DataBreaches.Net

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

Security Researcher Comments on HIPAA Security Rule

Posted on March 20, 2025 by Dissent
Image: AI-generated.

As long-time readers know, DataBreaches has occasionally run into difficulties when trying to helpfully notify entities of their data leaks or breaches. In other cases, independent researchers have also reported frustration with trying to get entities to respond to responsible disclosures. More often than not, initial attempts at disclosure are ignored or go to spam or trash. At other times, we may be accused of being extortionists or spammers.

Good faith security researchers need protection and entities need to get their cybersecurity hygiene acts together and create systems to receive and process notifications or disclosures.

Some of us have raised the issue with HHS in response to their request for comments on proposed HIPAA Security Rules changes.

Adam Shostack writes:

A group of us have urged HHS to require that health care providers to act on (and facilitate reporting of) security issues by good faith cybersecurity researchers.

The core of what we recommend is that HHS should require cooperation with Good Faith researchers.

  1. All regulated entities should be required to enable people to report security issues in a way that’s easy to discover and aligned with standards.
  2. All regulated entities that produce software should be required to publish a vulnerability disclosure policy.
  3. Regulated entities should be discouraged from threatening Good Faith researchers
  4. Regulated entities should be rewarded for positive engagement with Good Faith researchers
  5. HHS should add “insecure operations” to the wall of shame, including threatening Good Faith researchers or possibly even failing to engage in Good Faith.
  6. Receipt of a Good Faith report must be tracked and managed, but not all reports rise to the level of an incident.

We chose to discuss regulated entities (rather ‘covered’ ones) because we believe these should be applied to those entering a BAA.

The comments are by a set of security researchers including myself, Jack Cable, Dissent Doe, Josiah Dykstra, Ph.D., Fred Jennings, and Chloé Messdaghi on the HIPAA Security Rule Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to Strengthen Cybersecurity for Electronic Protected Health Information. Lastly, the official comment doesn’t include Chloe as a contributor because of an oversight, this version does.

Don’t miss the snarky background stories!

Related posts:

  • HIPAA Security Rule Facility Access Controls – What are they and how do you implement them?
  • Protect Good Faith Security Research Globally in Proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty
Category: Commentaries and AnalysesHIPAAOf Note

Post navigation

← Department of Defense civilian employee pleads guilty to taking classified documents
Former University of Michigan Football Quarterbacks Coach and Co-Offensive Coordinator Indicted on Charges of Unauthorized Access to Computers and Aggravated Identity Theft →

1 thought on “Security Researcher Comments on HIPAA Security Rule”

  1. Jake from Statefarm says:
    March 20, 2025 at 6:34 pm

    They should also be more specific on encryption. Database encryption or disk encryption…

Comments are closed.

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

  • Integrated Oncology Network victim of phishing attack; multiple locations affected (2)
  • HHS’ Office for Civil Rights Settles HIPAA Privacy and Security Rule Investigation with Deer Oaks Behavioral Health for $225k and a Corrective Action Plan
  • HB1127 Explained: North Dakota’s New InfoSec Requirements for Financial Corporations
  • Credit reports among personal data of 190,000 breached, put for sale on Dark Web; IT vendor fined
  • Five youths arrested on suspicion of phishing
  • 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)

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.