Keeping an ID Theft Victim's Information Private is Catching On

Tom Fragala, CEO of Truston Identity Theft Services, started his MyTruston identity theft and recovery product based on the principle that he didn't believe an identity theft victim should have to give up their information to a third-party to protect themselves. After all, most of this information gets stored in a database, which is one of main places (besides trash cans) identity thieves go to steal information.

Information stored on databases is legitimately bought and sold by information brokers all the time. Criminals sometimes pose as having a legitimate interest to access the information. Of course, there have also been cases of dishonest employees selling it without a so-called legitimate purpose. This makes it extremely difficult to determine exactly where any stolen information originally came from. At this point in time, so much information has been stolen, we routinely hear about it being sold in chat rooms right over the Internet.

It didn't make sense to Tom to put all this information in another place, where it could potentially be compromised again. Databases have created an ability to store more information than ever before and transfer it with a click of a mouse.

Having been an identity theft victim himself, Tom had some rather personal feelings on the subject. It should also be mentioned that Tom has spent thousands of hours being a personal advocate for victims of this crime.

Since launching the do-it-yourself tool — where you don't have to be an expert to protect yourself or recover from identity theft — it has received numerous awards and become a hot topic within the technology industry itself. Besides not having to be an ID theft expert — you don't have to expose any of your personal information to a third party and the protection aspect is and always has been free. There is a charge for using the recovery tool, which can be cancelled anytime. I'll tell you a secret about that last statement, further down.

I discovered the latest news that the Truston concept is catching on when reading Tom's blog, which is well worth a read if you are interested in identity theft or privacy issues. "Today we announced that our MyTruston product has been included in the portfolio of the Affinion Security Center, the largest provider of identity protection and privacy services. Affinion has nearly 35 years of industry experience and over 65 million members of their many products. Clients of their identity protection and privacy products include Wells Fargo, Bank of America and The Hartford Insurance. Truston's Software-as-a-Service technology is deeply integrated within the Affinion Security Center’s core solution platform, IdentitySecure," according to Tom himself.

Just the day before, Truston also announced a partnership with CreditFYI, which is a one-stop shop for the best credit card rates, best loan rates, as well as, to learn how to protect your good name and credit rating.

Besides Affinion Group and CreditFYI, Truston is a private label partner with Identity Force, which provides identity theft protection services to the U.S. Government. Truston has been given a Four-Star rating by PC Magazine and has received several awards. "Truston's awards include a 2008 Product Innovation Award, a Hot Company 2008 Award, being selected for 10 Companies to Watch in 2008 by the Pacific Coast Business Times, the 2008 Tomorrow's Technology Today award, and it was identified as a leader by Javelin Strategy & Research in their December 2007 identity theft market report," according to the press releases.

If you are interested in just how user-friendly the tool is, the Truston site has a tour you can take.

I've also had the pleasure of speaking with Tom on several occasions and beta tested the tool myself before it rolled out. I've covered this in several blog posts on Tom and the MyTruston identity theft tool.

Now for the secret I promised earlier in the post. I mentioned that using the tool always has been and always will be free, but there is a nominal charge for using he recovery services. The secret is that if you go directly to the Truston site - you can use everything free for 45 days. Last, but not least, this free trial doesn't require you give them a credit card (which will get charged if you forget to cancel) until after the trial expires.

0 comments

IT Policy Compliance Group Issues 2008 Report on Best Practices

(Courtesy of ITpolicycompliance.com)

The IT Policy Compliance Group just released their annual report on the state of affairs of what they refer to as IT governance, risk and compliance (IT GRC).

The goal of the group is to promote the development of research and information to assist IT and Finance professionals meet their organization's policy and regulatory compliance goals. They do this by providing information for organizations to improve compliance results by providing reports based on primary research.

If you take the time to check out their site, they have other items of interest to anyone charged with the ever growing responsibility of protecting systems from those who have the intent to compromise them.

The recently released report suggests that measuring the value delivered by IT has been traditionally associated with applications that have an impact on customer service, sales, expenses and profit. Unfortunately -- as more organizations have their data compromised -- the result of not protecting information can be a loss of revenue, added expenses (legal costs), and a loss of consumer trust.

This is especially true, if the compromise becomes a matter of public record.

Included in the report are an analysis of recent losses incurred by a large retailer ($530 million) and a large financial services firm ($100 million). The analysis takes into account the loss of revenue due to business disrruption, loss of consumer trust in addition to the harder costs, such as legal expenses. Other analysis includes losses suffered by a automotive manufacturer and a rental and leasing company.

IT departments are constantly being challenged to be up and running 100 percent of the time to maximize efficiency. While doing this, they need to protect their data and adhere to legal and regulatory requirements at the same time.

The challenge is to manage business opportunity and risk at the same time. The 2008 report shows that the firms with the most mature practices in compliance and risk management are doing better and spending less to achieve their goals. This translates into more revenue, profit and customer retention.

The report shows that continuous improvement in risk management and compliance with a focus on operational excellence is paying dividends. Organizations with a mature compliance process have evaluated their processes and made them part of the culture within an organization. While this encompasses the involvement of all facets of an organization, two key items are the support of senior management and training employees to embrace a culture of compliance.

The most mature firms have developed formalized training for their employees, supported by senior management, on subjects like ethics and codes of conduct, IT security and data protection policies, legal compliance, as well as, subjects like sexual harassment and discrimination. They have also developed processes and trained their employees how to deal with emergency situations.

The human factor is always the key to success in any organization. It makes sense that successful organizations focus their efforts through their most valuable resources, which are human beings. Very few exploits are successful without a healthy dose of social engineering.

Also of interest in this informative report is an analysis of results by industry and size. One shoe doesn't necessarily fit all and taking the time to examine all the different types of organizations that use technology to accomplish their goals makes the report a valuable read.

The report, which is located on ITpolicycompliance.com, is only available to members of the site. Saying that, the site is soliciting new members and the sign-up process is simple.

Besides this report, the site has a lot of other valuable information on it, also. I would recommend the site and it's resources to anyone interested in the mysterious world of compliance because it takes it to the level of making sense and developing best practices that will benefit the overall objectives of any organization.

0 comments

UC Irvine Staff Nails ID Thief in Texas

A former UnitedHealthCare worker, who stole the personal and financial information of at least 1100 University of California, Irvine students has been arrested in Dallas, Texas.

Michael Tyrone Thomas, of Fort Worth, was arrested at his home and is being held on $300,000 bail. The authorities are alleging Thomas stole the information while working at UnitedHealthCare in December 2007. They are also charging that Thomas used the information to fill out fraudulent tax returns using 163 identities stolen in the caper.

According to the Houston Chronicle, a spokesman for UnitedHealthCare didn't return their call concerning the arrest on Friday. I went to the UnitedHealthCare site and found nothing mentioned about this case as of this writing.

It appears that the investigation was initiated by the UC Irvine Police after students started complaining about identity theft in March. Specifically, they complained about someone using their information to fill out bogus tax returns. University computer experts took a look at their systems and found no signs of a breach. Subsequently, University Police investigating the case discovered all the students were enrolled in a insurance program administered by UnitedHealthCare.

A press release on the UC Irvine site gave credit to UCI Police Sergeants Tony Frisbee, Shaun Devlin and Corporal Caroline Altamirano for working closely on the case with the Dallas District Attorney's Office. The release indicates that they expect additional arrests and that the IRS will be investigating the tax fraud implications in the case.

Recently, the National Taxpayer Advocate, issued a report to Congress indicating that tax fraud involving the use of stolen identities has grown 644 percent in the past four years. In a lot of these cases, forged W-2's are used to claim an earned income credit, which can net the fraudster thousands of dollars per return.

