DataBreaches.Net

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

Short-term monitoring inadequate for Banner, Anthem data breaches – BizWest Editorial

Posted on August 19, 2016 by Dissent

If BizWest Media‘s editors think that what Banner and Anthem offered in the wake of their breaches isn’t enough, they’d likely be totally appalled that Athens Orthopedic Clinic hasn’t offered its patients any credit monitoring.  Here’s how the BizWest Media editorial begins:

Short-term monitoring inadequate for Banner, Anthem data breaches

It’s not enough.

Banner Health recently revealed in letters to customers that “cyber attackers may have gained unauthorized access to information stored on a limited number of Banner Health computer servers.” Accessed data may have included patient names, birth dates, Social Security numbers, addresses, physician names, dates of service, clinical information, health-insurance information, members of patient health plans and more.

Banner’s announcement came quickly — three weeks after it says it discovered the breach — but the remedy is sorely lacking. Banner has offered those affected one year of free credit and identity monitoring. That falls short of the two years offered by Anthem BlueCross BlueShield after records of more than 70 million customers were exposed in 2015. Anthem now has offered credit and identity protection for life — but only if those affected remain Anthem members. Sign up for a new plan and the protection goes away.

Clearly, credit and identity protection for one year is inadequate. Even two years doesn’t cut it, not when data that’s been compromised includes Social Security numbers, the No. 1 data point needed to initiate new credit. Add in all of the other information exposed in the breaches, and there’s little left to the imagination for hackers.

Anthem’s current model of cutting someone off from credit and identity monitoring if they switch plans also is irresponsible.

Read the full editorial on BizWest.

Anyone care to estimate how many times I proposed entities pool their resources to provide credit monitoring for everyone?

Now consider this finding from a recent Ponemon study:

 To minimize the financial consequences, some healthcare organizations have purchased data breach insurance policies. One-third of healthcare organizations have a data breach insurance policy and 29 percent of business associates have a cyber breach insurance policy. Fifty-seven percent of healthcare organizations and 52 percent of business associates say they purchase up to $5 million in coverage. Insurance typically covers external attacks by cyber criminals (56 percent of healthcare respondents and 57 percent of business associates) and incidents affecting business partners, vendors or other third parties that have access to the organizations information assets (48 percent of healthcare respondents and 52 percent of business associates).

What happens to the patients or members of the two-thirds of healthcare organizations that don’t have insurance? We need only look at Athens Orthopedic Clinic’s claims that it cannot afford to provide any credit monitoring services to get an example of how patients may spend the rest of their lives having to protect themselves with no real help from the organization they trusted their information to.

So…. if car owners are required to carry liability insurance in many states, should entities be required to carry insurance for data breaches?

 


Related:

  • Canadian woman stuck since 2021 in Mauritius after passport withheld
  • ‘People have had to move house’: Inside the British Library, two years on from devastating cyber attack
  • Two years after an audit highlighted significant concerns, North Salem Central School District leaves sensitive student data at risk
  • Landmark civil penalty of AU$5.8 million issued under Australia’s Privacy Act
  • How many courts have had sealed and sensitive files exposed by one vendor's error?
  • Legal Aid Agency chief admits difficulties understanding impact of cyberattack
Category: Commentaries and Analyses

Post navigation

← Newkirk Products, Inc. Provides Update to Notice of Data Breach
T-Mobile’s Czech subsidiary gets CZK 3.6 million fine for inadequate safeguards →

1 thought on “Short-term monitoring inadequate for Banner, Anthem data breaches – BizWest Editorial”

  1. looeeznga says:
    August 20, 2016 at 11:00 am

    The only answer to this question?

    Hell yes, they should.

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.