DataBreaches.Net

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

HHS corrects entry for LANAP & Implant Center breach

Posted on September 11, 2014 by Dissent

There’s been an interesting update to HHS’s breach tool for the entry concerning a breach reported by Dr. David DiGiallorenzo of the LANAP & Implant Center in Williamsport, Pennsylvania.

I had first noted the breach in December 2013, and then provided an update here. When the breach was added to HHS’s breach tool, I noted the addition and commented on the errors in what had been reported to HHS:

The LANAP & Implant Center breach reported here and here was reported by David DiGiallorenzo, D.M.D.  as occurring on September 17, 2012. That seems incorrect as the torrent was uploaded to a PirateBay site on February 18, 2010. Perhaps Dr. DiGiallorenzo confused date of discovery with date of breach? I’d ask them, but their lawyer has already said they’d have no further comment on the breach.  Surprisingly, Dr DiGiallorenzo seems to have reported that (only) 2,600 patients were affected by the breach. Inspection of the torrent reveals that over 11,000 individuals had PII and/or PHI in the database exposed online, so I’m really not sure how they got that number to report.  The incident was reported as “Unauthorized Access/Disclosure,Hacking Incident”,”Network Server, Electronic Medical Record,” and hopefully, HHS will confirm whether this really was a hack by a third party.

At the time, I  contacted HHS about the errors in what appeared on the breach tool, and raised a number of concerns with both HHS and the FTC concerning the incomplete and/or inaccurate disclosures to patients as well as the alleged retaliation experienced by the individual who brought the breach to the media’s attention.

On September 4, HHS updated the public breach tool entry to read:

“David DiGiallorenzo, D.M.D.”, PA,””, 11000, 02/18/2010,”Unauthorized Access/Disclosure, Hacking/IT Incident”, Other, 09/04/2014,

So HHS has now corrected the entry to show the correct number of patients affected and the correct date of the incident. Also, the entry no longer indicates “Hacking Incident,” but rather “Hacking/IT incident.” “Network Server, Electronic Medical Record” has been replaced by “Other.” I wish I knew what the “Other” stands for in this case, and I’m curious as to what OCR will find in its investigation.

Because there is no summary provided in their logs, it would appear that their investigation is still open. Seeing how OCR investigations into breaches reported in 2011 are first being closed now, I expect it will be a while before we see this investigation closed.

Related posts:

  • Unencrypted laptops still a major cause of breach reports to HHS
Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← D&J Optical sues former employees for misappropriation of patient/proprietary information
Yandy breach impacted over 44,000 online customers →

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

  • National Health Care Fraud Takedown Results in 324 Defendants Charged in Connection with Over $14.6 Billion in Alleged Fraud
  • Swiss Health Foundation Radix Hit by Cyberattack Affecting Federal Data
  • Russian hackers get 7 and 5 years in prison for large-scale cyber attacks with ransomware, over 60 million euros in bitcoins seized
  • Bolton Walk-In Clinic patient data leak locked down (finally!)
  • 50 Customers of French Bank Hit by Insider SIM Swap Scam
  • Ontario health agency atHome ordered to inform 200,000 patients of March data breach
  • Fact-Checking Claims By Cybernews: The 16 Billion Record Data Breach That Wasn’t
  • Horizon Healthcare RCM discloses ransomware attack in December
  • Disgruntled IT Worker Jailed for Cyber Attack, Huddersfield
  • Hacker helped kill FBI sources, witnesses in El Chapo case, according to watchdog report

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

  • 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
  • Hacker helped kill FBI sources, witnesses in El Chapo case, according to watchdog report
  • Germany Wants Apple, Google to Remove DeepSeek From Their App Stores
  • Supreme Court upholds Texas law requiring age verification on porn sites
  • Justices nix Medicaid ‘right’ to choose doctor, defunding Planned Parenthood in South Carolina

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.