In my post on this story, I mentioned that the IRS has a dedicated page to assist identity theft victims when their information has been used to commit tax fraud. The Houston Chronicle article mentioned that UnitedHealthCare will be offering free credit monitoring and that UCI will be offering loans to the affected students. It also mentioned that UCI Police Chief, Paul Henisey doesn't think the rest of the names were used because the reports of identity theft dropped off in late June.

Free credit monitoring seems to be the standard offer to victims when a data breach is disclosed, but it doesn't necessarily reveal all forms of identity theft. Credit bureaus do not track what information is being used to file a tax return and would be worthless in the already known cases. Other examples when credit monitoring might not be the end-all solution to identity theft protection are medical benefit fraud, employment fraud, government benefit fraud, some forms of check fraud and last, but not least, when it is used to commit crimes of other than a financial nature.

If I were one of the affected UC Irvine students, I wouldn't turn down the free credit monitoring (it does help in a lot of instances), but I would also visit the Identity Theft Resource Center's Financial Identity Theft - More Complex Cases page to educate myself a little further.

So far as Chief Henisey's prediction that this case is over -- I certainly hope it is -- but it wouldn't be prudent for everyone to let their guard down just yet. Information is bought and sold in a lot of places (including over the Internet) for the purpose of identity theft. There is no way of telling, whether or not, any of this information was passed to someone else for a profit.

Saying that, it's refreshing to see the culprit caught in this case and the UC Irvine Police Department (along with other University staff) did an excellent job in their investigation. It isn't very often when one of these cases is traced to the person behind it.

0 comments

Data Theft Grows 68 Percent in 2008

Linda Foley at the Identity Theft Resource Center made an ominous announcement that data breaches were at an all time high. According to research conducted by the group, the number of data breaches has grown 68 percent in 2008 versus the same time period in 2007.

The current study acknowledges that some breaches are under reported and multiple breaches are sometimes reported as a single event. The breach at BNY Mellon and SunGard data were cited as an example of a single event affecting multiple businesses.

The report shows an increase in data breaches at businesses, financial institutions and health/medical institutions. Interestingly enough, breaches that involved the government/military and educational institutions showed a decrease.

Breaches are becoming more technology based, also. Electronic data breaches accounted for 80.7 percent of the total versus 19.3 percent, which were considered paper breaches.

I suspect that the increased activity at businesses and financial institutions is because the goal is to steal financial instruments that already have a cash value associated with them. As the general public has become more aware of the issues surrounding identity theft, opening fraudulent accounts with other people's information is becoming more difficult. More people are reviewing their credit and placing alerts/freezes on their individual reports, either by doing it themselves or paying a service to do it for them. When accounts are stolen that already have disposable spending power or (cash) on them, identity theft protection is unlikely to stop them from being compromised.

Because of the increased awareness, more fraudsters take over accounts instead of trying to open new ones. Most of the current identity theft protection methods being used will not stop this from happening.

So far as the statistic that electronic theft is becoming more prevalent than paper theft, perhaps shredding documents is making stealing paper harder? Of course, it might also mean that the methods to steal information electronically have become more advanced, also. Crimeware kits of the DIY (do-it-yourself) variety have spread this ability to people, who lack the technical skills to do it by themselves. There is a lot of evidence that these kits aren't too hard to purchase over the Internet and that sometimes they even come with technical support.

ID Analytics partnered with the study and added statistical information showing that 39 percent of data exposures were caused by missing or stolen devices in 2007. Their statistics also show that malicious intent in data breaches is a growing trend. Malicious intent categories include insider theft and access into account information by external methods (hacking).

A new trend, not specifically mentioned in the report, is large caches of stolen information being discovered that no one knew about before. Yesterday, Dark Reading announced that SecureWorks found one of these caches. Finjan has recently reported finding pretty much the same thing located on what they refer to as "crimeservers" on the Internet. The announcement by SecureWorks reported that hackers are using a trojan, called "Coreflood" also known as "AFCore."

SecureWorks reported that this trojan has gone undetected for a number of years and has compromised corporations, government agencies, healthcare agencies and "others." In this attack, one work station would be compromised and the hacker would wait for an administrator to log on. Once the administrator logged on to the infected work station, the hacker would then use the administrator's privileges to infect entire systems. This "hack" is being used to grab user names, passwords and even entire pages of information. Please note (my speculation) that this type of exploit is probably being used to steal more than financial information, also.

Given the fact that SecureWorks mentions government sites being hacked in this manner, there is no telling what the intent might be or who the information is being sold to (my speculation).

To the best of my knowledge, neither SecureWorks or Finjan have disclosed exactly who has been compromised or the exact details of the information to the general public.

This should lead the average person to believe that the problem of data breaches is far greater than anyone knows. The ITRC study explains why this is a problem when compiling any study on this subject.

Besides the ITRC, there are a lot of dedicated people gathering statistical information on data breaches. While they can only track information on the known occurrences, these people do a lot to educate the rest of us and raise the awareness level of what is becoming a growing problem.

The report gives credit to PogoWasRight, Attrition.org, breachblog.com, the Maryland and New Hampshire Attorney General breach notification lists and other sources that were used to compile this report.

The ITRC is a non profit organization designed to help businesses and people protect themselves from this clear and present danger to all of us. If you are interested in this problem, their site is a good place to educate yourself.

0 comments

Wards will now start notifying customers their information was stolen in December

The Associated Press announced on Friday that old time retailer Montgomery Ward is the latest victim of a data breach, where at least 51,000 records were compromised. The unfortunate problem now is they failed to notify the victims, which is the law in 44 States.

Since Montgomery Ward declared bankruptcy in 2001 this announcement might sound confusing, but the company was resurrected in 2004 under the name, Direct Marketing Services Incorporated. Direct Market Services sells merchandise under the names Wards.com, SearsHomeCenter.com, SearsShowplace.com, SearsRoomforKids.com (and two more) online.

Allegedly, hackers gained access by going through another Direct Marketing Services site, HomeVisions.com.

When they discovered the hack in December, they did notify their payment processor, Visa and Mastercard, but failed to notify any individual customers. Of course, they now plan to do so after being asked about it by the Associated Press.

The hat tip in this instance goes to CardCops, which a group of cyber sleuths who track stolen payment card data in underground carder forums for financial institutions. CardsCops spotted a group of 200,000 card numbers for sale (including CVC data) on one of the forums (chatrooms) they were monitoring. After tracing some of these cards to their owners, they discovered that they were had one thing in common (Wards).

At this point, it is unclear on whether the official estimate of 51,000 missing records is correct, or the hackers misrepresented the number of cards available in their underground forum.

When asked for some commentary, Visa declined to comment, MasterCard stated they warned the issuing banks to watch for suspicious activity and Discover stated they issued new cards.

Wards is not alone in not notifying their customers, or the public promptly when a data breach occurs. Recently lamented about this in a post suggesting we are a long way from full disclosure in data breaches.

Even without all the known data breaches, there are many that are never discovered. Besides that, information is stolen all the time on a smaller scale by dishonest employees, phishing and (despite all the shredders) from the trash.

The sad truth is from the criminal perspective, stolen information that hasn't been detected is worth more than information that is known to be "hot."

If you would like to see more information on the known data breaches, the DLDOS database at Attrition.org is a good resource. PogoWasRight is also another place that covers the privacy concerns arising from this problem, which faces us all.

0 comments

TJX shoots the messenger reporting potential identity theft issues!

(Picture courtesy of b d solis at Flickr)

One would assume after compromising an estimated 94 million people's information, a company would become a model of information security for the rest of us to aspire to. Sadly, if the following story is true, this is NOT the case at TJX.

