Jump to content

Data breach: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m →‎2024: +some info
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
(53 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Intentional or unintentional release of secure information}}
{{Short description|Intentional or unintentional release of secure information}}
{{good article}}


A '''data breach''', also known as '''data leakage''', is "the unauthorized exposure, disclosure, or loss of [[personal information]]".{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=5}}
A '''data breach''' is a security violation, in which sensitive, protected or confidential data is copied, transmitted, viewed, stolen, altered or used by an individual unauthorized to do so.<ref>{{Cite report|url=https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cb/im1504.pdf|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111184732/https://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/cb/im1504.pdf|archive-date=11 November 2020|title=State and Tribal Child Welfare Information Systems, Information Security Data Breach Response Plans|date=1 July 2015|page=2|publisher=United States Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families|id=ACYF-CB-IM-15-04 }}</ref> Other terms are '''unintentional information disclosure''', '''data leak''', [[information leakage]] and '''data spill'''. Incidents range from concerted attacks by individuals who hack for personal gain or malice ([[Black hat hacking|black hats]]), [[organized crime]], [[political activist]]s or [[Central government|national governments]], to poorly configured system security or careless disposal of used [[computer]] equipment or [[Data storage#Recording media|data storage media]]. Leaked information can range from matters compromising [[national security]], to information on actions which a government or official considers embarrassing and wants to conceal. A deliberate data breach by a person privy to the information, typically for political purposes, is more often described as a "leak".<ref>{{Cite OED|leak|id=106654}}</ref>


Attackers have a variety of motives, from financial gain to [[hacktivism|political activism]], [[political repression]], and [[espionage]]. There are several technical root causes of data breaches, including accidental or intentional disclosure of information by insiders, loss or theft of [[encryption|unencrypted]] devices, hacking into a system by exploiting [[software vulnerabilities]], and [[social engineering attack]]s such as [[phishing]] where insiders are tricked into disclosing information. Although prevention efforts by the company holding the data can reduce the risk of data breach, it cannot bring it to zero.
Data breaches may involve financial information such as credit card and debit card details, bank details, [[personal health information]] (PHI), [[personally identifiable information]] (PII), [[trade secrets]] of corporations or [[intellectual property]]. Data breaches may involve overexposed and vulnerable [[unstructured data]] – files, documents, and sensitive information.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.xconomy.com/new-york/2016/04/26/panama-papers-leak-the-new-normal/#|title=Panama Papers Leak: The New Normal?|publisher=Xconomy|date=2016-04-26|access-date=2016-08-20}}</ref>


The first reported breach was in 2002 and the number occurring each year has grown since then. A large number of data breaches are never detected. If a breach is made known to the company holding the data, post-breach efforts commonly include containing the breach, investigating its scope and cause, and notifications to people whose records were compromised, as required by law in many jurisdictions. Law enforcement agencies may investigate breaches, although the hackers responsible are rarely caught.
Data breaches can be quite costly to organizations with direct costs (remediation, investigation, etc.) and indirect costs ([[reputational damage]]s, providing cyber security to victims of compromised data, etc.).


Many criminals sell data obtained in breaches on the [[dark web]]. Thus, people whose personal data was compromised are at elevated risk of [[identity theft]] for years afterwards and a significant number will become victims of this crime. [[Data breach notification laws]] in many jurisdictions, including all [[states of the United States]] and [[European Union member states]], require the notification of people whose data has been breached. Lawsuits against the company that was breached are common, although few victims receive money from them. There is little empirical evidence of economic harm to firms from breaches except the direct cost, although there is some evidence suggesting a temporary, short-term decline in [[share price|stock price]].
According to the [[nonprofit]] [[consumer organization]] Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, a total of 227,052,199 individual records containing sensitive personal information were involved in security breaches in the [[United States]] between January 2005 and May 2008, excluding incidents where sensitive data was apparently not actually exposed.<ref name="pri"/>

