truly protects consumer information. Conner said: "Cybercrime continues to grow and is increasingly affecting more and more of this country's citizens. To slow the upward trend of cybercrime in this country, all organisations - enterprise, consumer and even governments - need to carefully review current security approaches and identify key gaps within their infrastructures." He further called for Congress to pass a data breach notification law that better protects consumer identities through stronger data security standards with strong encryption. "This is an opportunity to do something about a security issue that impacts all Americans", said Conner.

Legal woes may be next for Heartland Payment Systems, a payment processor that reported a major security breach this week. Depending on the results of the ongoing investigation, Heartland is likely to face the threat of litigation from issuing banks, merchants and consumers, says Scott Vernick, an attorney with Fox Rothschild LLP in Philadelphia, who specializes in data theft cases. "The businesses that use Heartland as a credit card processor, as well as thousands of consumers, will be anxiously watching for any negative impact, including harm to their business reputations, and the real possibility of identity theft or fraud," says Vernick. The fact that Heartland's systems were certified as being fully in compliance with data handling rules, called the PCI standards, raises questions about the efficacy of such standards. Hannaford Brothers grocery chain was likewise fully PCI compliant when it had 300 stores hacked and 4.3 million record swiped..... "This latest incident shows how, despite companies being compliant with regulations such as PCI, they are still a long way from being secure," says Mike Rothman, senior vice president of strategy at elQnetworks.

A recent data breach study commissioned by the state of Maine sheds light on the losses banks experienced as a result of the data breaches at TJX and Hannaford Brother's supermarkets. The state's banks said they incurred $2.1 million in expenses related to data breaches since January 1, 2007. The Hannaford breach had the largest impact, affecting 71 financial institutions and incurring $1.6 million in expenses according to the Maine Data Breach Study. Hannaford is based in Scarborough, Maine. The TJX breach accounted for $485,000 in expenses. The report was issued by the Main Bureau of Financial Institutions in November 2008. It studied the impact of data security breaches on Maine banks and credit unions. Fifty credit unions and 25 banks headquartered in Maine responded to the survey. Financial institutions reported more than 18 million records breached last year, according to the Identity Theft Research Center. The San Diego-based nonprofit found that data breach reports across five industry sectors jumped to 656 last year, up 47% from 2007. About 12% of the reports came from financial-services firms, up from 7% in 2007. In Maine, the Hannaford breach resulted in more than $318,000 in gross fraud losses, according to data reported by 22 financial institutions. More than 700 accounts were used to buy items fraudulently, although five of the 22 institutions that suffered a fraud loss did not report the number of accounts, according to the report. The Hannaford breach cost some banks as much as $58,000 to reissue credit cards to customers. Investigation expenses cost nearly $30,000 for some banks. Communication to customers cost nearly $28,000, some banks and credit unions reported. Fraud losses of nearly $45,000 were tied to the TJX data breach. The losses were reported by six financial institutions. The expenses for reissuing credit cards cost some banks as much as $32,000. Investigation expenses were as high as $21,000 for some banks. Communication to custom

It's been four years since data broker ChoicePoint acknowledged the data security breach that put it in the middle of a media firestorm and pushed data protection to the top of the infosecurity community's priority list. Since then, the business world has made plenty of progress hardening its data defenses -- thanks in part to industry standards like PCI DSS and data breach disclosure laws (click to see state-by-state map) now in place. But the latest data breach to grab headlines illustrates how vulnerable organizations remain to devastating network intrusions. Heartland Payment Systems, the Princeton, N.J.-based provider of credit and debit processing, payment and check management services, admitted Tuesday it was the victim of a data breach some quickly began citing as the largest of its kind. The company discovered last week that malware compromised card data across its network, after Visa and MasterCard alerted Heartland to sinister activity surrounding processed card transactions. The Shadow of ChoicePoint The Heartland breach comes roughly four years after ChoicePoint announced -- as required by California's SB 1386 data breach disclosure law -- that conmen stole personal financial records of more than 163,000 consumers by setting up fake business requests. Since then, much bigger incidents have occurred, most notably the TJX data breach that exposed more than 45 million debit and credit card holders to identity fraud. Heartland President and CFO Robert H.B. Baldwin Jr. said Tuesday that 100 million card transactions occur each month on the compromised systems used to provide processing to merchants and businesses. As of Tuesday, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse estimated that a total of 251,164,141 sensitive records had been compromised since early 2005. Up to 15 separate cases have been reported since Jan. 1, 2009.