Ran into this disturbing example of a messenger getting shot for trying to report sloppy security on Sans Newsbites:

TJX Companies has fired an employee from a Lawrence, Kansas TJ Maxx store for making posts to a forum about the company's lax security practices, even after the notable breach. The employee, Nick Benson, said in several posts that except for a period of time following the breach disclosure when a strong password policy was enforced, the employee password at his store's server was set to blank. In addition, at one point a store server was running in administrator mode. When Benson began work at TJX, his password was the same as his user name. TJX says Benson was fired for disclosing confidential company information. -http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/23/tjx_fires_whistleblower/print.html-http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/scrt/3A2C5453A05F8C31CC257454006CE111

Reading a little further by linking to the article written by Dan Goodin in the Register, I discovered that the act of posting in forums came about AFTER the employee tried to resolve the problem, internally:

Other security issues included a store server that was running in administrator mode, making it far more susceptible to attackers. He said he brought the security issues to the attention of a district loss prevention manager name Allen in late 2006, and repeatedly discussed them with store managers. Except for a stretch when IT managers temporarily tightened password policies, the problems went unfixed.

After posting on the forum (http://sla.ckers.org/forum/read.php?13,15148,page=1), the boss of one of the people Benson reported the matter to summoned him into the office and terminated him.

I suppose we could all argue that posting this information in a public forum is dangerous. Saying that, Benson did try to report the matter through his internal chain of command and nothing was done?

Maybe it is because the people, he reported it to aren't IT savvy enough to realize how vulnerable TJX's systems are when they are left unprotected like this?

Even if a hacker didn't compromise the system, it is feasible that a dishonest employee could gather quite of bit of information and sell it? Carder forums -- where personal and financial details are bartered over cyberspace -- are well known and not very hard to find.

Please note, I wrote IF a hacker didn't compromise the system. I'm just pointing out stealing information wouldn't take a very sophisticated hacking job given the opportunities described in this instance.

They might even post (anonymously), how easily they got the information in hacker forums. Sadly if Mr. Benson had been more anonymous, he would probably still be employed. I guess it doesn't pay to be honest in cases like these?

My post just before this was about another revelation (pun intended) that not all data breaches are being reported. I tied this post into two stories. One was about the lack of reporting, and other one was recent reports about Finjan finding crimeservers via simple searches that contain a lot of information that could be used to commit a host of financial crimes.

Interestingly enough, the crimeservers (available to anyone on the Internet) weren't "password protected," either.

So far as Mr. Benson is concerned, I wonder if TJX was required to maintain a confidential hot-line and if he ever reported the matter there? Although, I'm not a lawyer, I also have to wonder if federal laws protecting "whistleblowers" apply here. More information on whistleblower laws can be seen on whistleblower.com.

It's a crying shame that the powers that be at TJX didn't value the fact that an employee was trying to show them where they might receive a lot more unfavorable public exposure by compromising their customer information.

I'll close with a supportive comment from the editor at SANS:

[Editor's Note (Schultz): Once again TJX is proving itself to be a villain. Interestingly, I still sometimes shop at a TJ Maxx or Marshalls store, but I always pay cash--I would never use a credit card because of TJX's huge security deficiencies. And if Nick Benson reads this comment, I would encourage him to contact me, because I will do everything in my power to help him find another job. ]

PS: I would like to add that I'm pretty sure there are companies out there that would value an employee, who brought matters like these to their attention. They might save them millions of dollars in the end when you consider the cost of recovering from a data breach.

As a disclaimer, TJX's side of the story is unknown, but according to the Register article when they were asked they would not comment on the matter.

0 comments

A final (???) salute to Attrition.org's Data Loss Database - Open Source

I came across some pretty sad news on Tom Fragala's blog that Attrition.org was throwing in the towel on their well respected DLDOS (Data Loss Database - Open Source).

In their own words, this is the reason why they are shutting down:

Much like Attrition.org's past defacement mirror, the time has come for us to say "no mas". In the past few weeks, it has come to our attention that too many people are more concerned with making a profit off of our work without any offer of acknowledgement or compensation. For those who aren't familiar with Attrition, we're a non-profit hobby site that takes on "projects" as we see fit, when we want to, and when we have time. For those who *are* familiar with Attrition, you probably know that we don't take kindly to being dealt with unfairly. Commercial entities, including "identity-theft prevention" upstarts and book authors, will gladly contact us, ask for information and advice, and then not even offer us the equivalent of a reach-around when selling their materials. We don't pimp our resources to others; they come to us. Unfortunately, more often than not, they won't even send us a "thank you". We've mentioned it in the past, but we're not going to mention it in the future. This is the last mention.

I've often mentioned the fine work the good folks at Attrition did on being a honest (not motivated by money) voice in what most of us agree is a serious problem. Because of this, I've always tried to point people directly to their work.

Perhaps, as I lamented in an earlier post, the pay for protection racket is getting a little out of hand? A good example of the frustration Attrition might feel is evidenced by some of the comment spam at the bottom of that post.

Please note for the record that I consider this blog a small one-person effort, which couldn't hope to keep up with the extensive amount of work the Attrition.org team put into maintaining this now "historical database."

Maybe this will be the last time, I can thank them publicly. Saying that, I will do so one last time for all they "did" for who really matters in the growing problem of too much information being stored in not very safe places. If you want to know who I am referring to, all you need to do is look in the mirror.

After all, most us have probably had our information compromised (sometimes more than once) in one of the data breaches catalouged in the Data Loss Database - Open Source.

I guess the old saying is true, "money is the root of all evil."

You can read the post from Attrition on this matter on their site, here.

Update 4/17/08: It appears that the DDLOS database might not be completely inactive. Emergent Chaos and Entering the Networked World are reporting that the database is generating new material.

If you go to Attrition's news page, Lyger has done a post "A new beginning." In it he announces a partnership with a new identity theft protection service:

Going forward, we would like to announce that we have a new partnership with Identity-Love-Sock, a trusted provider of identity theft prevention services. Not only can Identity-Love-Sock protect YOU from IDENTITY THEFT, it also provides several guarantees for your PROTECTION should YOU be affected by IDENTITY THEFT. With the services provided by Identity-Love-Sock , YOU will NEVER have to WORRY about your IDENTITY being STOLEN, MISUSED, or otherwise COMPROMISED. For more details on how YOU can be COVERED and PROTECTED, please visit Identity-Love-Sock . You'll be glad you did.

Hmmmm...I've been looking for an ehtical way to monetize this blog, I wonder if they are accepting affiliates?

0 comments

Identity theft victim branded a paedophile still suffering after proven innocent!

This isn't the first time, I've written about Operation Ore, where a lot of British citizens were wrongfully accused of viewing child pornography.

Operation Ore was the result of an investigation conducted in the United States (Operation Avalanche), where a lot of credit card details being used to view child pornography were provided to the British authorities. It eventually led to a lot of people, including Pete Townsend of the Who, being charged with viewing child pornography.

It was later revealed that a large number of the credit card numbers obtained in the Avalanche search warrant had been stolen in one of the data breaches we read about, too frequently. In my original post on this story, I wrote about the data breach that caused this:

54,348 of the credit card numbers discovered in the U.S. search warrant were identified as having been stolen from Levenger Incorporated, a luxury goods company. Of course, Levenger declined to comment on how the information was stolen.

This case showed how an innocent person can be charged with a crime after becoming an identity theft victim.

The BBC just did a personal account of one person, who was victimized by being wrongfully accused, where they wrote:

With ID fraud on the rise, the assumption is you'll lose money which can be claimed back. But Simon Bunce lost his job, and his father cut off contact, when he was arrested after an ID fraudster used his credit card details on a child porn website.

And Mr. Bunce didn't frequent "fly by night e-commerce sites, either." In his own words his credit card details were stolen from a "trusted" site.

The bottom line is that Mr. Bunce lost his job, was shunned by his own family and branded as a paedophile.

Furthermore, months later when he cleared his name, it took him a long time to get another job earning only a fraction of his previous salary. Even though, he has clearly been proven innocent, Mr. Bunce is still suffering the financial repercussions of identity theft.

