DataBreaches.Net

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

Target ignored its own warning system – Bloomberg (updated)

Posted on March 13, 2014 by Dissent

I’m watching  Josh Tyrangiel of Bloomberg on CBS News this morning reporting that prior to its massive breach, Target ignored the warning alerts generated by its  FireEye system.  Target hasn’t responded to Bloomberg’s questions as to why the warning e-mails generated by the system were ignored.

Interestingly, we heard something similar in the Neiman-Marcus breach where hackers kept triggering alarms, but the almost 60,000 alarms were ignored by personnel  who viewed them as false positives.

Update: Jim Finkle and Susan Heavey of Reuters have more on this and Target’s response, including comments by experts that it’s completely understandable that personnel might ignore the malware alerts from FireEye:

FireEye has a function that automatically deletes malicious software, but it had been turned off by Target’s security team before the hackers’ attack, the Bloomberg report said, citing two people who audited FireEye’s role after the breach.

Shook and Strand said that the vast majority of FireEye’s customers turn off that functionality because it is known for incorrectly flagging data as malware, which can halt email and Web traffic for business users.

“FireEye … is cutting edge,” Strand said. “But it takes love and care and feeding. You have to watch it and monitor it.”


Related:

  • Hacking Formula 1: Accessing Max Verstappen's passport and PII through FIA bugs
  • Protected health information of 462,000 members of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana involved in Conduent data breach
  • TX: Kaufman County Faces Cybersecurity Attack: Courthouse Computer Operations Disrupted
  • Hotel and Casino near Las Vegas Strip suffers data breach, documents say
  • Bombay High Court Orders Department of Telecommunications to Block Medusa Accounts After Generali Insurance Data Breach
  • Attorney General James Announces Settlement with Wojeski & Company Accounting Firm
Category: Business SectorHackID TheftOf NoteU.S.

Post navigation

← EC-Council notifies members of recent breach
TX: Resident Finds Unshredded Copies of Personal Documents in Apartment Dumpster →

6 thoughts on “Target ignored its own warning system – Bloomberg (updated)”

  1. Anonymous says:
    March 13, 2014 at 9:40 am

    Because too many alerts are “just noise”. FireEye alerts are noise because it is too hard to react to them.

  2. Anonymous says:
    March 13, 2014 at 9:42 am

    They are ignored because there isn’t a mechanism to react to them.

    The FireEye hangover is what you get after you’ve bought FireEye but cannot react to what it is telling you.

    People buy the product with no way to act upon the alerts. This is what FireEye neglects to tell you when you buy their product.

  3. Josh jones says:
    March 13, 2014 at 6:04 pm

    It would be interesting to hear someone from FireEye comment to that.

    1. Dissent says:
      March 13, 2014 at 6:23 pm

      Yeah, but what can they really say other than, “What do we need to do – dance naked on the table to get your attention?”

  4. Anonymous says:
    March 13, 2014 at 11:35 pm

    “Let your stolen data reach the sky.FireEye!”

  5. Anonymous says:
    March 14, 2014 at 2:34 pm

    Malware.binary overload. All FireEye customers know that feeling, $1.6m for a generic message whilst the founders become billionaires on a cash cow.

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

  • Suspected Russian hacker reportedly detained in Thailand, faces possible US extradition
  • Did you hear the one about the ransom victim who made a ransom installment payment after they were told that it wouldn’t be accepted?
  • 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

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

  • Lawmakers Warn Governors About Sharing Drivers’ Data with Federal Government
  • 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

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.