DataBreaches.Net

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

Why unsubscribing from mail lists might not have protected you from the Epsilon breach

Posted on April 5, 2011 by Dissent

Back in December 2010, when Walgreens sent out its first breach notifications,  one of the troubling aspects was that despite the fact that consumers had unsubscribed from their mailings, their data had been retained.  The December 2010 notification email read, in part:

We realize you previously unsubscribed from promotional emails from Walgreens, and that will continue. As a company, we absolutely believe that all customer relationships must be built on trust. That is why we believe it is important to inform you of this incident. Online security experts have reported an increase in attacks on email systems, and therefore we have voluntarily contacted the appropriate authorities and are working with them regarding this incident.

So why did they retain his data when the customers had clearly unsubscribed? How does it inspire trust if you keep data that you are no longer supposed to use when hanging on to it increases the risk that it will be acquired by cybercriminals?  How is that a relationship built on trust?

Fast forward and it appears that it has happened again.   The latest round of Walgreens notifications reads, in part:

[…]

We realize you previously unsubscribed from promotional emails from Walgreens, and that will continue, but we feel an obligation to make you aware of this incident. We regret this has taken place and any inconvenience this may have caused you. If you have any questions regarding this issue, please contact us at 1-855-814-0010. We take your privacy very seriously, and we will continue to work diligently to protect your personal information.

Sincerely,

Walgreens Customer Service Team

So why were those data still on Epsilon’s servers? Was that a function of Walgreens’ policies about data retention even for unsubscribers?

Shouldn’t “unsubscribe” mean “Pretend you never met me and I never gave you my email address.  Delete it.”   And do most customers believe that when they unsubscribe, their data are being deleted?

Don’t tell me to read the privacy policies as we all know most people don’t really read them.

Why isn’t there a popup next to the “subscribe” button that tells you that your name and email address will be sent to a third party and will never be deleted even if you unsubscribe?  How about:

By subscribing, your name and email address will go to a vendor that we trust, even if you don’t know who they are. And your data will remain with that vendor even after you die, barring any act of Congress or the FTC.

Wouldn’t that at least be more transparent if you’re not going to delete the data when the customer unsubscribes?

Walgreens has not (yet) responded to an inquiry I sent them about this issue earlier today.

Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← CT: MidState Medical Center informs 93,500 patients of data breach
Have you gotten a phishing phone call after the Epsilon 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

  • Ransomware Attack on ADP Partner Exposes Broadcom Employee Data
  • Anne Arundel ransomware attack compromised confidential health data, county says
  • Australian national known as “DR32” sentenced in U.S. federal court
  • Alabama Man Sentenced to 14 Months in Connection with Securities and Exchange Commission X Hack that Spiked Bitcoin Prices
  • Japan enacts new Active Cyberdefense Law allowing for offensive cyber operations
  • Breachforums Boss “Pompompurin” to Pay $700k in Healthcare Breach
  • HHS Office for Civil Rights Settles HIPAA Cybersecurity Investigation with Vision Upright MRI
  • Additional 12 Defendants Charged in RICO Conspiracy for over $263 Million Cryptocurrency Thefts, Money Laundering, Home Break-Ins
  • RIBridges firewall worked. But forensic report says hundreds of alarms went unnoticed by Deloitte.
  • Chinese Hackers Hit Drone Sector in Supply Chain Attacks

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

  • Massachusetts Senate Committee Approves Robust Comprehensive Privacy Law
  • Montana Becomes First State to Close the Law Enforcement Data Broker Loophole
  • Privacy enforcement under Andrew Ferguson’s FTC
  • “We would be less confidential than Google” – Proton threatens to quit Switzerland over new surveillance law
  • CFPB Quietly Kills Rule to Shield Americans From Data Brokers
  • South Korea fines Temu for data protection violations
  • The BR Privacy & Security Download: May 2025

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.