While I'm certain that cases like this have made the authorities a little more careful of who they are prosecuting, if a criminal assumes a legitimate identity (complete with documents to support it) this could be happen to any of us.

This case and the personal story of Mr. Bunce clearly shows the dangers everyone is facing from continuing to store too much information in too many not very secure places.

BBC article (highly recommended reading), here.

Attrition.org and PogoWasRight try to document the record amount of everyone's information that is stolen. Please note, there is so much of it being compromised they freely admit they cannot keep track of it all. Of course, the criminals stealing it probably don't reveal all the places they are getting it, either.

Suad Leija's Paper Weapons site shows how easily (extremely convincing) documents can be obtained by just about anyone to use the stolen information. "They are as good as anything in your pocket," according to Suad.

I also try to keep up with some of this on this blog. Here is my original post on Operation Ore, which was called Operation Avalanche in the United States:

British citizens accused of child porn found to be fraud victims

0 comments

Barack, Hillary John - Does anyone know where our (your) privacy has gone?

About a week ago, I wrote a post about Britney having her privacy "jacked" by a bunch of "naughty" hospital employees. This occurred at one of the most respected medical and institutions of higher learning in the world, the University of California, Los Angeles.

Ironically, it's now been revealed that another highly respected institution, the State Department had some "naughty" employees "jack" the privacy of the three major presidential candidates, Barack, Hillary and John.

While a lot of us take Britney's exploits with a grain of salt, it's another example where too many people are being given access to too much sensitive information. Even if we take most of Britney's adventures in a not very serious light -- she is a human being and therefore worthy of a little respect and privacy in her personal affairs.

This should be especially true when someone is seeking medical attention of a sensitive nature.

The official spin in both instances is that these events were caused by naughty employees, who were snooping where they shouldn't have been. While it appears there was no sinister intent in all of this, it points to the fact that none of us can count on a little respect or privacy, anymore.

Maybe we have too many databases containing highly personal information that the wrong people have been given access to? You can spend millions on security, but no amount of it will prevent something from being compromised if the wrong person has been given access to it.

Of course, the there is a financial motive to not wanting to fix the problem anytime in the near future. It's no secret that selling personal information is a multi-billion dollar business. Implementing technology is a multi-billion dollar venture, also. It shouldn't surprise us that there is a lobby (with a lot of money), who wants to keep things the way they are.

Because of this, it shouldn't surprise us that we see criminals exploiting the loopholes in protecting information, either. After all, they're making a lot of money off it, also.

If naughty employees with a penchant for snooping could obtain the personal information of three political candidates, it isn't a far stretch that someone with more sinister intentions could have accomplished the same thing. I wonder, who failed to notice that we are now granting "contract employees" access to information of this nature?

After all, this isn't the first time a contract employee, government or otherwise, has compromised sensitive information.

I guess private businesses aren't the only entities outsourcing jobs (and a lot of people's personal information) in the process. We seem to live in a world, where in order to save a little on the bottom line, we seem to ignore basic principles (like need to know) when protecting information.

Perhaps, if we stopped storing sensitive information in too many places with little regard to who can look at it, we would stop being "shocked" when it's compromised?

All a reasonably intelligent person would have to do is look at the number of reported compromises involving sensitive information that occur and then wonder how many more there are that no one knows about? I threw that in because most people, who do something wrong normally don't disclose what they did to third parties.

After a compromise occurs, we all seem content that security enhancements will prevent the next one. Sadly, most of the enhancements introduced so far haven't put a dent in the problem and the saga goes on. In fact, it normally doesn't take very long before we hear about the latest security enhancement being defeated.

Maybe the problem needs to be taken to a more simple level? Perhaps if we weren't storing information in places -- where too many people have access to it -- we would see less of it being compromised?

We live in a world, where technology has made things easier and more productive. The problem is that "easy and productive" is taking a toll on what should be a basic human right, privacy.

The bottom line is that it has become too easy to compromise information and technology makes both good and bad people, more productive.

Saying all that, the three candidates are on record, when it comes to privacy. In July of 2006, Hillary Clinton spoke to a lot of same issues in a speech, where she said:

Privacy is at the crossroads of all these issues, and modern life makes many things easier… and many things easier to know. And yet, privacy is somehow caught in the crosshairs of these changes.

Our economy is increasingly data driven. We have dramatically ramped up surveillance in our efforts to fight terrorists who hide among innocent civilians.

But every day the news contains a story of how the records of millions of consumers, veterans, patients have been compromised.

At all levels, the privacy protections for ordinary citizens are broken, inadequate and out of date.

Likewise, Barack Obama has the following statement about this issue on his site:

Dramatic increases in computing power, decreases in storage costs and huge flows of information that characterize the digital age bring enormous benefits, but also create risk of abuse. We need sensible safeguards that protect privacy in this dynamic new world. As president, Barack Obama will strengthen privacy protections for the digital age and will harness the power of technology to hold government and business accountable for violations of personal privacy.

John McCain (as part of a bipartisan committee) has expressed frustration on the privacy issue, also. Here is what he was quoted as saying in a CNet story after a FTC report was released on the state of the state on privacy:

A bipartisan group of senators led by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said it is determined to pass new laws restricting the ability of Web sites to collect and use information from a visitor without that person's consent.

For the last several years, Web sites have operated under a form of self-regulation, and industry groups have touted the ever-increasing number of sites posting privacy policies. However, members of the Senate Commerce Committee today decried those steps as inadequate and cited polls showing that the vast majority of consumers opposed industry self-regulation.

There is no doubt that by this point in the game, most of our politicians have made a statement on the privacy issue. Despite these statements, most of the legislation presented in Washington hasn't been passed yet?

In fact if memory serves me correctly, the last time we tried to pass some federal legislation, the end result was that it would have watered down more proactive laws already passed into law at the State level.

I know everyone is busy with the campaign underway so I'm going to include a reference to an article (with an interactive map) showing what State laws on this issue have already been enacted. Included on the map is a interactive flag over the District of Columbia showing which federal laws have not.

Well put together article by csoonline.com, here.

In case anyone reading this can't keep up with the record number of data breaches, Attrition.org had a chronology, here.

PogoWasRight is another place that helps me keep up with the record number of compromises, also.

0 comments

IT Policy Compliance Group looks back at what was important in 2007

The IT Policy Compliance Group issued a great year end analysis of the important events that took place in the world of IT security in 2007.

Lamont Wood wrote this interesting analysis and leads into it by saying:

Looking back, those who specialize in the history of corporate and cultural debacles may one day hail 2007 as the year when the dusty topic of document retention became a matter of corporate life and death. Thanks to the pervasiveness of networked computers, corporate data proved again and again that it could not only leak into the wild, but, once there, take on a life of its own-and do enormous harm to its parent.

The essay covers some interesting subjects like Data Breaches, PCI DSS Folies, CyberWars and the The Dark Side.

It also includes a summary of the regulations that businesses had to learn to deal with in 2007.

I'm going to refrain from commenting further to direct people to these interesting observations, here.

I did another post on a report from the ITPCG entitled, IT Policy Compliance Group issues study on data breaches and information theft.

This report revealed that focusing on fewer risk focused control points, and then inspecting them more frequently made an organization less likely to suffer data breaches/information theft.

If you haven't read the report yet, it is a worthwhile read, also.

In case you are unfamiliar with the IT Policy Compliance Group, here is their mission (in their own words):

The ITpolicycompliance.com web site is dedicated to promoting the development of research and information that will help IT security professionals meet the policy and regulatory compliance goals of their organizations. Specifically, this site focuses on assisting organizations to improve compliance results by providing reports based on primary research as well as other related information and resources.

