DataBreaches.Net

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

Out of sight, but not out of court

Posted on July 6, 2011 by Dissent

I’ve been busy recently, backfilling DataLossDB.org. I’m currently working on  2007 (because who wants to tackle 2008 until we have to, right?).

In the process, I’ve been reminded of some breaches that most of us probably never paid much attention to or followed up on. As a case in point, consider  this entry in my archive from October 2007:

For many diners at the Cotton Patch restaurant on North Street, the meal was only the first taste of a months-long investigation of credit card theft, mail fraud and stolen identity.

But after finding that 140 victims of stolen credit card numbers had all dined at Cotton Patch during the summer, The U.S. Postal Inspection Service will close its investigation of the case because of a lack of new leads.

Source – Daily Sentinel

Being a curious soul, I started searching to determine if there was ever any follow-up that I had missed in the media.

It turns out that there was a follow-up, but it was in the courts, not the media.  And according to a lawsuit filed by Cotton Patch Cafe against Micros Systems,  the breach was due to the point of sale (POS) system provided by Micros Systems not being as secure as it had been advertised. For its part, Micros Systems denies all of Cotton Patch’s allegations or responds that it does not have sufficiently detailed allegations from Cotton Patch to respond to.  Many of the court filings are under seal so I have not been able to access them.

The complaint does not specify the total number of customers whose cards were compromised, but it indicates that the restaurant’s losses were over $100,000. The restaurant notes that although they subsequently determined that their system was first compromised in 2006,  the rash of fraudulent charges in 2007 was due to activity in May and June.  On August 23 of that year, they allege, RBS Lynk notified them that Visa’s and MasterCard’s fraud departments had identified Cotton Patch as the point of common purchase in a number of cases where card numbers had been compromised.

Did Cotton Patch send notifications to their customers after they were informed or subsequent to any forensic evaluation?  I hope so, but I find no media coverage on that point. I  emailed counsel for Cotton Patch yesterday with a number of questions about the breach and case, but have received no response as yet.

But one of the things I really  wondered about was  how many of the POS breaches we saw in the restaurant/hospitality sector in 2008 might have been avoided had those who were breached in 2007 sounded the alarm publicly and loudly. Transparency about breaches is not just a good public posture or good for customer trust and loyalty.  It can also be altruistic.  If Cotton Patch did not disclose their findings about their breach publicly, then I hope that they shared them with other restauranteurs through other means and thereby alerted others to avoid the problems they experienced.  But did they?  I hope their lawyer provides some additional details on this case.

 

Category: Breach IncidentsBreach TypesBusiness SectorHack

Post navigation

← Connexion Hack Team dumps military and government email addresses and passwords as well as a California government site’s table of donors
AL: Patient data stolen from Troy Regional Medical Center used in tax refund fraud scheme →

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

  • Cyberattack pushes German napkin company into insolvency
  • WMATA Train Operators Arrested in Health Care Fraud Scheme
  • Washington Post investigating cyberattack on journalists, WSJ reports
  • Resource: State Data Breach Notification Laws – June 2025
  • WestJet investigates cyberattack disrupting internal systems
  • Plastic surgeons often store nude photos of patients with their identity information. When would we call that “negligent?”
  • India: Servers of two city hospitals hacked; police register FIR
  • Ph: Coop Hospital confirms probe into reported cyberattack
  • Slapped wrists for Financial Conduct Authority staff who emailed work data home
  • School Districts Unaware BoardDocs Software Published Their Private Files

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

  • Vermont signs Kids Code into law, faces legal challenges
  • Data Categories and Surveillance Pricing: Ferguson’s Nuanced Approach to Privacy Innovation
  • Anne Wojcicki Wins Bidding for 23andMe
  • Would you — or wouldn’t you?
  • New York passes a bill to prevent AI-fueled disasters
  • Synthetic Data and the Illusion of Privacy: Legal Risks of Using De-Identified AI Training Sets
  • States sue to block the sale of genetic data collected by DNA testing company 23andMe

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.