DataBreaches.Net

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

Yahoo! UK fined £250,000 by ICO after systemic failures put customer data at risk

Posted on June 12, 2018 by Dissent

From the ICO’s office:

Yahoo! UK Services Limited has been fined £250,000 by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) following a cyber-attack in November 2014. The incident was publicly disclosed in September 2016, almost two years after it had taken place.

Because of when the breach happened, the ICO’s investigation was carried out under the Data Protection Act 1998.

It considered the circumstances under which the personal data of approximately 500 million international users of Yahoo!’s services was placed at risk. In particular, the ICO focused on the 515,121 UK accounts, that Yahoo! UK Services Limited – based in London – had responsibility for as a data controller.

The compromised personal data included names, email addresses, telephone numbers, dates of birth, hashed passwords, and encrypted or unencrypted security questions and answers.

ICO Deputy Commissioner of Operations, James Dipple-Johnstone, said in a blog about the ICO investigation:

“People expect that organisations will keep their personal data safe from malicious intruders who seek to exploit it.

“The failings our investigation identified are not what we expect from a company that had ample opportunity to implement appropriate measures, and potentially stop UK citizens’ data being compromised.”

In summary, the investigation found that:

  • Yahoo! UK Services Ltd failed to take appropriate technical and organisational measures to protect the data of 515,121 customers against exfiltration by unauthorised persons;
  • The company failed to take appropriate measures to ensure that its data processor – Yahoo! Inc – complied with the appropriate data protection standards;
  • It also failed to ensure appropriate monitoring was in place to protect the credentials of Yahoo! employees with access to Yahoo! customer data;
  • The inadequacies found had been in place for a long period of time without being discovered or addressed.

The ICO considered the breach to be a serious contravention of Principle 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998, which states that appropriate technical and organisational measures must be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data.

Under the 1998 Act, the ICO has the power to impose a maximum fine of £500,000.

Mr Dipple-Johnstone said:

“Cyber-attacks will happen, that’s just a fact, and we fully accept that they are a criminal act. But as the intruders become more sophisticated and more determined, organisations need to make it as difficult as possible for them to get in. But they must also remember that it’s no good locking the door if you leave the key under the mat.”

Since the ICO investigation, data protection law has changed. The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into effect on 25 May 2018.

Mr Dipple-Johnstone added:

“Under the GDPR and the new Data Protection Act 2018, individuals have stronger rights and more control and choice over their personal data. If organisations, especially well-resourced, experienced ones, do not properly safeguard their customers’ personal data, they may find customers taking their business elsewhere.”

Category: Business SectorHackOf Note

Post navigation

← Data leak hits Trident Group, cyber crime cell registers FIR
Dixons Says Almost 6 Million Cards Targeted in Cyberattack →

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

  • Almost one year later, U.S. Dermatology Partners is still not being very transparent about their 2024 breach
  • Oklahoma Expands its Security Breach Notification Law
  • Ransomware group Gunra claims to have exfiltrated 450 million patient records from American Hospital Dubai.
  • North Shore University Sleep Disorders Center employee charged with secretly recording patients in restrooms
  • 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

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.