DataBreaches.Net

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

Lost or stolen?

Posted on February 28, 2010 by Dissent

In the big scheme of things, it may be small breach report.  But the difference between what Ameriprise Financial told the state attorney general and what they told the client caught my eye.

In  a notification letter to the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office, Ameriprise Financial Services informed the state that they had had a data breach incident involving “the theft of information ….”

Yet in the letter to the individual(s) affected, they write, “Your REIT application was lost by an express mailing vendor en route to the REIT transfer agent.”

So which was it?  Lost or stolen?  Hopefully, the letter to the individual(s) was the more accurate description, as I might react differently to hearing my data had been stolen as opposed to lost.

Ameriprise Financial is certainly not the only firm to have seeming discrepancies between what they report in their cover correspondence to a state attorney general’s office and what they report to those affected.  It does make it difficult to code reports for data analyses, however.

Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← Welcome Infosec Island Network readers
Shands notifies individuals of information breach →

1 thought on “Lost or stolen?”

  1. rmcree says:
    March 1, 2010 at 2:53 pm

    Possibly related posts:
    http://searchfinancialsecurity.techtarget.com/tip/0,289483,sid185_gci1393703,00.html
    http://holisticinfosec.blogspot.com/search?q=ameriprise
    Cheers.

Comments are closed.

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

  • Comstar LLC agrees to corrective action plan and fine to settle HHS OCR charges
  • Australian ransomware victims now must tell the government if they pay up
  • U.S. Sanctions Cloud Provider ‘Funnull’ as Top Source of ‘Pig Butchering’ Scams
  • Victoria’s Secret takes down website after security incident
  • U.S. Government Employee Arrested for Attempting to Provide Classified Information to Foreign Government
  • St. Cloud Provides Update on Ransomware Attack in 2024
  • Bradford Health Systems detected abnormal network activity in December 2023. They first sent out breach notices this week.
  • Websites selling hacking tools to cybercriminals seized
  • ConnectWise suspects cyberattack affecting some ScreenConnect customers was state-sponsored
  • Possible ransomware attack disrupts Maine and New Hampshire Covenant Health locations

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

  • Nebraska Bans Minor Social Media Accounts Without Parental Consent
  • Trump Taps Palantir to Compile Data on Americans
  • The US Is Storing Migrant Children’s DNA in a Criminal Database
  • Home Pregnancy Test Company Wins Dismissal of Pixel Wiretapping Suit
  • The CCPA emerges as a new legal battleground for web tracking litigation
  • U.S. Spy Agencies Are Getting a One-Stop Shop to Buy Your Most Sensitive Personal Data
  • Period Tracking App Users Win Class Status in Google, Meta Suit

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.