DataBreaches.Net

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

New HHS guidance on Ransomware and HIPAA

Posted on July 14, 2016 by Dissent

I hate it when I tweet something but forget to  post it. In today’s installment of “Smacking Myself in the Forehead,” I remember to tell readers that HHS has issued a new guidance on ransomware and HIPAA.

A recent U.S. Government interagency report indicates that, on average, there have been 4,000 daily ransomware attacks since early 2016 (a 300% increase over the 1,000 daily ransomware attacks reported in 2015).1 Ransomware exploits human and technical weaknesses to gain access to an organization’s technical infrastructure in order to deny the organization access to its own data by encrypting that data. However, there are measures known to be effective to prevent the introduction of ransomware and to recover from a ransomware attack. This document describes ransomware attack prevention and recovery from a healthcare sector perspective, including the role the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) has in assisting HIPAA covered entities and business associates to prevent and recover from ransomware attacks, and how HIPAA breach notification processes should be managed in response to a ransomware attack.

You can find the guidance here (pdf).

A few points of note about the guidance:

While the question as to whether an incident is a reportable incident under HIPAA is fact-specific (see below), a ransomware incident is, undoubtedly, a security incident under HIPAA:

The presence of ransomware (or any malware) on a covered entity’s or business associate’s computer systems is a security incident under the HIPAA Security Rule. A security incident is defined as the attempted or successful unauthorized access, use, disclosure, modification, or destruction of information or interference with system operations in an information system. See the definition of security incident at 45 C.F.R. 164.304. Once the ransomware is detected, the covered entity or business associate must initiate its security incident and response and reporting procedures. See 45 C.F.R. 164.308(a)(6).

But do you need to report it under HIPAA? From the guidance:

A breach under the HIPAA Rules is defined as, “…the acquisition, access, use, or disclosure of PHI in a manner not permitted under the [HIPAA Privacy Rule] which compromises the security or privacy of the PHI.” See 45 C.F.R. 164.402.6.

When electronic protected health information (ePHI) is encrypted as the result of a ransomware attack, a breach has occurred because the ePHI encrypted by the ransomware was acquired (i.e., unauthorized individuals have taken possession or control of the information), and thus is a “disclosure” not permitted under the HIPAA Privacy Rule.

Unless the covered entity or business associate can demonstrate that there is a “…low probability that the PHI has been compromised,” based on the factors set forth in the Breach Notification Rule, a breach of PHI is presumed to have occurred. The entity must then comply with the applicable breach notification provisions, including notification to affected individuals without unreasonable delay, to the Secretary of HHS, and to the media (for breaches affecting over 500 individuals) in accordance with HIPAA breach notification requirements. See 45 C.F.R. 164.400-414.

Although this guidance does not address the question of whether HHS recommends paying any ransom, a previous interagency technical guidance does address this question:

There are serious risks to consider before paying the ransom. We do not encourage paying a ransom. We understand that when businesses are faced with an inability to function, executives will evaluate all options to protect their shareholders, employees, and customers. As you contemplate this choice, consider the following risks:

  • Paying a ransom does not guarantee an organization will regain access to their data; in fact, some individuals or organizations were never provided with decryption keys after having paid a ransom.
  • Some victims who paid the demand have reported being targeted again by cyber actors.
  • After paying the originally demanded ransom, some victims have been asked to pay more to get the promised decryption key.
  • Paying could inadvertently encourage this criminal business model.

Those are all valid points and concerns, as I acknowledged in another post this morning as to whether entities should pay ransom demands. But there’s a difference between your operations being affected and patient data being sold, so each case – and the consequences – need to be carefully considered.


Related:

  • IVF provider Genea notifies patients about the cyberattack earlier this year.
  • Key figure behind major Russian-speaking cybercrime forum targeted in Ukraine
  • Clorox Files $380M Suit Alleging Cognizant Gave Hackers Passwords in Catastrophic 2023 Cyberattack
  • #StopRansomware: Interlock
  • Suspected XSS Forum Admin Arrested in Ukraine
  • Two more entities have folded after ransomware attacks
Category: Health DataMalwareOf NoteU.S.

Post navigation

← Almost half of Irish businesses would hide data breach from customers
MT: State health employees fired after giving data to lawmakers →

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

  • Scattered Spider Hijacks VMware ESXi to Deploy Ransomware on Critical U.S. Infrastructure
  • Hacker group “Silent Crow” claims responsibility for cyberattack on Russia’s Aeroflot
  • AIIMS ORBO Portal Vulnerability Exposing Sensitive Organ Donor Data Discovered by Researcher
  • Two Data Breaches in Three Years: McKenzie Health
  • Scattered Spider is running a VMware ESXi hacking spree
  • BreachForums — the one that went offline in April — reappears with a new founder/owner
  • Fans React After NASCAR Confirms Ransomware Breach
  • Allianz Life says ‘majority’ of customers’ personal data stolen in cyberattack (1)
  • Infinite Services notifying employees and patients of limited ransomware attack
  • The safe place for women to talk wasn’t so safe: hackers leak 13,000 user photos and IDs from the Tea app

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

  • Congress tries to outlaw AI that jacks up prices based on what it knows about you
  • Microsoft’s controversial Recall feature is now blocked by Brave and AdGuard
  • Trump Administration Issues AI Action Plan and Series of AI Executive Orders
  • Indonesia asked to reassess data privacy terms in new U.S. trade deal
  • Meta Denies Tracking Menstrual Data in Flo Health Privacy Trial
  • Wikipedia seeks to shield contributors from UK law targeting online anonymity
  • British government reportedlu set to back down on secret iCloud backdoor after US pressure

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.