DataBreaches.Net

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

Guardant notifies patients of unintended information exposure going back to October 2020

Posted on May 6, 2024 by Dissent

A notification by Guardant Health, Inc. in California (“Guardant”) caught DataBreaches’ eye yesterday.

Guardant is a laboratory that performs cancer screening tests on samples received from its physician and hospital partners. Patient information that they received may have been inadvertently exposed between October 5, 2020 and February 29, 2024.

They explain:

Guardant recently determined that a file containing certain personal information related to samples collected in late 2019 and 2020 was inadvertently made available in a publicly accessible online platform. Guardant promptly removed the file from the online platform and initiated an investigation. The investigation revealed that a Guardant employee inadvertently transferred the file to the platform. The file was believed to have been transferred in October 2020, and on March 4, 2024, we were able to determine, based on a review of available records of activity, that the file was copied by unidentified third parties between September 8, 2023 and February 28, 2024.

They do not explain whether their access logs went back to October 2020 or if they were unable to determine if there was any access prior to September 8, 2023. Nor do they explain why it took them almost six months to discover that the file was being accessed by unidentified parties.

The information contained in the file varied per individual but may have included some or all of the following: names, ages, medical record and identification numbers, and medical information such as treatment information and dates, and test results. Significantly, no financial information or Social Security numbers were contained in the file.

They add:

As general good practice, it is recommended that you regularly monitor statements from your medical providers for any irregularities.

It’s also generally good practice to monitor and audit your system and files. How did this error go undetected for more than three years?

Their notification, submitted to the California Attorney General’s Office, does not disclose how many patients had data accessed by unidentified third parties. The incident has not yet appeared on HHS’s public breach tool.

DataBreaches contacted Guardant yesterday seeking additional details and an explanation of why the error went undetected for more than three years. No reply has been received by publication.

 


Related:

  • Resource: NY DFS Issues New Cybersecurity Guidance to Address Risks Associated with the Use of Third-Party Service Providers
  • TX: Kaufman County Faces Cybersecurity Attack: Courthouse Computer Operations Disrupted
  • Bombay High Court Orders Department of Telecommunications to Block Medusa Accounts After Generali Insurance Data Breach
  • Cyber-Attack On Bectu’s Parent Union Sparks UK National Security Concerns
  • Attorney General James Announces Settlement with Wojeski & Company Accounting Firm
  • JFL Lost Up to $800,000 Weekly After Cyberattack, CEO Says No Patient or Staff Data Was Compromised
Category: Commentaries and AnalysesExposureHealth DataU.S.

Post navigation

← More than 380,000 additional NYC students had info breached in 2022 Illuminate Education hack
Will feds reveal anything exciting about LockBit and LockBitSupp? (YES!) →

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

  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Almost two years later, Alpha Omega Winery notifies those affected by a data breach.
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms MFSA liability in data leak case, orders regulator to shoulder costs
  • A jailed hacking kingpin reveals all about the gang that left a trail of destruction
  • Army gynecologist took secret videos of patients during intimate exams, lawsuit says

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

  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[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.