DataBreaches.Net

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

FTC closes non-public investigation of Morgan Stanley data breach

Posted on August 10, 2015 by Dissent

Back in January 2015, Morgan Stanley disclosed an insider breach (previous coverage here and here). It appears that the Federal Trade Commission opened an investigation into the breach under Section 5 of the FTC Act, but decided not to pursue any enforcement action.

In a closing letter to Morgan Stanley’s counsel, Maneesha Mithal, Associate Director of the Division of Privacy and Identity Protection at FTC explains why the FTC decided to close the investigation, but noted that closing the investigation should not be construed as a determination that there was no violation of Section 5. 

The letter may be instructive, as it suggests that if an entity has appropriate policies in place, but there’s a failure due to “human error,” then the FTC will not necessarily pursue a case. In this case, the access controls for one narrow set of reports was configured improperly and Morgan Stanley corrected the problem as soon as they become aware of it.

So here we have a situation where there was a risk of significant injury to consumers that they could not reasonably avoid. Whether the risk was offset by any benefits, well, I don’t know how the FTC calculates that in this case. But it looks like what saved Morgan Stanley was it was able to show the FTC its policies and all the ways it had attempted to prevent the very problem that occurred.

Category: Financial SectorInsiderU.S.

Post navigation

← Former Assistant Band Director for Broward County School District Pled Guilty in Identity Theft Tax Fraud Scheme Involving Former Students’ Info
Woman accused of stealing identities of coworkers, going shopping →

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

  • When ransomware listings create confusion as to who the victim was
  • Rajkot civic body’s GIS website hit by cyber attack, over 400 GB data feared stolen
  • Taiwan’s BitoPro hit by NT$345 million cryptocurrency hack
  • Texas gastroenterology and surgical practice victim of ransomware attack
  • Romanian Citizen Pleads Guilty to ‘Swatting’ Numerous Members of Congress, Churches, and Former U.S. President
  • North Dakota Enacts Financial Data Security and Data Breach Notification Requirements
  • Pro-Ukraine hacker group Black Owl poses ‘major threat’ to Russia, Kaspersky says
  • Vanta bug exposed customers’ data to other customers
  • Lyrix Ransomware Targets Windows Users with Advanced Evasion Techniques
  • Central Maine Healthcare tackles suspected cybersecurity issue; hospitals remain open

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

  • Florida ban on kids using social media likely unconstitutional, judge rules
  • State Data Minimization Laws Spark Compliance Uncertainty
  • Supreme Court Agrees to Clarify Emergency Situations Where Police Don’t Need Warrant
  • Stewart Baker vs. Orin Kerr on “The Digital Fourth Amendment”
  • Fears Grow Over ICE’s Reach Into Schools
  • Resource: HoganLovells Asia-Pacific Data, Privacy and Cybersecurity Guide 2025
  • She Got an Abortion. So A Texas Cop Used 83,000 Cameras to Track Her Down.

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.