Here is who supports this site:

CSI (Computer Security Institute), The IIA (The Institute of Internal Auditors), ISACA (Information Systems Audit and Control Association), the IT Governance Institute, Protiviti, and acknowledge Symantec for providing the financial support to make this site possible.

0 comments

Discovering a record amount of information theft only solves half the problem

Has anyone besides me noticed that when data breaches are reported, we see an official statement that the information hasn't been used by identity thieves?

After thinking on that one for awhile, it makes sense that criminals would stop using the information from a data breach after it has been reported.

So far as information used before the breach is discovered, it's pretty hard to prove where the information came from in an identity theft case. With so much compromised information out there, it's nearly impossible to figure out where the point-of-compromise is in any individual case.

When a data breach occurs, a lot of accounts are closed down and everyone who has been compromised runs out and checks their credit reports. Most of the time, free identity theft monitoring is made available to those who have been breached, also.

My guess is that once the stolen information is made public, it's probably dangerous to use. At the very least, it probably doesn't hold the same profit value that it had when no one knew it had been stolen.

For the past week, the news has been awash with the year end statistics on data breaches. By all the recent news accounts, 2007 was a record year.

While reporting data breaches is painful and costly, reporting them probably makes the information a lot harder to exploit for criminal purposes.

Although 2007 was a record number for reported data breaches, very few of criminals stealing the information got caught. Organizations losing the information are starting to be held accountable, but it would be nice to see more of criminals stealing the information brought to justice.

Another thing to consider is that data breaches aren't putting organizations out of business. True, they are costly, but in the end the cost is normally passed on to everyone using their services.

In the end, we are all paying for the cost of fixing data breaches.

And while a record number of data breaches were reported, there would have to be some that no one (except the criminals) know about.

My guess is that there is a lot information theft that is never detected. I would also surmise that this is considered the most valuable information being sold and used by criminals.

Compromised information is normally most effective when the person who it belongs to doesn't know it's being used.

Until we impact both sides of the equation -- the people losing information and punishing the people stealing it -- we are probably going to see news reports reflecting record statistics on the amount of data breaches occurring.

To do this, we need to focus more resources on catching the people stealing the information and enact laws that make it hurt when they get caught.

The last statistic I saw was that less than 1 percent of them get caught, and if they do, they normally get a slap on the wrist. A lot of the reasons for this are insufficient resources to investigate fraud and a lot of cases that are never reported by both organizations and individuals.

AP article (courtesy of the Washington Post) on 2007 data breach trends, here.

Update: Dissent from the Chronicles of Dissent and PogoWasRight left a good comment on this post pointing out that a lot of people did get caught this year. He is right and I did posts on a number of them.

The people out there catching the crooks stealing the data would be able to do a lot more if they were given more resources!

The Chronicles of Dissent has an excellent article on this subject that I highly recommend to anyone interested in the phenomenon of data breaches, here.

0 comments

IT Policy Compliance Group issues study on data breaches and information theft

Today, the IT Policy Compliance Group released an interesting report on the state of compliance and how it relates to the growing phenomenon of information theft and data breaches.

The IT compliance group is a non-profit organization supported by the Computer Security Institute, Institute of Internal Auditors, ISACA, IT Governance Institute, Protiviti and Symantec. The report reflects the findings of more than 450 organizations that were surveyed.

To sum up the main findings in the report:

The most recent benchmark research conducted by the IT Policy Compliance Group (IT PCG) reveals an intimate relationship between financial outcomes, sustained competitive advantage, data protection, and regulatory compliance.

The core competencies for protecting sensitive data are the result of this research and show the practices, procedures, and organizational strategies being implemented by organizations with the least loss and theft of sensitive data. A company’s ability to sustain its competitive advantage is enabled by protecting its sensitive data, resulting in better customer retention while protecting the brand and reputation of the firm. Protecting sensitive data helps a company avoid revenue loss, market capitalization loss, and unnecessary expenses.

The findings in the report show that a lot of organizations are struggling with high rates of data loss and theft. 87 percent of them suffer data losses, or theft 3-12+ times a year. The remaining 13 percent with three or less occurrences have something in common - an efficient and workable compliance program.

The organizations with the fewest occurrences focus on 30 or fewer control objectives. This is in stark contrast to the organizations with a higher occurrence rate, who focus on 80 or more control objectives.

These organizations (with the fewest occurrences) have examined their control points, carefully selected the most important ones and remain focused on them.

Organizations with the fewest occurrences inspect their control points more frequently. The most compliant organizations with the fewest occurrences inspect them an average of every 19 days. Those organizations with the most occurrences inspect their control points on an average of every 230 days.

Data breaches and information theft are getting more and more expensive for the organizations, who suffer the unfortunate experience of having one happen to them:

Financial outcomes from the loss or theft of sensitive data include customer defections, revenue declines, declines in stock price for publicly traded firms, and additional expenses (see Why Compliance Pays: Reputations and Revenues at Risk, IT PCG, July 2007). Additional financial risk results from expenses incurred for litigation, litigation settlements, consumer credit counseling, investigations, data restoration, and necessary(and after-the-fact) get-well efforts. Averaging nearly 8 percent of revenue, the expected losses from benchmarks conducted with hundreds of organizations are mirrored by actual experience.

The report points out that one shoe doesn't fit all when a data breach occurs -- but there is little doubt that the cost is rising and will continue to do so -- as more public awareness is created from all the play some of these breaches get in the media.

Also acknowledged is that despite the large amount of reported data breaches, there are many more that are never discovered.

Information is worth money, whether it is used to commit financial crimes or gain a competitive edge over another organization. These undiscovered occurrences are more valuable to the people stealing the information because nothing has been done to counter the fact that they have it.

The recent TJX data breach -- which is now being estimated by some sources at up to 100 million records lost -- has already caused TJX to claim a $118 million loss in their second quarter earnings.

A key finding in the report includes the importance of the human factor. Anyone who has studied information theft, or data breaches knows that the human factor is often what compromises information.

I've often written that no amount of security is going to stop a motivated person, who has been given access to the information.

Social engineering techniques are also used by criminals to trick employees into either giving up the information, or downloading software to compromise it by more technical means.

A good example of this is a recent study issued by the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration's Office. The report revealed that 60 percent of the IRS employees tested compromised sensitive information via social engineering techniques routinely employed by criminals.

According to the ITPCG report, here are the different causes of data breaches/information theft revealed by the study:

The conduits through which sensitive data is being lost and stolen include data residing on PCs, laptops, and mobile devices; data leaking through email, instant messaging, and other electronic channels; and data that is accessed through applications and databases.

Notably, most of the methods listed above require some human interface to occur.

It never ceases to amaze me when I see another report, where a laptop, tape, or disc is lost containing sensitive information. Even worse, we still see occurrences where the information was even encrypted.

A case to point would be the recent occurrence in the United Kingdom, where unprotected discs containing the information of 25 million children were being sent snail mail.

The report goes into more depth on how information theft occurs and states:

After user error, the most common contributions to data loss and theft include violations of policy, Internet threats and attacks, lost and stolen laptops, IT vulnerabilities, and insufficient controls in IT. These sources of data loss and theft can be countered with a combination of policy violation sanctions and procedural and technical controls.

The report sums it's findings up with the sources of compliance deficiencies. It's findings were that five areas are directly related to IT security, three areas are related to IT function and may relate to IT security, and two others that are directly related to procedures and may or may not involve IT.

Today, besides people, IT technology is what runs most organizations. The reason for this is obvious, it reduces costs and makes things run more efficiently. Given this, when IT technology is used improperly it has made criminals more efficient and provides them with new avenues to commit crimes.

Saying that, this report has a lot of valuable information for anyone developing a compliance program to protect this asset (information).

The report cites the Attrition.org data loss archive as a resource. This is also a valuable resource for anyone looking at the growing phenomenon of data breaches/information theft.