Many [[jurisdiction]]s have passed [[data breach notification laws]], which requires a company that has been subject to a data breach to inform customers and take other steps to remediate possible injuries. 50 U.S. states have some form of data breach notification laws, the definitions of what constitutes "personal information" vary. So US requires more transparent and comprehensive data protection laws.Especially under varying state laws and the increasing amount of sensitive data being collected.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Markos |first1=Ereni |last2=Peña |first2=Priscilla |last3=Labrecque |first3=Lauren I. |last4=Swani |first4=Kunal |date=July 2023 |title=Are data breaches the new norm? Exploring data breach trends, consumer sentiment, and responses to security invasions |url=https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/joca.12554 |journal=Journal of Consumer Affairs |language=en |volume=57 |issue=3 |pages=1089–1119 |doi=10.1111/joca.12554 |s2cid=260327672 |issn=0022-0078}}</ref>


==Definition==
==Definition==
A data breach is a violation of "organizational, regulatory, legislative or contractual" law or policy{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=2}} that causes "the unauthorized exposure, disclosure, or loss of [[personal information]]".{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=5}} Legal and contractual definitions vary.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=41}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=2}} Some researchers include other types of information, for example [[intellectual property]] or [[classified information]].{{sfn|Shukla et al.|2022|pp=47-48}} However, companies mostly disclose breaches because it is required by law,{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=18}} and only personal information is covered by [[data breach notification laws]].{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=42}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=45}}
A data breach may include incidents such as theft or loss of [[digital media]] such as [[Magnetic tape data storage|computer tapes]], [[hard drive]]s, or [[laptop computer]]s with [[encryption|unencrypted]] information, posting such information on the [[World Wide Web]] without proper [[information security]] precautions, transfer of such information to a system which is not completely open but is not appropriately or formally [[accreditation|accredited]] for security, such as unencrypted [[e-mail]], or transfer of such information to the [[information system]]s of a possibly hostile agency, such as a competing corporation or a foreign nation, where it may be exposed to more intensive decryption techniques.<ref>''[https://www.archives.gov/isoo/faqs/incidents-spills.html When we discuss incidents occurring on NSSs, are we using commonly defined terms?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190417080942/https://www.archives.gov/isoo/faqs/incidents-spills.html |date=2019-04-17 }}'', "Frequently Asked Questions on Incidents and Spills", [[National Archives]] Information Security Oversight Office</ref>


==Prevalence==
[[ISO/IEC 27040]] defines a data breach as: ''compromise of security that leads to the accidental or unlawful destruction, loss, alteration, unauthorized disclosure of, or access to protected data transmitted, stored or otherwise processed''.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Information technology — Security techniques — Storage security|url=https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/es/#iso:std:iso-iec:27040:ed-1:v1:en|access-date=2020-10-24|website=www.iso.org}}</ref>
{{see also|List of data breaches}}
[[File:Data breaches in the United States by year, 2005–2023.png|thumb|upright=1.2|Data breaches reported in the United States by year, 2005–2023]]
The first reported data breach occurred on 5 April 2002{{sfn|Joerling|2010|p=468 fn 7}} when 250,000 [[social security numbers]] collected by the [[State of California]] were stolen from a data center.{{sfn|Lesemann|2010|p=206}} Before the widespread adoption of [[data breach notification laws]] around 2005, the prevalence of data breaches is difficult to determine. Even afterwards, statistics per year cannot be relied on because data breaches may be reported years after they occurred,{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=18}} or not reported at all.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=29}} Nevertheless, the statistics show a continued increase in the number and severity of data breaches that continues {{As of |2022|lc=yes}}.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|pp=17-18}} In 2016, researcher [[Sasha Romanosky]]<!-- redlink, probably notable --> estimated that data breaches (excluding [[phishing]]) outnumbered other security breaches by a factor of four.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=9}}


