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
Privacy: Do We Need a National Data Breach Disclosure Law?
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
3/30/2018 | 6:42:18 PM
Re: Victim Shaming
@Dallas: On this "victim shaming", I'm going to suggest that in some cases it's well deserved. Facebook deserves it now and deserved it in 2012 because of how they have disrespected users and their data for so long. Uber deserves it too, for similar reasons. The healthcare industry DEFINITELY deserves it because they are lagging behind so much -- and because people don't have as much choice about their healthcare providers or insurance carriers. And it's a huge motivator for e-commerce -- because they know that the brand damage will simply cause people to move to another platform (unlike with, say, a bank; people aren't going to en masse move investment accounts and mortgages and credit cards because of a little breach -- especially considering the consumer protections in financial services).
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
3/30/2018 | 6:36:55 PM
Re: Web
Sure, but we ALREADY HAVE numerous state laws here. Federal law on data-breach notification specifically isn't going to add any meaningfully significant privacy protections (unless there was to be a severe cracking down, with far stricter requirements and shorter deadlines than even the strictest states require -- which would have its own drawbacks) except to further confuse compliance officers and confound compliance efforts -- the cost of which get passed on to customers, meaning that these companies now need to sell even MORE user data.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
3/30/2018 | 6:33:37 PM
Let's leave it alone.
I understand the concerns, but at this point, it doesn't matter much. Almost all the states have their own laws here, and the strictest states (effectively MA, CA, and -- where PCI-DSS is concerned -- MN, NV, and WA) effectively create "floors" for national/regional organizations. To put federal law/regulation on top of this all would seriously muck things up even more for compliance efforts, IMHO.



(Disclaimer: This post is provided for informational, educational and/or entertainment purposes only. Neither this nor other posts here constitute legal advice or the creation, implication or confirmation of an attorney-client relationship. For actual legal advice, personally consult with an attorney licensed to practice in your jurisdiction.)
DallasBishoff
50%
50%
DallasBishoff,
User Rank: Author
3/28/2018 | 9:00:13 PM
Re: Victim Shaming
It is important to note that most people who provide their privacy information to a third party are doing so for the purpose of receiving a service, or participating in a collective social forum. Many organizations cannot provide the service to an individual without collecting personal information. For instance, any transaction that involves a credit card payment. In that regard, there is no basis for "victim sharing." The individual has done nothing more than picked a service provider. Unfortunately, sometimes these types of data sets are compromised. 

Now, if you are referring to an independent vendor with a data set that includes privacy data, many of them are already very sensitive to the reputation risk associated with a data breach. In a breach, they too are a victim, noting that a compromise may involve a criminal act. However, not all breach scenarios involve criminal acts. There is a long history of data disclosures that are a result of simple human error - an access control mechanism was not implemented properly, and the ability to freely discover and access the data was both possible, and actually occurred. 

In summary, victim shaming is not going to make the landscape better. Problems are solved through addressing the root cause, and not symptomatic attributes. However, thank you for your thoughts. As the author of the article, I hope that you benefited from the perspective presented.

 
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
3/28/2018 | 7:09:35 PM
Re: Victim Shaming
Yes, we need to do more to protect the data and privacy. I agree. There is a shared responsibility everybody needs to pay attention and do their parts, and then there is criminals we need to go after.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
3/28/2018 | 7:06:21 PM
Re: Victim Shaming
Easier to go after the victim and blame them for what they could have/should have/might have done differently. This make sense, at the same time when it comes to security it is everybodys responsibility.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
3/28/2018 | 7:03:59 PM
Re: Victim Shaming
Maybe it's time that we return to criminalizing the criminal instead of the victim This is a good point to raise. Holding the criminal responsible is the way to go.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
3/28/2018 | 7:02:29 PM
Standard
They contend a federal standard would simplify compliance and make the threshold for disclosure clear to businesses and consumers alike. This may be good to get early notification when there is a breach, if you remember yahoo, they reported it 4 years later.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
3/28/2018 | 6:59:10 PM
Two seconds
In the US, an identity is compromised every two seconds. This is really very scary to hear. There has to be a better way to manage security of our indentity
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
User Rank: Ninja
3/28/2018 | 6:55:43 PM
PII
We have healthcare laws that address privacy, but only when the privacy data is protected health information, a form of PII. PII may apply outside of healthcare as far as I understood, for healthcare there is PHI protection.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/3/2020
Pen Testers Who Got Arrested Doing Their Jobs Tell All
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  8/5/2020
Browsers to Enforce Shorter Certificate Life Spans: What Businesses Should Know
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/30/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17366
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
An issue was discovered in NLnet Labs Routinator 0.1.0 through 0.7.1. It allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions or to cause a denial of service on dependent routing systems by strategically withholding RPKI Route Origin Authorisation ".roa" files or X509 Certificate...
CVE-2020-9036
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
Jeedom through 4.0.38 allows XSS.
CVE-2020-15127
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
In Contour ( Ingress controller for Kubernetes) before version 1.7.0, a bad actor can shut down all instances of Envoy, essentially killing the entire ingress data plane. GET requests to /shutdown on port 8090 of the Envoy pod initiate Envoy's shutdown procedure. The shutdown procedure includes flip...
CVE-2020-15132
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
In Sulu before versions 1.6.35, 2.0.10, and 2.1.1, when the "Forget password" feature on the login screen is used, Sulu asks the user for a username or email address. If the given string is not found, a response with a `400` error code is returned, along with a error message saying that th...
CVE-2020-7298
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
Unexpected behavior violation in McAfee Total Protection (MTP) prior to 16.0.R26 allows local users to turn off real time scanning via a specially crafted object making a specific function call.