Here is statement of purpose for the IT Policy Compliance Group from their site:

The www.ITpolicycompliance.com web site is dedicated to promoting the development of actionable, fact-based findings that will help professionals to better meet the policy and regulatory compliance goals of their organizations. Supported by members such as the Institute of Internal Auditors, the Computer Security Institute, and Symantec (collectively known as the IT-Policy Compliance Group), the web site focuses on delivering information that will assist in improving IT compliance results based on primary benchmark research.

The full report is available on the site.

0 comments

Former Nevada State employee claims he was fired for revealing data breach

(Photo courtesy of wazzywooze at Flickr)

It never ceases to amaze me how a lack of information security translates into official statements that no one is aware of any identity theft that has occurred.

With as many people, we know have been compromised, and accounting for episodes like the one below where we probably aren't sure, who really knows?

The State of Nevada has a possible compromise, where no one seems to be certain, whether or not, a lot of people were compromised.

From the article written about this by RJG.com:

Hundreds of CDs containing payroll information about state employees, including Social Security numbers, have either been lost or stolen over the last three years.

That's the word from state Personnel Director Todd Rich, who says the system has been tightened to prevent unauthorized people from getting employee information.

Rich says his department sent a total of more than 13,000 CDs to 80 agencies for review every two-week pay period over the last three years. He says as many as 470 are still missing, but his agency has NOT been notified of any identity theft as a result.

The powers that be have since instituted putting a password on the CDs, along with a requirement that they be signed for.

The person, Jim Elste, who revealed the fact that the CDs were missing was fired. He claims it was for revealing this matter, but the State is claiming his employment was terminated for "poor management and lack of anger control."

There have been so many data breaches and so many people compromised, if they were to become an identity theft victim, it might be nearly impossible to figure out where the crook got their information.

No wonder, whenever a suspected breach occurs, no one is SURE if anyone has become a victim of identity theft. The only thing we can be sure of is that there are a lot of victims out there and the number is growing.

Reno Gazette-Journal story, here.

If you would like to see how many people have been compromised -- the list grows VERY frequently -- the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse tracks reported breaches, here.

As of this writing, this one isn't listed as a breach yet!

0 comments

Schwarzenegger vetoes data breach bill

It appears the data breach bill, which went to Governor Schwarzenegger's desk for signature has been vetoed.

Cheryl Walker at the OC Register is reporting:

An ID theft protection bill that would have made businesses that take credit cards for purchases more accountable to consumers and card issuers was vetoed Saturday by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

In a message explaining his veto of AB779, the governor claimed the marketplace already provides the necessary protections for consumers and that the state bill might conflict with private security standards.

He also contended the bill lacked clarity and could increase the cost of compliance for small businesses.

There seems to be little press coverage on this and I couldn't find any comment from Arnold about it on his site.

There has been a lot of coverage about a NRF (National Retail Federation) letter calling out that businesses, who accept credit cards are forced to maintain credit card information for 18 months to protect themselves from fraud (chargebacks).

Here is a post, I did on that subject:

Retailers call for a level playing field on data security

Maybe this bill was too unfair towards businesses, who accept plastic, and favored the financial services industry a little too much? The bill would have pushed more of the financial responsibility towards businesses versus the card issuers, themselves.

The sad thing is that with all the bickering between these two large sectors, it's probably the little person, who will lose out in the long run.

Although, with a lot of litigation being raised, data breaches are becoming extremely costly. Maybe both sides of the equation need to get together and come up with something that will work for everyone?

After all, they do share one thing in common, which is their customers!

OC Register story, here.

0 comments

MyTruston -- where you can see if someone is stealing your identity for free!

You won't get a million dollar guarantee and Tom Fragala's social security number if you decide to use myTruston identity theft prevention/recovery services. You also aren't going to get the paid endorsements for his product by Fred Thompson, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Howard Stern.

Tom, who is the CEO/Founder of MyTruston doesn't believe in buying endorsements, paying bloggers, or doing massive advertising campaigns to promote his service.

He trusts that once a prudent consumer looks at his product and the value it provides, the service sells itself.

Tom was an identity theft victim himself and has spent thousands of hours advocating for other victims. Many of the basic principles behind myTruston were based on both of these personal experiences.

What you get with myTruston is a "piece of mind" that if you have to protect yourself from identity theft -- your information isn't being exposed in another place -- where it might be compromised.

Preventing identity theft using myTruston is and always has been free, you only pay for the recovery services, if and when you need them.

Most identity theft services require that you provide them with all of your personal information, and in some instances, even your power of attorney.

With myTruston you can protect your identity, and if need be, recover from identity theft without giving up your information to a third-party.

With call centers being outsourced -- the possibility of insider theft, and hacking techniques that seem to routinely defeat current security technology -- this might be something to think about when protecting your identity and financial well-being.

All identity theft services bundle free services that theoretically could be done for free. It's a low overhead and immensely profitable business. The trick to it is making sure you do everything properly, and this is where a third-party service can add value.

The unique twist with Truston is that it's free to prevent identity theft and you only pay to recover from it. In other words, you don't pay for something that might never happen to you, which seems to be a common denominator with a lot of the services out there.

Many of the services out there charge $10.00 and up a month to protect you, which is free at myTruston. Many of them (also) do not cover you if you were compromised before you paid for their services (read the fine-print).

What Truston provides is an easy do-it-yourself (DIY) platform that makes it easy for the average person to ensure they are not being compromised, and take effective action if they have been.

Truston recently announced they were upgrading their service and lowering the cost of their paid (recovery) service. The paid portion of the service only needs to be used as long as the customer feels it is necessary.

Here is a portion of the announcement from their blog:

This week we released a new version of our award-winning myTruston service. The new features are FREE to current members for a 45–day free trial period. These four new prevention and privacy services are:

1. Credit bureau fraud alerts
2. Chexsystems fraud alerts
3. Stop pre-approved credit offers
4. Stop telemarketing calls

We updated our product names: we now have myTruston Free and myTruston Plus. myTruston Free has the same features since we first launched (inspecting your credit reports year round). myTruston Plus includes what you get with Free, the four new prevention/privacy features, and our ID theft recovery tools. Also, the price for the Plus service is reduced 50% to just $10 a month!

What I like about these new features is they begin to address the growing problem of synthetic identity theft. Synthetic identity theft occurs when different parts of people's identity are crafted to form another one. This is getting to be a big problem, which is expected to get worse.

In the near future, employers will have to take action when they have employees, who have social security numbers that don't match their names. In the past, this was never enforced, and social security numbers could be made up (literally).

With this new development, up to 20 million illegal immigrants are going to have to use social security numbers that match an identity. This could lead to an explosion in the already staggering amount of identity theft that is occurring.

Watching your identity carefully, is probably a better idea than ever before.

The Chexsystems alerts are a part of this new effort. Fraudulent checks that tie into identity assumptions do not always show up on credit reports.

In case you missed the Certegy data breach, where 8.5 million people's checking account information was compromised, this might be something that will help a few people out there. Please note this compromise was accomplished by a not very honest insider, therefore no amount of computer security could have stopped it.

Two other enhancements are the ability to put yourself on the no-call lists and stop all those pre-approved credit offers. Most privacy experts recommend we do this to avoid having our information sent all over the place.

Tom, whom I speak to on a semi-regular basis, has indicated that he and his team are working on even more enhancements to provide more value to his service in the future.

They are also working with industry partners to bundle their services and provide them as an option to a wider audience, who might want to a take a more private approach to preventing, or recovering from, identity theft.

I would highly recommend getting in touch with Truston if you are providing these services to your employees, or perhaps considering providing them to your customers.

Victims of identity theft are sometimes cautious about giving up their information after they've been victimized. MyTruston provides a viable solution for these customers, as well as, customers who are careful about protecting their privacy.