==Perpetrators==
==Trust and privacy==
According to a 2020 estimate, 55 percent of data breaches were caused by [[organized crime]], 10 percent by [[system administrators]], 10 percent by [[end user]]s such as customers or employees, and 10 percent by states or state-affiliated actors.{{sfn|Crawley|2021|p=46}} Opportunistic criminals may cause data breaches—often using [[malware]] or [[social engineering attack]]s, but they will typically move on if the security is above average. More organized criminals have more resources and are more focused in their [[targeted threat|targeting of particular data]].{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=7–8}} Both of them sell the information they obtain for financial gain.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=13}} Another source of data breaches are [[hacktivism|politically motivated hackers]], for example [[Anonymous (hacker group)|Anonymous]], that target particular objectives.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=9–10}} State-sponsored hackers target either citizens of their country or foreign entities, for such purposes as [[political repression]] and [[espionage]]. Often they use undisclosed [[Zero-day (computing)|zero-day vulnerabilities]] for which the hackers are paid large sums of money.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=10–11}} The [[Pegasus spyware]]—a [[no-click malware]] developed by the Israeli company [[NSO Group]] that can be installed on most cellphones and spies on the users' activity—has drawn attention both for use against criminals such as drug kingpin [[El Chapo]] as well as political dissidents, facilitating the [[murder of Jamal Khashoggi]].{{sfn|Kaster|Ensign|2023|p=355}}
The notion of a trusted environment is somewhat fluid. The departure of a trusted staff member with access to sensitive information can become a data breach if the staff member retains access to the data after the termination of the trust relationship. In distributed systems, this can also occur with a breakdown in a [[web of trust]]. [[Data quality]] is one way of reducing the risk of a data breach,<ref name=NHS_1>{{cite web| title=The NHS Must Prioritise Quality To Prevent Further Data Breaches| author=ISBuzz Team| url=https://informationsecuritybuzz.com/nhs-must-prioritise-quality-prevent-data-breaches| publisher=ISBuzz| date=1 August 2017| access-date=29 December 2023}}</ref> partly because it allows the owner of the data to rate data according to importance and give better protection to more important data.


==Causes==
Most such incidents publicized in the media involve [[privacy|private]] information on individuals, e.g. [[social security number]]s. Loss of corporate information such as [[trade secret]]s, sensitive corporate information, and details of [[contract]]s, or of government information is frequently unreported, as there is no compelling reason to do so in the absence of potential damage to private citizens, and the publicity around such an event may be more damaging than the loss of the data itself.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wickelgren|first=Abraham|date=2001|title=Damages for Breach of Contract: Should the Government Get Special Treatment?|journal=Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization|volume=17|pages=121–148|doi=10.1093/jleo/17.1.121}}</ref>


===Technical causes===
==Insider versus external threats==
Those working inside an organization are a significant cause of data breaches. Estimates of breaches caused by accidental "human factor" errors is around 20% by the Verizon 2021 Data Breach Investigations Report.<ref>{{Cite web|title=2021 DBIR Results & Analysis|url=https://www.verizon.com/business/resources/reports/dbir/2021/results-and-analysis/|access-date=2021-12-23|website=Verizon Business|language=en}}</ref> The external threat category includes hackers, cybercriminal organizations and state-sponsored actors. Professional associations for [[Information technology|IT]] asset managers work aggressively with IT professionals to educate them on [https://web.archive.org/web/20160616141727/http://www.aim.ph/blog/the-it-checklist-to-prevent-data-breach/ best risk-reduction practices]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.aim.ph/blog/the-it-checklist-to-prevent-data-breach/|title=The IT Checklist to Prevent Data Breach|website=IT Solutions & Services Philippines - Aim.ph|access-date=2016-05-06|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160616141727/http://www.aim.ph/blog/the-it-checklist-to-prevent-data-breach/|archive-date=2016-06-16|url-status=dead}}</ref> for both internal and external threats to IT assets, software and information. While security prevention may deflect a high percentage of attempts, ultimately a motivated attacker will likely find a way into any given network. [[Cisco Systems|Cisco]] CEO [[John T. Chambers|John Chambers]] has said: "There are two types of companies: those that have been hacked, and those that don't know they have been hacked."<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.networkworld.com/article/2952184/cisco-subnet/john-chambers-10-most-memorable-quotes-as-cisco-ceo.html|title=John Chambers' 10 most memorable quotes as Cisco CEO|newspaper=Network World|access-date=2016-11-10|archive-date=2019-01-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190121180708/https://www.networkworld.com/article/2952184/cisco-subnet/john-chambers-10-most-memorable-quotes-as-cisco-ceo.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> FBI Special Agent for Cyber Special Operations Leo Taddeo warned on Bloomberg television: "The notion that you can protect your perimeter is falling by the wayside and detection is now critical."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://blog.norsecorp.com/2015/03/12/fbi-official-says-prepare-for-more-damaging-cyber-attacks/|title=FBI on Bloomberg TV|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150420211301/http://blog.norsecorp.com/2015/03/12/fbi-official-says-prepare-for-more-damaging-cyber-attacks/|archive-date=2015-04-20|url-status=dead}}</ref>


