DataBreaches.Net

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

UMass settles potential HIPAA violations following 2013 malware infection

Posted on November 22, 2016 by Dissent

The University of Massachusetts Amherst (UMass) has agreed to settle potential violations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy and Security Rules. The settlement includes a corrective action plan and a monetary payment of $650,000, which is reflective of the fact that the University operated at a financial loss in 2015.

On June 18, 2013, UMass reported to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights (OCR) that a workstation in its Center for Language, Speech, and Hearing (the “Center”) was infected with a malware program, which resulted in the impermissible disclosure of electronic protected health information (ePHI) of 1,670 individuals, including names, addresses, social security numbers, dates of birth, health insurance information, diagnoses and procedure codes. The University determined that the malware was a generic remote access Trojan that infiltrated their system, providing impermissible access to ePHI, because UMass did not have a firewall in place.

OCR’s investigation indicated the following potential violations of the HIPAA Rules:

  • UMass had failed to designate all of its health care components when hybridizing, incorrectly determining that while its University Health Services was a covered health care component, other components, including the Center where the breach of ePHI occurred, were not covered components.  Because UMass failed to designate the Center a health care component, UMass did not implement policies and procedures at the Center to ensure compliance with the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules. (Note:  The HIPAA Privacy Rule permits legal entities that have some functions that are covered by HIPAA and some that are not to elect to become a “hybrid entity.”  To successfully “hybridize,” the entity must designate in writing the health care components that perform functions covered by HIPAA and assure HIPAA compliance for its covered health care components.)
  • UMass failed to implement technical security measures at the Center to guard against unauthorized access to ePHI transmitted over an electronic communications network by ensuring that firewalls were in place at the Center.
  • Finally, UMass did not conduct an accurate and thorough risk analysis until September 2015.

“HIPAA’s security requirements are an important tool for protecting both patient data and business operations against threats such as malware,” said OCR Director Jocelyn Samuels. “Entities that elect hybrid status must properly designate their health care components and ensure that those components are in compliance with HIPAA’s privacy and security requirements.”

In addition to the monetary settlement, UMass has agreed to a corrective action plan that requires the organization to conduct an enterprise-wide risk analysis; develop and implement a risk management plan; revise its policies and procedures, and train its staff on these policies and procedures.  The Resolution Agreement and Corrective Action Plan may be found on the OCR website at http://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/compliance-enforcement/agreements/umass.

SOURCE: HHS

Category: Health DataOf NoteU.S.

Post navigation

← @Kapustkiy and @CyberZeist hack a human rights foundation (UPDATED)
Madison Square Garden Company Alerts Customers of Payment Card Data Breach →

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

  • Marquette County Medical Care Facility discloses data breach
  • Industry Letter – June 23, 2025: Impact to Financial Sector of Ongoing Global Conflicts
  • MNGI Digestive Health settles class action lawsuit stemming from BlackCat attack
  • Four REvil ransomware members released after time served on carding charges
  • Why Dumping Sensitive Data on Network Shares is a Liability
  • A militarily degraded Iran may turn to asymmetrical warfare – raising risk of proxy and cyber attacks
  • Pro-Russian hackers disrupt Dutch government websites ahead of NATO summit
  • Iran-Linked Threat Actors Leak Visitors and Athletes’ Data from Saudi Games
  • UK: Oxford City Council still investigating cyberattack from earlier this month
  • Steelmaker Nucor Says Hackers Stole Data in Recent Attack

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

  • How Internet of Things devices affect your privacy – even when they’re not yours
  • Sky Views Personal Data as a Potential Weapon in IPTV Piracy War
  • Florida Used a Nationwide Surveillance Camera Network 250 Times To Aid in Immigration Arrests
  • Federal Court Strikes Down HIPAA Reproductive Health Care Privacy Rule
  • The Markup caught 4 more states sharing personal health data with Big Tech
  • Privacy in the Big Sky State: Montana’s Consumer Privacy Law Gets Amended
  • UK Passes Data Use and Access Regulation Bill

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