For the full announcement, which includes a free trial period for current customers on the paid services (you don't have to provide a credit card number, then remember to cancel)link, here.

I've noticed this is another neat marketing trick (requiring a credit card) employed by a lot of entities offering services for free lately. I suspect they count on busy and forgetful people like me, who forget to cancel the service.

PS: I got to know Tom from his blog and work as an advocate for identity theft victims. If you are interested in identity theft or privacy issues, I highly recommend you consider it as another free resource, he provides.

0 comments

How was Mayor Bloomberg's BofA account jacked?

Here is a clear case, which shows that just about anyone can have their financial identity compromised. In this case, the victim is none other than the mayor of New York City, Michael R. Bloomberg.

This story is getting a lot of coverage, but no one is saying (if they know) how Mayor Bloomberg's financial information was compromised.

The New York Times (Sewell Chan) reported:

One man, Odalis Bostic, was indicted for trying to steal $420,000 from the mayor. According to prosecutors, Mr. Bostic created the Laderman Development Company in Elizabeth, N.J., and set up accounts in the company’s name at two banks, PNC and Sovereign Bank.

In early June, Mr. Bostic deposited a $190,000 forged check into the Sovereign account and a $230,000 forged check into PNC account, according to prosecutors. Both of the forged checks were drawn on Mr. Bloomberg’s personal account at the Bank of America and were issued in the name of the mayor’s financial manager, Geller & Company.

Mr Bostic was probably hoping the bank would release the funds, at which time, he would have drained the accounts.

During the course of the investigation another fraud was discovered, where Mayor Bloomberg was the victim:

A second man, Charles Nelson, has been charged with stealing $10,000 from one of the mayor’s financial accounts on May 11. In an online transaction, Mr. Nelson transferred $10,000 from the mayor’s Bank of America account to an E*Trade account the defendant had set up, prosecutors said. They said he later used a debit card for cash advances and to make purchases from the E*Trade account.

The next question is how did Charles Nelson get Mayor Bloomberg's log on credentials to his Bank of America account? Getting a copy of a check and counterfeiting it is one thing, but online transactions normally require a log on ID and password.

I checked the press release from the Manhattan DA and it doesn't disclose how this happened, either.

None of the stories indicate that Bostic and Nelson knew each other. In fact, Robert Morgenthau, the DA was quoted as saying they were unrelated in the NY Times story. The DA's press release doesn't stipulate whether they knew each other, or not.

Mr. Nelson was arrested in New Jersey and is being charged with grand larceny and identity theft.

There are a lot of ways an account can be compromised (jacked). Phishing, where account owners are tricked into giving up their details and data breaches happen at an alarming rate these days. The sad thing is that there is so much of this going on, it's pretty hard to determine the original point-of-compromise.

Another sad thing is that, according to most statistics, over 99 percent of the criminals doing this are never brought to justice. In fact, most of the time, a victim can do little more than file a report, which never gets investigated.

This story is a testament to making sure you review your accounts on a regular basis. As long as unauthorized withdrawals are reported in a timely fashion, the owner of the account normally can't be held liable.

New York Times story, here.

Manhattan DA press release on this, here.

0 comments

Another 6.3 million people's information stolen at Ameritrade

According to the AP, Ameritrade is reporting that someone hacked into their systems and made off with 6.3 million people's information:

Online brokerage TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. said Friday one of its databases was hacked and contact information for its more than 6.3 million customers was stolen. A spokeswoman for the Omaha-based company said more sensitive information in the same database, including Social Security numbers and account numbers, does not appear to have been taken.

The company would not share many details of its investigation, including when the hack took place, because it is still looking into the theft and cooperating with investigators from the FBI, Securities and Exchange Commission, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and local authorities.

Allegedly, Ameritrade has known about this for awhile and it might have been the threat of legal action, which prompted them to come forward now:

But Ameritrade has known about the problem at least since late May when two of its customers sued the brokerage in federal court because they were receiving unwanted e-mail ads on accounts used only for Ameritrade.

The data on Ameritrade's servers may have been vulnerable for an extended period of time dating back at least to last October, according to the lawsuit filed by lawyer Scott A. Kamber. The company said Friday the problem had recently been fixed.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit had wanted the court to order Ameritrade to tell its customers about the data problem, but Ameritrade issued its release before a hearing could be held. The plaintiffs are also seeking damages and are trying to qualify as a class-action lawsuit.

"They preferred putting out a press release with their own language in it rather than have the court order them to put out a release with our language," Kamber said.

While maintaining confidentiality in an investigation is sometimes necessary, you would think that someone might want to warn the 6.3 million people, who were affected by this?

They might want to start monitoring their finances, carefully.

In addition to this, the stated need for confidentiality is coming from Ameritrade and not a law enforcement source involved in the investigation. The claim that a federal hearing might have forced disclosure might make some wonder about the credibility of what is being said, also.

The verbiage used in the Ameritrade press release states that social security numbers don't "appear" to have been taken is a little scary, also. Does this mean that they aren't sure?

Why would a hacker only take contact information, when social security and dates of birth were available in the same database, also?

My guess is that dates of birth and social security numbers would make the information more valuable to the hackers, who compromised the system.

The press release does state that account numbers and passwords were in a different database, and were not compromised.

Security and identity theft experts are speculating that the information taken could be used to phish for additional information, which then could be to commit identity theft. Phishing is where an e-mail from an official looking, but spoofed (impersonated) source tricks someone into giving up sensitive information.

Tricking people into giving up their information is also known as, social engineering.

Crimeware might also be used to steal the additional information. Once downloaded crimeware, steals information from a system automatically, normally using keylogging software. Crimeware can be picked up by clicking on the link of a phishy e-mail.

According to the Anti-Phishing Working Group, who studies this carefully has reported crimeware use is on the rise. One of the reasons for the rise in crimeware is that DIY (do-it-yourself) kits are being sold on the black market. This allows less sophisticated criminals to get into the game.

The CNet version of the story, quotes Graham Cluley (Sophos) as speculating how Ameritrade's system was probably compromised:

"There are only two different ways this could have happened. There was either a vulnerability with their Web site and it was hacked, or someone internally gained access with a Trojan horse."

Ameritrade has hired ID Analytics, Inc. to monitor what is going on and determine if any identity theft occurs out of all of this.

They are also providing additional information on their site about this unfortunate event for their customers.

The TJX data breach, which compromised over 45 million people, has caused a lot of uproar about how data breaches should be handled and who should pay for them.

Class action law suits are being brought forth and legislation is being introduced to determine, who pays for all the damage, when a data breach occurs.

This is becoming extremely costly for the companies being breached. The last report I saw about the cost incurred so far by TJX is $256 million. The sad thing is that I doubt this is the final figure.

Legislation in California is awaiting Arnold Schwarzenegger's signature, which will require retailers to reimburse financial institutions for the cost of fixing breached financial data. Interestingly enough -- in this data breach and the last major one, I've written about (Certegy) -- the data was not stolen from a retailer.

The Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, PogoWasRight and Attrition.org all compile information on data breaches, which happen so frequently, they are becoming almost "too routine" news events.

If anyone, who was has been affected by a data breach wants independent advice on what to do if you become an identity theft victim, the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse has a very informative page about this, here.

AP story by Josh Funk, here.

0 comments

Monster.com might be sending you a letter that your information was compromised

Photo courtesy of shane_allen at Flickr

If you posted your information for a job on Monster.com, you might be getting a letter notifying you that your personal details have been compromised:

Joseph Menn, Los Angeles Times is reporting:

Monster.com said Thursday that 1.3 million users had personal information stolen by criminals who hacked into the job-placement website. The company said it would warn each of the victims by mail.

Monster parent Monster Worldwide Inc. said it identified the victims after analyzing the data found this week by computer security firm Symantec Corp., which had estimated that hundreds of thousands of people were at risk.