Despite developers' goal of delivering a product that works entirely as intended, virtually all [[software bugs|software]] and [[hardware bug|hardware]] contains bugs.{{sfn|Ablon|Bogart|2017|p=1}} If a bug creates a security risk, it is called a [[vulnerability (computing)|vulnerability]].{{sfn|Ablon|Bogart|2017|p=2}}{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=25}}{{sfn|Seaman|2020|pp=47-48}} [[Software patch|Patches]] are often released to fix identified vulnerabilities, but those that remain unknown ([[Zero-day (computing)|zero day]]s) as well as those that have not been patched are still liable for exploitation.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=26-27}} Both software written by the target of the breach and third party software used by them are vulnerable to attack.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=25}} The [[software vendor liability|software vendor is rarely legally liable]] for the cost of breaches, thus creating an incentive to make cheaper but less secure software.{{sfn|Sloan|Warner|2019|pp=104-105}}
==Medical data breach==
{{Main|Medical data breach}}
Some celebrities have found themselves to be the victims of inappropriate medical record access breaches, albeit more so on an individual basis, not part of a typically much larger breach.<ref name="Spears Clooney">{{cite news |last=Ornstein |first=Charles |title=Hospital to punish snooping on Spears|url=http://articles.latimes.com/2008/mar/15/local/me-britney15 |access-date=2013-07-26 |newspaper=Los Angeles Times|date=2008-03-15}}</ref> Given the series of medical data breaches and the lack of public trust, some countries have [[:Category:Medical privacy legislation|enacted laws]] requiring safeguards to be put in place to protect the security and confidentiality of medical information as it is shared electronically and to give patients some important rights to monitor their medical records and receive notification for loss and unauthorized acquisition of health information. The United States and the [[European Union|EU]] have imposed mandatory medical data breach notifications.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Medical data breaches: Notification delayed is notification denied| doi=10.1016/j.clsr.2012.01.003|volume=28|issue=2|journal=Computer Law|pages=163–183|year=2012|last1=Kierkegaard|first1=Patrick}}</ref> Reportable breaches of medical information are increasingly common in the United States.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=McCoy|first1=Thomas H.|last2=Perlis|first2=Roy H.|date=September 25, 2018|title=Temporal Trends and Characteristics of Reportable Health Data Breaches, 2010-2017|journal=JAMA|volume=320|issue=12|pages=1282–1284|doi=10.1001/jama.2018.9222|issn=1538-3598|pmc=6233611|pmid=30264106}}</ref>
[[File:Data breach average cost germany.svg|thumb|Average cost of data breaches in Germany<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.symantec.com/content/de/de/about/downloads/press/2010_annual_study.pdf | title=2010 Annual Study: German Cost of a Data Breach | access-date=2011-10-12 | date=February 2011 | publisher=Ponemon Institute | archive-date=2015-09-24 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150924121456/http://www.symantec.com/content/de/de/about/downloads/press/2010_annual_study.pdf | url-status=dead }}</ref>]]


