First, let’s start with the breach, as reported by Darren Pauli on SC Magazine:
A security researcher was questioned by NSW Police after quietly reporting a massive security gaffe to First State Superannuation that potentially exposed millions of customer accounts.
Patrick Webster found he was able to access electronic superannuation notices of any customer by changing numerical values in URLs used to issue statements to clients.
Webster, a customer of First State Superannuation and consultant at OSI Security, increased the URL number value by one and was granted access to a former colleagues’ super statement.
He was shown information such as name, address, date of birth, next of kin and superannuation payments.
[…]
Okay, simply changing a numerical value in a url exposes customers’ data? In 2011? First State Superannuation should be very embarrassed.
In a letter to customers dated October 7, they acknowledged that customers’ online accounts had been accessed, but did not reveal how ridiculously simple it was for Webster to access their accounts. Then, in a phrasing that is completely contradicted by the circumstances, they write, “Your account remains secure.” “Remains?” It was not secure, which is why Webster was able to access others’ member statements. Maybe now it’s more secure, but for them to imply that the accounts had always been secure and remained secure is misleading, I think.
But their response to the breach deserves heaps and heaps of scorn and shaming. As also reported by Darren Pauli:
A security consultant who quietly tipped off First State Superannuation about a web vulnerability that potentially put millions of customers at risk has been slapped with a legal threat demanding he allow the company access to his computer, and warned he may be forced to pay the cost of fixing the flaw.
A legal document (pdf) seen by SC and sent from Pillar, the fund administrator of First State Super, demanded that Patrick Webster provide the company’s IT staff access to his computer.
Read more on SC Magazine. The legal document indicates that Webster reportedly accessed 568 members’ accounts. Why he accessed so many is not explained, and may wind up being important, but First State’s suggestion that he might have to pay for them fixing their sloppy security is mind-numbingly shameful.