DataBreaches.Net

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

U.S. states say Anthem too slow to inform customers about breach

Posted on February 13, 2015 by Dissent

Jim Finkle reports:

Ten U.S. states have sent a letter to Anthem Inc complaining that the company has been too slow in notifying consumers that they were victims of a massive data breach disclosed last week.

“The delay in notifying those impacted is unreasonable and is causing unnecessary added worry to an already concerned population of Anthem customers,” said the letter, which was sent on Tuesday by Connecticut Attorney General George Jepsen on behalf of Connecticut and nine other states.

Read more on Reuters.  A copy of the letter is available here (pdf).

Reading the letter, it seems that Anthem generally got praised for disclosing the breach relatively quickly after discovery of the breach, but criticized for not providing more details quickly enough and for not notifying affected consumers of the details concerning credit-monitoring quickly enough.

I suppose Anthem could have waited to disclose the breach until they had more details and had all the credit-monitoring ducks in a row and ready to go, but wasn’t it more important to alert consumers so they could begin to take steps to protect themselves? I almost think the state attorneys general are being a bit unreasonable, even though I understand that their constituents are worrying and calling them to complain. The state attorneys general should know that forensics takes time and that Anthem would disclose more details if it knew more.

Yesterday – two days after the letter was sent – Anthem disclosed that the attack affected current and former customers going back to 2004, and that everyone who was enrolled on or after 2004 would be offered two years of credit monitoring.  Other important details, such as when the breach first occurred, remain to be clarified.

But saying that they’ve been slow to disclose details seems a bit unfair to this blogger. Certainly there is no federal or state laws that require a breached entity to know all the details and disclose them within two weeks of discovery.

The issue of credit-monitoring, however, is something Anthem probably could have handled better, as at least some people rushed out to purchase credit-monitoring and restoration services, not knowing that Anthem would provide them services that would be retroactive.

I wonder if as part of Anthem’s data breach response plan, they had pre-planned which credit-monitoring service they would use, or if they first began doing comparative shopping and evaluation after the breach was discovered. Finding a firm that can handle such a large breach is difficult, as we’ve seen on this blog when consumers report that they cannot get through on overwhelmed phone lines or sign-up sites crash from heavy use. Had Anthem taken that into account and ensured that there was a firm out there that could handle a massive breach? Is this delay in providing the details of the plan due to the vendor needing to line up more staff and phone lines quickly or is the delay due to Anthem?  There’s probably a lesson to be learned here.

 

Category: HackHealth DataU.S.

Post navigation

← Jeb Bush exposes 12,000 to ID theft after posting emails online
Medicare/Medicaid fraud can put you at risk – protect yourselves. →

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

  • Operation ENDGAME strikes again: the ransomware kill chain broken at its source
  • Mysterious Database of 184 Million Records Exposes Vast Array of Login Credentials
  • Mysterious hacking group Careto was run by the Spanish government, sources say
  • 16 Defendants Federally Charged in Connection with DanaBot Malware Scheme That Infected Computers Worldwide
  • Russian national and leader of Qakbot malware conspiracy indicted in long-running global ransomware scheme
  • Texas Doctor Who Falsely Diagnosed Patients as Part of Insurance Fraud Scheme Sentenced to 10 Years’ Imprisonment
  • VanHelsing ransomware builder leaked on hacking forum
  • Hack of Opexus Was at Root of Massive Federal Data Breach
  • ‘Deep concern’ for domestic abuse survivors as cybercriminals expected to publish confidential abuse survivors’ addresses
  • Western intelligence agencies unite to expose Russian hacking campaign against logistics and tech firms

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

  • Widow of slain Saudi journalist can’t pursue surveillance claims against Israeli spyware firm
  • Researchers Scrape 2 Billion Discord Messages and Publish Them Online
  • GDPR is cracking: Brussels rewrites its prized privacy law
  • Telegram Gave Authorities Data on More than 20,000 Users
  • Police secretly monitored New Orleans with facial recognition cameras
  • Cocospy stalkerware apps go offline after data breach
  • Drugmaker Regeneron to acquire 23andMe out of bankruptcy

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.