DataBreaches.Net

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

The DOJ Criminal Division’s Laptop Computer Encryption Program and Practices – Audit Report

Posted on April 2, 2010 by Dissent

From the summary of findings in The Criminal Division’s Laptop Computer Encryption Program and Practices, Audit Report 10-23, March 2010:

Criminal Division-Owned Laptop Computers

Our review found that of the 40 laptops we tested for encryption software, 10 did not have encryption, and 9 of those 10 did not have Windows passwords enabled. All of the unencrypted laptops were in one Criminal Division section, the International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP), and all of those laptops contained sensitive departmental data.

In addition to our testing of laptops for encryption, we found weaknesses in other areas of the Criminal Division’s laptop encryption program. We determined that at least 43 laptops did not comply with DOJ standards and Criminal Division requirements for laptop security settings. Also, documentation was not maintained to verify the successful installation of whole disk encryption software for all laptop computers. In addition, the Criminal Division was unable to produce an accurate inventory of the universe of laptop computers it owns from ARGIS, DOJ’s official property management system.

Non-Criminal Division-Owned Laptop Computers

We found serious deficiencies with the [Offices, Boards, and Divisions] OBD 47 contractor-owned laptops. Specifically, seven out of nine OBD 47 contractors we tested processed sensitive Department data on laptops without encryption.

In addition to our testing of contractor laptops for encryption, we found weaknesses in oversight of data security policies for the Criminal Division’s contractors. For both the Mega 3 and OBD 47 contracts, we found that these contracts did not have the required security clause requiring encryption, and the Criminal Division had not implemented alternative controls to compensate for the contract deficiencies.

The entire audit can be found here (pdf).


Related:

  • US company with access to biggest telecom firms uncovers breach by nation-state hackers
  • Former General Manager for U.S. Defense Contractor Pleads Guilty to Selling Stolen Trade Secrets to Russian Broker
  • The 4TB time bomb: when EY's cloud went public (and what it taught us)
  • Alan Turing institute launches new mission to protect UK from cyber-attacks
  • Some lower-tier ransomware gangs have formed a new RaaS alliance -- or have they? (1)
  • Another plastic surgery practice fell prey to a cyberattack that acquired patient photos and info
Category: Commentaries and AnalysesGovernment SectorOf Note

Post navigation

← NV: Washoe County School District notifies parents of stolen student info
BCBS of Tennessee still notifying individuals of breach →

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.