Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
Nearly Half Of Consumers Will Punish Breached Retailers During Holidays
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Marilyn Cohodas
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
10/21/2014 | 4:10:26 PM
Re: Follow through
I think you hit the nail on the head @Stratustician, until the card companies start losing money, there really is no great incentive for retail to change their payment practices..
Stratustician
Stratustician,
User Rank: Moderator
10/21/2014 | 3:29:19 PM
Re: Follow through
The reality is that aside from the huge inconvenience if you have to get new credit cards, there really is no customer penalty for many folks.  Banks and credit card issuers usually refund fraudulent charges, so this I think has taken away most of the stigma.  If the convenience is still there for customers to purchase from these retailers, there will probably not be enough of a backlash for them to worry too much about customer perception.
Marilyn Cohodas
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
10/21/2014 | 11:16:37 AM
Re: Follow through
I was in Home Depot over the weekend buying a ladder and as I was watching the cashier process my purchase on, shall we say,  a less than a state of the art POS terminal, I wondered whether I had  taken leave of my senses.  But then the moment passed and I leftwith a carriage full of items, paid for by credit card. I don't think consumers will ever be in the vanguard of payment reform. But who will be?  
Whoopty
Whoopty,
User Rank: Ninja
10/21/2014 | 10:39:56 AM
Follow through
Like the others have said, time will tell if people actually follow through on the claims. I wish more did vote with their wallets, as it's quite an effective way to enact change.

There's quite a few companies I refuse to deal with (often feeling like I'm biting my nose off to spite my face) because of certain practices. Sometimes it's because their security has been poor, but its more likely to be related to customer relations of business practices: like Apple's closed ecosystem. 
GonzSTL
GonzSTL,
User Rank: Ninja
10/21/2014 | 10:03:48 AM
Re: maybe
People shop at specific stores for many reasons. People are also more aware of breaches, given the ever increasing number of them year after year. It is almost as if consumers in general think what security professionals have been saying all along – it isn't whether or not you will be breached, but when you will be breached. So call it breach fatigue or whatever, it probably won't deter most of them from shopping at a store they have become accustomed to. Now those who were dramatically impacted might, and justifiably so, but I'm not sure that it will be the majority who shop at that store. In addition, consumers may simply use cash instead of plastic, if they really like the store. Plus, with the lagging economy, people may also be more credit conscious and opt for cash spending. Regardless, a breach company still sports a black eye in front of their customers, and that is sometimes difficult to overcome. At the same time, I also believe that consumers are fed up with companies that do not practice safe computing around sensitive data, and want someone to pay dearly for security failures.
Kelly Jackson Higgins
Kelly Jackson Higgins,
User Rank: Strategist
10/21/2014 | 9:56:43 AM
Re: maybe
@prospecttoreza, you nailed it!
prospecttoreza
prospecttoreza,
User Rank: Strategist
10/21/2014 | 9:17:00 AM
Re: maybe
They also promise to start going to gym, quit smoking, and visit their elderly parents. :-(
Kelly Jackson Higgins
Kelly Jackson Higgins,
User Rank: Strategist
10/20/2014 | 5:13:34 PM
Re: maybe
I did this post-TJX breach, but I didn't after Target. Mainly because I had breach fatigue at that point. I think many consumers are just now realizing what data breaches are all about, so they are initially reacting this way (boycotting). But as they get used to them, they probably will do what I did, and just shop away anyway.
Thomas Claburn
Thomas Claburn,
User Rank: Ninja
10/20/2014 | 3:39:57 PM
maybe
They may, but consumers often say that they value privacy and security without actually taking action that counts.


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Practical Network Security Approaches for a Multicloud, Hybrid IT World
The report covers areas enterprises should focus on for their multicloud/hybrid cloud security strategy: -increase visibility over the environment -learning cloud-specific skills -relying on established security frameworks -re-architecting the network
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-30333
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-09
RARLAB UnRAR before 6.12 on Linux and UNIX allows directory traversal to write to files during an extract (aka unpack) operation, as demonstrated by creating a ~/.ssh/authorized_keys file. NOTE: WinRAR and Android RAR are unaffected.
CVE-2022-23066
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-09
In Solana rBPF versions 0.2.26 and 0.2.27 are affected by Incorrect Calculation which is caused by improper implementation of sdiv instruction. This can lead to the wrong execution path, resulting in huge loss in specific cases. For example, the result of a sdiv instruction may decide whether to tra...
CVE-2022-28463
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08
ImageMagick 7.1.0-27 is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow.
CVE-2022-28470
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08
marcador package in PyPI 0.1 through 0.13 included a code-execution backdoor.
CVE-2022-1620
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08
NULL Pointer Dereference in function vim_regexec_string at regexp.c:2729 in GitHub repository vim/vim prior to 8.2.4901. NULL Pointer Dereference in function vim_regexec_string at regexp.c:2729 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted input.