DataBreaches.Net

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

“Small” breach, big impact, redux

Posted on August 29, 2015 by Dissent

In November 2013, I blogged about the case of a privacy breach at Northern Inyo Hospital that was so devastating to the patient that she was going to move away. The breach was a willful insider breach that impacted a custody dispute.

That same year, and unbeknownst to most people, there was a lawsuit filed over another insider breach that similarly devastated the patient involved. This one involved the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center and an employee of OB/GYN Dr. John Edwards accessing the system’s database and then disseminating sensitive information about an employee-patient, Norma Lozano. Dr. Edwards is affiliated with UCLA, but Ms Lozano was not his patient and there was no reason for anyone in his office to access her records. According to media reports, an unnamed temporary employee of Dr. Edwards, allegedly accessed Lozano’s medical records in September 2012, made copies with her cell phone and sent them to Lozano’s former boyfriend — the father of Lozano’s then unborn child — and another person.

Lozano sued UCLA, and her case made it to court this past week. You can read a recap of the case on Patch, MyNewsLA.

It is not clear to me whether this incident was ever reported to the California Department of Public Health and of so, what action the CDPH took in response. What is disturbing is that in its defense, UCLA claims the responsibility lies with Dr. Edwards for providing his password to his temporary employee.

But does it? While I agree that Dr. Edwards had an obligation to train his employees and establish access controls and monitor his employees’ conduct, shouldn’t the hospital, recognizing the risk of snooping and inappropriate access, have done more to prevent such situations? Should only celebrities have higher levels of data protection? I don’t think so.

It is not clear to me why Dr. Edwards was dropped from the case as a defendant, and why the unnamed employee was not also sued, but I hope everyone takes note that a major hospital system seems to be saying that it’s not their responsibility to protect you from improper access to your records from employees of its affiliated doctors.

Think about whether that is a satisfactory situation.

 

 

Related posts:

  • UCLA Health discloses network breach potentially affecting 4.5 million patients
  • Small-Scale Violations of Medical Privacy Often Cause the Most Harm
  • UCLA Health System notifies 16,288 of stolen hard drive
  • UCLA Health notifying patients of stolen laptop containing personal health information; third breach report in as many months?
Category: Breach IncidentsCommentaries and AnalysesHealth DataU.S.

Post navigation

← More reaction to the Third Circuit opinion in FTC v. Wyndham
Boston University notifies medical research participants after server compromise →

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.