DataBreaches.Net

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

FTC Approves Consent Order in CVS Case

Posted on June 24, 2009 by Dissent

Following a public comment period, the Commission has approved a final consent order in the CVS Caremark case involving failure to adequately secure customers’ medical and financial data.

Prior coverage of the case can be found here. Additional documents on the case can be found here. According to the complaint, CVS Caremark did not implement reasonable policies and procedures to dispose securely of personal information, did not adequately train employees, did not use reasonable measures to assess compliance with its policies and procedures for disposing of personal information, and did not employ a reasonable process for discovering and remedying risks to personal information.

Of particular interest (to me, anyway) was the FTC’s response to comments by the World Privacy Forum to the then-proposed order. In their response to the WPF’s questions and comments, the FTC wrote, in part:

Finally, you ask the Commission to require CVS Caremark to notify consumers whose information was discarded in the dumpster incidents. The Commission considers a variety of factors in deciding whether notice to consumers is an appropriate remedy in a particular case, such as whether consumer victims are reasonably identifiable and whether the notice would be likely to benefit consumers under the circumstances. Here, the Commission has determined that the remedies in the proposed order – including implementing and maintaining a comprehensive information security program and obtaining independent assessments of its effectiveness every other year for 20 years – will ensure appropriate protections for consumers.

Well, no. Consumers whose records were just improperly discarded should have been notified so that they can decide whether they want to continue doing business with CVS. Future security protections do nothing for those whose records were already exposed. Although I have tremendous respect for the FTC, I think they took the easy way out on this one instead of insisting that CVS notify everyone whose records were involved.


Related:

  • UN Cybercrime Convention to be signed in Hanoi to tackle global offences
  • Two U.K. teenagers appear in court over Transport of London cyber attack
  • ModMed revealed they were victims of a cyberattack in July. Then some data showed up for sale.
  • 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
  • Bombay High Court Orders Department of Telecommunications to Block Medusa Accounts After Generali Insurance Data Breach
Category: Breach IncidentsExposureHealth DataOf NotePaperU.S.

Post navigation

← FTC Approves Final Consent Order in CVS Caremark Case
FBHive.com Facebook Exploit →

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

  • 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
  • The Case for Making EdTech Companies Liable Under FERPA
  • NHS providers reviewing stolen Synnovis data published by cyber criminals

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

  • 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
  • Who’s watching the watchers? This Mozilla fellow, and her Surveillance Watch map

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.