In this latest data breach, it is being reported that only names, addresses and e-mail addresses were stolen. This information will likely be used to lure potential job candidates into what are known as job scams.

In a job scam, a person is recruited into cashing bogus financial instruments, or laundering the proceeds of Internet crime. In most instances, these bogus employers will request a lot of personal and financial information (supposedly to vet the new employee)and this is probably where someone would put themselves at a real risk of becoming an identity theft victim.

The LA Times article also stated:

Also Thursday, some Monster users said they had received such e-mails as far back as February.

Since job scams are nothing new and Monster isn't the only site, where scammers gather information to lure people into doing their dirty work, it's very possible that the current data breach has nothing to do with the e-mails going as far back as February.

I've seen these types of e-mails going back a lot further that February.

Here is a previous post, I did with an emphasis on the social engineering aspects of job scams:

Internet criminals stealing information from job sites isn't anything new!

LA Times article, here.

0 comments

The sad state of affairs in the information (identity) theft crisis

It shouldn't surprise anyone that data breaches are becoming more prevalent than ever, or that identity theft is up fifty percent since 2003.

Robert L. Scheier (courtesy of InfoWorld) wrote an article about this that is getting a lot of play in the press:

Today's electronic world is a risky place for your personal data -- and it's not getting any safer. More than 158 million data records of U.S. residents have been exposed as a result of security breaches since January 2005, according to The Privacy Rights Clearing House, a nonprofit consumer rights organization.

As fast as banks, merchants and consumers add new layers of security to their storage systems and network, say security analysts, new technologies -- or simply careless users -- create new security holes that aggressive and sophisticated identity thieves eagerly exploit. The result, says Avivah Litan, a vice president and distinguished analyst at Gartner Inc., is that "things will get worse before they get better."

Whether information is being stolen by phishing, pharming, hacking, insider theft, or common dumpster diving - the problem seems to be growing by leaps and bounds.

An interesting aspect, which I've covered in previous posts is that criminals seem to be using technology as a marketing tool - just like their counterparts in more legitimate businesses:

Criminals are also getting smarter. Larry Ponemon, chairman and founder of Ponemon Institute, which conducts research on privacy and security issues, calls it "inverted customer relationship management," in which criminals target the wealthiest individuals for their attacks.

Some are even buying marketing lists to piece together profiles of "who's got the Platinum [American Express card] and who's got the account with Merrill Lynch and who doesn't," says Litan.

I found this particularly interesting because a reasonable person would have to question, who is selling them these lists?

In the most recent high profile data breach to hit the news at Certegy, a dishonest insider sold the information to a broker. Interestingly enough, as far as I know, this information broker has yet to be identified. The next question might be - who did the information broker sell the information to?

Recently, another data broker (InfoUSA) was pegged for selling marketing lists to sweepstakes scammers.

Perhaps PogoWasRight, who states "We have met the enemy and he is us" hits the reason for the problem right on the nose.

A lot of people are making billions, if not trillions of dollars making it easy to use information. So much information has been plastered in so many places, we seem to have lost track of it all.

This gives the criminals behind this phenomenon a lot of places to steal, or even buy everything they need to commit identity theft.

Another sad statistic is that these criminals seem to rarely get caught. Pretty sure the last statistic I saw was less than 1 percent. This makes it a pretty lucrative criminal enterprise to be involved in.

Despite this, we still don't have a law that addresses data breaches?

With the elections coming up, perhaps we should be asking our elected leaders, why this is the case?

The only way to turn this trend around is to make everyone involved in it, more accountable.

Interesting article by Robert L. Scheier, here.

The article mentions statistics gathered by the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, which I quote frequently. Other places that gather information on this are PogoWasRight and Attrition.org.

And all of them will be the first to tell you - these are only the breaches we know about. The mysterious criminals stealing the information would rather not disclose, who they are stealing IT from. Of course, the people getting the information stolen from them would probably rather not make it public, either.

0 comments

Class action law suit filed against Certegy for data breach

Data breaches are likely to become costly to organizations who fail to protect their information. The TJX data breach (45 million people and counting compromised) has inspired several legal actions in both the United States and Canada.

Now a similar action is being brought against Certegy, a check verification company, who had an insider sell information to a still (as far as I know) undisclosed data broker.

An August 15th press release announced:

The law firm of Girard Gibbs LLP (http://www.girardgibbs.com/) has filed a class action complaint on behalf of approximately 8.5 million consumers nationwide whose financial and personal data was stolen by an employee of Certegy Check Services, Inc. and Fidelity National Information Services, Inc (NYSE: FIS) and released to unauthorized third parties. The complaint alleges that a senior database administrator misappropriated the confidential information of millions of consumers and then sold the data to direct marketing firms and data brokers who may have resold it to others.

“Certegy and FIS had a duty to safeguard the confidential data of consumers from any breach, including that of their employees. Once the internal breach became known, it should have been communicated to the public in a timely and adequate manner,” said Eric Gibbs, one of the attorneys for the plaintiff. “The failure by these companies to make the internal data breach immediately known exposed consumers to direct marketing campaigns and the risk of unauthorized use of their bank accounts and identity theft.”

This case is interesting because it involves customer information that was obtained at merchants, who used the service to verify whether a person's check, or sometimes payment card was good.

I wrote a couple of posts about Certegy, which received a lot of comments. One comment (in my opinion) by a "Risk Manager" opened up another can of worms:

I think there is a bigger issue here that Certegy does not "own" the data that was stolen but in fact it is records of Certegy customers like businesses that contract Certegy for check-cashing services. I would ask Certegy to confirm what they store on their systems, how long they store it and why bank account and credit card numbers are stored AND investigate if Certegy violated any Visa/PCI mandates.

This seems to be a reasonable question, especially in light of some of the more high profile data breaches, we've recently seen. However in this instance, since all it takes is one person (who has access) to compromise information, it probably wouldn't have made much difference.

The reality is that Certegy sells the fact that they store a lot of information on people to merchants. Without this information, they wouldn't have a service to sell.

Nonetheless, the statement does warrant consideration as to how well third party databases are protected, especially when they contain detailed personal and financial information?

I'm not sure why the data broker, who bought the information hasn't been identified? They are responsible for buying and selling information all the time. Information is worth money and is being sold (some believe haphazardly) all the time.

Recently, it was disclosed that a data broker sold lists targeting elderly gamblers to sweepstakes (lottery) scammers. New York Times article, here.

Current laws enable financial institutions to sell your information, unless you go through a pretty complicated process of opting-out. They are required by law to notify you of your rights, but these are often sent out via snail mail and called "privacy notices." I've often made the mistake of thinking they were junk mail and shredded them.

They don't make it easy for the average person to protect their information.

I wonder how much personal information is sold to people that shouldn't be getting it? Even if we manage to opt-out today, how much of our information is already stored on a database somewhere?

Since the people enabling information to be compromised are making billions of dollars by selling it -- perhaps more of these lawsuits are one way to hold them accountable and bring some sanity to what is becoming a situation -- which seems to get worse all the time?

Of course, more laws to protect consumers are needed, also!

As I stated earlier, this is going to be interesting. I don't know where it will go, but maybe this is a signal to the people data mining our information to wake up and smell the coffee?

If they don't, they might end up dealing with a lot of litigation, which is always very costly.

It also might put them out of business. Dark Reading did an article this week about another third party vendor Verus, who folded after it was disclosed that they lost a lot of people's information from several hospitals. The point of compromise in this situation was the failure of some IT people to leave a firewall up when transferring information between servers.

Here are my two previous posts on the Certegy breach:

Not to worry, check processing company (Certegy) believes the 2.3 million stolen records will not be used for fraud!

Certegy reveals their data breach is a lot larger than originally reported

0 comments