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.

Risk

8/20/2008
12:42 PM
Keith Ferrell
Keith Ferrell
Commentary
50%
50%

Are Competitor Security Problems A Business Advantage Worth Talkng?

The news that one of the nation's leading student testing companies had its security problems made public by another testing company should give us all pause. How worried do we need to be about competitors blowing the security whistle on us? How worried should that type of competitor be about protecting an industry's customers as well as its own competitive advantage?

The news that one of the nation's leading student testing companies had its security problems made public by another testing company should give us all pause. How worried do we need to be about competitors blowing the security whistle on us? How worried should that type of competitor be about protecting an industry's customers as well as its own competitive advantage?The Princeton Review, one of the companies many of us remember from long hours hunched over standardized school tests, and longer weeks waiting for the test results, recently suffered a data breach that placed both test scores and personal data for thousands of Florida students on a publicly accessible Web site.

Informed of the breach, The Princeton Review shut down the site and began investigating how the breach happened.

My guess is that they're also investigating who reported it to the press: The New York Times story that broke the breach news noted that the Times was alerted to the problem by a Princeton Review competitor who preferred to remain anonymous.

Great: not only do we need to worry about defenses and keeping breaches from happening in the first place, now we need to start thinking about whether or not our competitors are watching and waiting for us to make a mistake so that they can report it.

All's fair, as some say, in love, war and business, but from my perspective this one goes too far. While a case can be made that the nameless competitor wasn't trying to profit directly from the breach news being broken, it's even more clear that the company was trying to harm The Princeton Review's rep.

And even more clear that the competitor was doing nothing at all to protect the students' data from being accessed.

My take is that The Princeton Review was sloppy, dangerously so with its data, and that should surely give its clients and customers some pause.

But the competitor was blatantly callous, openly (if anonymously) more concerned about compromising The Princeton Review's reputation than about protecting any student info from being compromised.

One approach speaks poorly about a single company's security practices; the other risks giving the entire industry a black eye.

You know which is which, and so do the testing companies' clients. Problem is we don't know which company puts its perceived competitive advantage ahead of overall industry well being, and that speaks poorly, if only by implication, for everybody in the business.

Take a look here at what bMighty had to say about another highly publicized data breach.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Manchester United Suffers Cyberattack
Dark Reading Staff 11/23/2020
As 'Anywhere Work' Evolves, Security Will Be Key Challenge
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/23/2020
Cloud Security Startup Lightspin Emerges From Stealth
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  11/24/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-27660
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
SQL injection vulnerability in request.cgi in Synology SafeAccess before 1.2.3-0234 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the domain parameter.
CVE-2020-27659
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in Synology SafeAccess before 1.2.3-0234 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) domain or (2) profile parameter.
CVE-2020-29127
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
An issue was discovered on Fujitsu Eternus Storage DX200 S4 devices through 2020-11-25. After logging into the portal as a root user (using any web browser), the portal can be accessed with root privileges when the URI cgi-bin/csp?cspid=&csppage=cgi_PgOverview&csplang=en is visit...
CVE-2020-25624
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-30
hw/usb/hcd-ohci.c in QEMU 5.0.0 has a stack-based buffer over-read via values obtained from the host controller driver.
CVE-2020-29378
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-29
An issue was discovered on V-SOL V1600D V2.03.69 and V2.03.57, V1600D4L V1.01.49, V1600D-MINI V1.01.48, V1600G1 V2.0.7 and V1.9.7, and V1600G2 V1.1.4 OLT devices. It is possible to elevate the privilege of a CLI user (to full administrative access) by using the password [email protected]#y$z%x6x7q8c9z) for the e...