Payment processor Heartland Payment Systems has been sued over a data breach it disclosed publicly on Inauguration Day last week. The lawsuit, filed on Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Trenton, N.J., alleges that Heartland failed to adequately safeguard the compromised consumer data, did not notify consumers about the breach in a timely manner as required by law, and has not offered to compensate consumers for costs they may incur in protecting themselves from identity fraud. In a statement that coincided with President Barack Obama's inauguration events, Heartland said the breach occurred last year but that it found evidence of the intrusion only in the previous week and immediately notified law enforcement and credit card companies. Heartland was alerted in late October to suspicious activity surrounding processed card transactions by Visa and MasterCard and hired forensic auditors who uncovered malicious software that compromised data in the company's network, said Robert H.B. Baldwin Jr., chief financial officer of Heartland, last week. The lawsuit seeks damages and relief for the "inexplicable delay, questionable timing, and inaccuracies concerning the disclosures" with regard to the data breach, which is believed to be the largest in U.S. history. Heartland executives have declined to specify how many consumers or accounts were affected. The company handles 100 million transactions per month for more than 250,000 merchants. The lawsuit, first reported by SearchSecurity news site, also accuses Heartland of negligence in taking more than two months to determine the existence and scope of the breach and criticizes the company for failing to identify which merchants were affected by the breach. The suit was filed on behalf of Woodbury, Minn., resident Alicia Cooper, who was notified last week by her credit union that a card associated with her account was included in the breach. It seeks class action status. A Heartland spokesman said the company could no

The Veterans Affairs Department has agreed to pay up to $20 million to veterans for exposing them to possible identity theft in 2006 after losing their sensitive personal information. In court filings Tuesday, lawyers for the VA and the veterans said they had reached agreement to settle the veterans' lawsuit alleging invasion of privacy. The money will be used to pay for veterans who suffered actual harm, such as emotional distress or expenses incurred for credit monitoring. The lawsuit came after a VA data analyst in 2006 admitted that he had lost a laptop and external drive containing the names, birth dates and Social Security numbers of up to 26.5 million veterans and active-duty troops. The laptop was later recovered intact.

Federal regulators on Tuesday met to hear about whether the benefits of cloud computing justify increased regulation, as privacy activists claim, or whether such an approach would do more harm than good. "We need to be smarter about dealing with technology, and cloud computing is posing (a) risk for us," said Hugh Stephenson, deputy director for international consumer protection at the Federal Trade Commission's Office of International Affairs. The FTC convened the two-day meeting in its offices here, which follows a series of similar workshops held in previous years on topics like spam, privacy, and behavioral advertising. The agency may file lawsuits to halt "unfair or deceptive acts or practices," meaning that if cloud computing is not unfair or deceptive, the FTC would likely not have jurisdiction. To secure personal information on the cloud, regulators may have to answer questions such as which entities have jurisdiction over data as it flows across borders, whether governments can access that information as it changes jurisdiction, and whether there is more risk in storing personal information in data centers that belong to a single entity rather than multiple data centers. The current panoply of laws at the state, national, and international level have had insufficient results; FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour cited a 2008 PricewaterhouseCoopers information security survey (PDF) in which 71 percent of organizations queried said they did not have an accurate inventory of where personal data for employees and customers is stored. With data management practices that are not always clear and are subject to change, companies that offer cloud-computing services are steering consumers into dangerous territory, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Already, problems of identity theft are skyrocketing, he said, and without more regulation, data management services may experience a collapse analogous to that

Web sites that strip personally identifiable information about their users and then share that data may be compromising their users' privacy, according to researchers at the University of Texas at Austin. They took a close look at the way anonymous data can be analyzed and have come to some troubling conclusions. In a paper set to be delivered at an upcoming security conference, they showed how they were able to map out the connections on public social networks such as Twitter and Flickr. They were then able to identify people who were on both networks by looking at the many connections surrounding their network of friends. The technique isn't 100 percent effective, but it may make some users uncomfortable about whether they should allow their data to be shared in an anonymous format. Web site operators often share data about users with partners and advertisers after stripping it of any personally identifiable information such as names, addresses or birth dates. Arvind Narayanan and fellow researcher Vitaly Shmatikov found that by analyzing these "anonymized" data sets, they could identify Flickr users who were also on Twitter about two-thirds of the time, depending on how much information they have to work with. "A lot of the time people will share information online and they'll expect that they are anonymous," Narayanan said in an interview. But if their identity can be ascertained on one social network, its possible to find out who they are on some other network, or at least make a "strong guess," he said.

Reform legislation is expected to be introduced this spring to update the Federal Information Security and Management Act, known as FISMA. A major complaint about FISMA is that complying with its rules does not necessarily guarantee departmental and agency information systems are secure. In this exclusive interview, Sen. Tom Carper, chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, Federal Services and International Security, discusses: Key provisions in the bill to improve ways to measure and determine the security of federal government information systems; Efforts to create a government-wide Chief Information Security Officer Council; His views on the most pressing cybersecurity challenges facing the nation: identity theft and the viability of financial institutions and threats by foreign nations to federal information systems.