DataBreaches.Net

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

NHS-backed org reacted to GitHub leak disclosure with legal threats and police call, complains IT pro

Posted on May 14, 2021 by Dissent

Gareth Corfield has a commentary on a recent case where a researcher found himself threatened legally.  It begins:

IT pro Rob Dyke says an NHS-backed company not only threatened him with legal action after he flagged up an exposed GitHub repository containing credentials and insecure code, it even called the police on him.

Dyke, who has previously appeared in this organ, in March said he received letters from lawyers representing the Apperta Foundation after he told the business he had found a public repo containing the source code for an insecure online portal and its database containing usernames, hashed passwords, email addresses, and API keys.

Read more on The Register.  This case had attracted a lot of attention on Twitter and support for Dyke.  Corfield’s comments, however, are somewhat more conservative. Here are part of his comments, with this site’s reaction:

Vuln disclosure can be a fraught process. Someone in Dyke’s position in future may be better off asking a trusted organisation or confidante to disclose a security hole on his behalf rather than doing it personally, especially in a situation where an existing relationship has turned sour for whatever reason. Bug bounty schemes and similar vuln disclosure programs are the best methods where available as there should be a well-defined process for passing on evidence and details in a way that doesn’t end up with a report to the police.

That researchers need shields to disclose responsibly is a problem, and one that bug bounty schemes do not solve because bug bounty schemes require nondisclosure and leave the researcher stuck about not making something public when it would be of public concern.

Telling an organization that has screwed up its security, especially its lawyers, that you will retain a copy of the leaked data will rarely trigger a positive reaction. Keeping data post-remediation shouldn’t be the norm, we think.

What if the researcher knows that the entity is not going to disclose a breach or situation publicly and that people should be notified? Does The Register still think the data should be destroyed?

What about giving the data to HaveIBeenPwned or other breach leak sites? Should that be taboo or illegal?

There’s a lot to think about, but having to defend yourself when you’re just trying to disclose responsibly will only discourage responsible disclosure.

Related posts:

  • Growing Pains: As HackerOne has grown, is it harming what it intended to help? Part 1.
Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← Chemical distributor pays $4.4 million to DarkSide ransomware
Toshiba unit hacked by DarkSide, conglomerate to undergo strategic review →

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

  • Alert: Scattered Spider has added North American airline and transportation organizations to their target list
  • Northern Light Health patients affected by security incident at Compumedics; 10 healthcare entities affected
  • Privacy commissioner reviewing reported Ontario Health atHome data breach
  • CMS warns Medicare providers of fraud scheme
  • Ex-student charged with wave of cyber attacks on Sydney uni
  • Detaining Hackers Before the Crime? Tamil Nadu’s Supreme Court Approves Preventive Custody for Cyber Offenders
  • Potential Cyberattack Scrambles Columbia University Computer Systems
  • 222,000 customer records allegedly from Manhattan Parking Group leaked
  • Breaches have consequences (sometimes) (1)
  • Kansas City Man Pleads Guilty for Hacking a Non-Profit

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

  • 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
  • European Commission publishes its plan to enable more effective law enforcement access to data
  • Sacred Secrets: The Biblical Case for Privacy and Data Protection
  • Microsoft’s Departing Privacy Chief Calls for Regulator Outreach
  • Nestle USA Settles Suit Over Job-Application Medical Questions

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.