Vulnerabilities vary in their ability to be [[Exploit (computer security)|exploit]]ed by malicious actors. The most valuable allow the attacker to [[code injection|inject]] and run their own code (called [[malware]]), without the user being aware of it.{{sfn|Ablon|Bogart|2017|p=2}} Some malware is downloaded by users via clicking on a malicious link, but it is also possible for malicious [[web applications]] to download malware just from visiting the website ([[drive-by download]]). [[Keyloggers]], a type of malware that records a user's keystrokes, are often used in data breaches.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=19–22}} The majority of data breaches could have been averted by storing all sensitive information in an encrypted format. That way, physical possession of the storage device or access to encrypted information is useless unless the attacker has the [[encryption key]].{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=15}} [[Hash function|Hashing]] is also a good solution for keeping [[password]]s safe from [[brute-force attack]]s, but only if the algorithm is sufficiently secure.{{sfn|Ntantogian |Malliaros|Xenakis|2019}}
==Consequences==
Although such incidents pose the risk of [[identity theft]] or other serious consequences, in most cases there is no lasting damage; either the breach in security is remedied before the information is accessed by unscrupulous people, or the thief is only interested in the hardware stolen, not the data it contains. When such incidents become publicly known, it is customary for the offending party to attempt to mitigate [[damages]] by providing to the victim's subscription to a [[credit reporting agency]], for instance, new credit cards, or other instruments. In the case of [[Target Corporation|Target]], the 2013 breach cost Target a significant drop in profit, which dove an estimated 40 percent in the 4th quarter of the year.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/27/business/target-reports-on-fourth-quarter-earnings.html|title=Data Breach Hurts Profit at Target|date=27 February 2014|newspaper=The New York Times|access-date=11 May 2016|last1=Harris|first1=Elizabeth A.}}</ref> At the end of 2015, [[Target Corporation|Target]] published a report claiming a total loss of $290 million to data breach related fees.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Manworren|first1=Nathan|last2=Letwat|first2=Joshua|last3=Daily|first3=Olivia|date=May 2016|title=Why you should care about the Target data breach|journal=Business Horizons|volume=59|issue=3|pages=257–266|doi=10.1016/j.bushor.2016.01.002|issn=0007-6813}}</ref>


Many data breaches occur on the hardware operated by a partner of the organization targeted—including the [[2013 Target data breach]] and [[2014 JPMorgan Chase data breach]].{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=22-23}} [[Outsourcing]] work to a third party leads to a risk of data breach if that company has lower security standards; in particular, small companies often lack the resources to take as many security precautions.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=19-20}}{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=22-23}} As a result, outsourcing agreements often include security guarantees and provisions for what happens in the event of a data breach.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=19-20}}
The [[Yahoo!|Yahoo]] breach disclosed in 2016 may be one of the most expensive today. It may lower the price of its acquisition by Verizon by $1 billion.<ref>{{cite news|url=https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/06/report-verizon-wants-1-billion-discount-after-yahoo-privacy-concerns/|title=Verizon Wants $1 Billion Discount After Yahoo Privacy Concerns|date=October 6, 2016|work=TechCrunch}}</ref> Verizon later released its renegotiation to Yahoo agreeing to lower the final price from $4.8 to $4.48 billion.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Trautman|first=Lawrence J.|date=2016|title=Corporate Directorss and Officerss Cybersecurity Standard of Care: The Yahoo Data Breach|journal=SSRN Working Paper Series|doi=10.2139/ssrn.2883607|s2cid=168229059|issn=1556-5068}}</ref> Cybercrime cost energy and utilities companies an average of $12.8 million each year in lost business and damaged equipment according to DNV GL, an international certification body and classification society based in Norway.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.hydrocarbonprocessing.com/news/2016/09/oil-and-gas-industry-joins-forces-in-fight-against-cybercrime|title=Hydrocarbon Processing|date=September 29, 2016}}</ref> Data breaches cost healthcare organizations $6.2 billion in the last two years (presumably 2014 and 2015), according to a Ponemon study.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.beckersasc.com/asc-turnarounds-ideas-to-improve-performance/data-breaches-cost-healthcare-industry-6-2b-4-points.html|title=Data breaches cost healthcare industry $6.2B|date=May 12, 2016|website=Becker's ASC Review}}</ref> According to studies, the most common attacks for healthcare data breaches are through hacking and IT incidents.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Seh |first1=Adil Hussain |last2=Zarour |first2=Mohammad |last3=Alenezi |first3=Mamdouh |last4=Sarkar |first4=Amal Krishna |last5=Agrawal |first5=Alka |last6=Kumar |first6=Rajeev |last7=Ahmad Khan |first7=Raees |date=June 2020 |title=Healthcare Data Breaches: Insights and Implications |journal=Healthcare |language=en |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=133 |doi=10.3390/healthcare8020133 |pmid=32414183 |pmc=7349636 |issn=2227-9032 |doi-access=free }}</ref>


