DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Was Lockheed Martin breach notification intentionally vague?

Posted on December 4, 2009 by Dissent

If Steve Regan of The Tech Herald thought Alpha Software’s breach notification was bland, I wonder what he thinks of Lockheed Martin’s recent breach notification.

On November 6, Lockheed Martin sent out a breach notification that began:

Dear

As part of Lockheed Martin’s continued vigilance of personal information privacy matters, I am writing to inform you about an incident that resulted in the potential compromise of your personal information.

After containing the incident, which occurred in April 2009, the Corporation took prudent measures to conduct a thorough analysis of the incident and implement solutions to deter future occurrences.

Really. There was no explanation of what the incident involved. Nor did the notification to the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office contain even a clue as to the nature of the incident or why it took from April 2009 until November 6 to notify them or the individual(s).

Is Lockheed Martin being intentionally vague because of an ongoing investigation, did they accidentally omit a paragraph explaining the incident, or is something else going on? Can a recipient really assess the risk they face without some sense of what happened?

Update April 16: The NYS Consumer Protection logs show that it received a breach report from Lockheed Martin concerning a hacking incident that affected 15 NYS residents.

No related posts.

Category: Breach IncidentsBusiness Sector

Post navigation

← Lost Textron Financial hard drive held employee, customer data
EIU warns of student data security breach (updated) →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • DOJ investigates ex-ransomware negotiator over extortion kickbacks
  • Hackers Using PDFs to Impersonate Microsoft, DocuSign, and More in Callback Phishing Campaigns
  • One in Five Law Firms Hit by Cyberattacks Over Past 12 Months
  • U.S. Sanctions Russian Bulletproof Hosting Provider for Supporting Cybercriminals Behind Ransomware
  • Senator Chides FBI for Weak Advice on Mobile Security
  • Cl0p cybercrime gang’s data exfiltration tool found vulnerable to RCE attacks
  • Kelly Benefits updates its 2024 data breach report: impacts 550,000 customers
  • Qantas customers involved in mammoth data breach
  • CMS Sending Letters to 103,000 Medicare beneficiaries whose info was involved in a Medicare.gov breach.
  • Esse Health provides update about April cyberattack and notifies 263,601 people (1)

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Oregon Amends Its Comprehensive Privacy Statute
  • Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Liberal Majority Strikes Down 176-Year-Old Abortion Ban
  • 20 States Sue HHS to Stop Medicaid Data Sharing with ICE
  • Kids are making deepfakes of each other, and laws aren’t keeping up
  • The Trump administration is building a national citizenship data system
  • Supreme Court Decision on Age Verification Tramples Free Speech and Undermines Privacy
  • New Jersey Issues Draft Privacy Regulations: The New

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.