DataBreaches.Net

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

Why Did Change Health Lowball Its 1st Breach Report to Feds?

Posted on August 2, 2024 by Dissent

Marianne Kolbasuk McGee of HealthInfoSec  poses a question about why Change Healthcare’s report to HHS indicated that 500 patients were affected when they already admitted that there were millions. Why use such a low placeholder instead of a higher number when it has been months since they discovered the breach and they must have some partial numbers that are already significantly higher than 500?  McGee writes:

Some legal experts were surprised by Change Healthcare’s super low estimate in the breach report submitted to HHS OCR, especially considering the circumstances of the high-profile ransomware attack.

“This is unusual,” said regulatory attorney Sara Goldstein of the law firm BakerHostetler. “Typically the ‘500 or 501 individual placeholder’ is used when covered entities or business associates are providing notification within 60 days of discovery but have not identified the total number of individuals requiring notification,” she said. […] “UHG publicly stated that the incident involved information for ‘a substantial proportion of people in America. Based on these statements, one would have expected that the initial notice to HHS OCR would have included a much larger number,” Goldstein said.

Read more at BankInfoSecurity.

Unlike Goldstein, DataBreaches was not surprised at all to see the 500 placeholder, and has an answer to the question, “Why did Change Health lowball its 1st breach report to feds?”

The answer is that HHS OCR has never taken enforcement action against any entity for using a placeholder, even months after the entity first discovered a breach. As long as HHS doesn’t enforce and penalize, why should any entity not take advantage and use just a placeholder to delay announcing what might be staggering numbers?

As reported on Breaches.net, DataBreaches did not get any replies when this site emailed and called HHS OCR in January and February to ask how they follow up when an entity uses a 500 or 501 placeholder. Getting no answer at all, DataBreaches filed under FOIA in March. No substantive reply has been received as yet.

No related posts.

Category: Breach LawsCommentaries and AnalysesHealth DataHIPAA

Post navigation

← Cencora confirms patient health info stolen in February attack
Ever More Toxic Ransomware Brands Breed Lone Wolf Operators →

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

  • Russia Jailed Hacker Who Worked for Ukrainian Intelligence to Launch Cyberattacks on Critical Infrastructure
  • Kentfield Hospital victim of cyberattack by World Leaks, patient data involved
  • India’s Max Financial says hacker accessed customer data from its insurance unit
  • Brazil’s central bank service provider hacked, $140M stolen
  • Iranian and Pro-Regime Cyberattacks Against Americans (2011-Present)
  • Nigerian National Pleads Guilty to International Fraud Scheme that Defrauded Elderly U.S. Victims
  • Nova Scotia Power Data Breach Exposed Information of 280,000 Customers
  • No need to hack when it’s leaking: Brandt Kettwick Defense edition
  • SK Telecom to be fined for late data breach report, ordered to waive cancellation fees, criminal investigation into them launched
  • Louis Vuitton Korea suffers cyberattack as customer data leaked

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

  • On July 7, Gemini AI will access your WhatsApp and more. Learn how to disable it on Android.
  • German court awards Facebook user €5,000 for data protection violations
  • Record-Breaking $1.55M CCPA Settlement Against Health Information Website Publisher
  • Ninth Circuit Reviews Website Tracking Class Actions and the Reach of California’s Privacy Law
  • US healthcare offshoring: Navigating patient data privacy laws and regulations
  • Data breach reveals Catwatchful ‘stalkerware’ is spying on thousands of phones
  • Google Trackers: What You Can Actually Escape And What You Can’t

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.