===Human causes===
In health care, more than 25 million people have had their health care stolen, resulting in the identity theft of more than six million people, and the out-of-pocket cost of victims is close to $56 billion.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Meisner|first=Marta|date=2018-03-24|journal=Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting|volume=6|issue=3|pages=63|doi=10.12775/CJFA.2017.017|issn=2300-3065|title=Financial Consequences of Cyber Attacks Leading to Data Breaches in Healthcare Sector|doi-access=free}}</ref> Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (PRC) has shown records from January 2005 to December 2018 that there has been more than 9000 breaches events. Also, what causes lead to each breach such as, insider attack, payment card fraud, lost or stolen portable device, infected malware and sending an email to the wrong person (DISC). This shows that many common mistake that leads to a data breach is humans who make mistakes allowing hackers to exploit it and perform an attack.<ref>{{Cite journal|date=2019-01-01|title=Digging Deeper into Data Breaches: An Exploratory Data Analysis of Hacking Breaches Over Time|journal=Procedia Computer Science|language=en|volume=151|pages=1004–1009|doi=10.1016/j.procs.2019.04.141|issn=1877-0509|doi-access=free|last1=Hammouchi|first1=Hicham|last2=Cherqi|first2=Othmane|last3=Mezzour|first3=Ghita|last4=Ghogho|first4=Mounir|last5=Koutbi|first5=Mohammed El}}</ref>
Human causes of breach are often based on trust of another actor that turns out to be malicious. [[Social engineering attack]]s rely on tricking an insider into doing something that compromises the system's security, such as revealing a password or clicking a link to download malware.{{sfn|Sloan|Warner|2019|p=94}} Data breaches may also be deliberately caused by insiders.{{sfn|Makridis|2021|p=3}} One type of social engineering, [[phishing]],{{sfn|Sloan|Warner|2019|p=94}} obtains a user's [[credential]]s by sending them a malicious message impersonating a legitimate entity, such as a bank, and getting the user to enter their credentials onto a malicious website controlled by the cybercriminal. [[Two-factor authentication]] can prevent the malicious actor from using the credentials.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=16-19}} Training employees to recognize social engineering is another common strategy.{{sfn|Sloan|Warner|2019|pp=106–107}}


Another source of breaches is accidental disclosure of information, for example publishing information that should be kept private.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=28}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=19}} With the increase in [[remote work]] and [[bring your own device]] policies, large amounts of corporate data is stored on personal devices of employees. Via carelessness or disregard of company security policies, these devices can be lost or stolen.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=18–19}} Technical solutions can prevent many causes of human error, such as encrypting all sensitive data, preventing employees from using insecure passwords, installing [[antivirus software]] to prevent malware, and implementing a robust patching system to ensure that all devices are kept up to date.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=31-32}}
It is notoriously difficult to obtain information on direct and indirect value loss resulting from a data breach. A common approach to assess the impact of data breaches is to study the market reaction to such an incident as a proxy for the economic consequences. This is typically conducted through the use of [[event studies]], where a measure of the event's economic impact can be constructed by using the security prices observed over a relatively short period of time. Several studies such studies have been published with varying findings, including works by Kannan, Rees, and Sridhar (2007),<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kannan|first1=Karthik|last2=Rees|first2=Jackie|last3=Sridhar|first3=Sanjay|date=September 2007|title=Market Reactions to Information Security Breach Announcements: An Empirical Analysis|journal=International Journal of Electronic Commerce|volume=12|issue=1|pages=69–91|doi=10.2753/jec1086-4415120103|s2cid=1267488|issn=1086-4415}}</ref> Cavusoglu, Mishra, and Raghunathan (2004),<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Cavusoglu|first1=Huseyin|last2=Mishra|first2=Birendra|last3=Raghunathan|first3=Srinivasan|date=2004|title=The Effect of Internet Security Breach Announcements on Market Value: Capital Market Reactions for Breached Firms and Internet Security Developers|journal=International Journal of Electronic Commerce|volume=9|issue=1|pages=69–104|doi=10.1080/10864415.2004.11044320|jstor=27751132|s2cid=10753015}}</ref> Campbell, Gordon, Loeb, and Lei (2003)<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Campbell|first1=Katherine|last2=Gordon|first2=Lawrence A.|last3=Loeb|first3=Martin P.|last4=Zhou|first4=Lei|date=2003-07-01|title=The economic cost of publicly announced information security breaches: empirical evidence from the stock market*|url=https://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-computer-security/jcs192|journal=Journal of Computer Security|volume=11|issue=3|pages=431–448|doi=10.3233/JCS-2003-11308|issn=1875-8924}}</ref> as well as Schatz and Bashroush (2017).<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Schatz|first1=Daniel|last2=Bashroush|first2=Rabih|date=2016-03-14|title=The impact of repeated data breach events on organisations' market value|journal=Information & Computer Security|volume=24|issue=1|pages=73–92|doi=10.1108/ics-03-2014-0020|issn=2056-4961|url=http://roar.uel.ac.uk/4333/1/postprint_iacs_bashroush_2015.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170922011246/http://roar.uel.ac.uk/4333/1/postprint_iacs_bashroush_2015.pdf|archive-date=2017-09-22}}</ref>


==Breach lifecycle==
Since data volume is growing exponentially in the digital era and data leaks happen more frequently than ever before, preventing sensitive information from being leaked to unauthorized parties becomes one of the most pressing security concerns for enterprises.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cheng |first1=Long |last2=Liu |first2=Fang |last3=Yao |first3=Dangfei |title=Enterprise data breach: causes, challenges, prevention, and future directions |journal=WIREs Data Min. Knowl. Discov. |year=2017 |volume=7 |issue=5 |pages=e1211 |doi=10.1002/widm.1211|s2cid=28320918 |doi-access=free |hdl=10919/80426 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> To safeguard data and finances, businesses and companies often have to put in additional costs to take preventive measure on potential data breaches.<ref name=":0">Ryle PM, Goodman L, Soled JA. Tax consequences of data breaches and identity theft. ''Journal of Accountancy''. October 2020:1-6.</ref> From 2017 to 2021, the predicted global spending on internet security is to be over $1 trillion.<ref name=":0" />
===Prevention===
{{see also|Information security|Data loss prevention software}}


Although attention to security can reduce the risk of data breach, it cannot bring it to zero. Security is not the only priority of organizations, and an attempt to achieve perfect security would make the technology unusable.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|pp=69-70}} Many companies hire a [[chief information security officer]] (CISO) to oversee the company's information security strategy.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=7, 9-10}} To obtain information about potential threats, security professionals will network with each other and share information with other organizations facing similar threats.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=200-201}} Defense measures can include an updated incident response strategy, contracts with [[digital forensics]] firms that could investigate a breach,{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=203-204}} [[cyber insurance]],{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=205}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=45}} and monitoring the [[dark web]] for stolen credentials of employees.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=206-207}} In 2024, the United States [[National Institute of Standards and Technology]] (NIST) issued a special publication, "Data Confidentiality: Identifying and Protecting Assets Against Data Breaches".{{sfn|Fisher ''et al.''|2024|loc=Title page}} The [[NIST Cybersecurity Framework]] also contains information about data protection.{{sfn|Fisher ''et al.''|2024|p=2}} Other organizations have released different standards for data protection.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=210}}
==Major incidents==
{{See also|List of data breaches}}
Notable incidents include:


The architecture of a company's systems plays a key role in deterring attackers. Daswani and Elbayadi recommend having only one means of [[authentication]],{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=217}} avoiding redundant systems, and [[Secure by default|making the most secure setting default]].{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=215-216}} [[Defense in depth (computing)|Defense in depth]] and [[distributed privilege]] (requiring multiple authentications to execute an operation) also can make a system more difficult to hack.{{sfn |Tjoa ''et al.''|2024|p=14}} Giving employees and software the least amount of access necessary to fulfill their functions ([[principle of least privilege]]) limits the likelihood and damage of breaches.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=217}}{{sfn|Lenhard|2022|p=53}} Several data breaches were enabled by reliance on [[security by obscurity]]; the victims had put access credentials in publicly accessible files.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|p=218}} Nevertheless, prioritizing ease of use is also important because otherwise users might circumvent the security systems.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=218–219}} Rigorous [[software testing]], including [[penetration testing]], can reduce software vulnerabilities, and must be performed prior to each release even if the company is using a [[CI/CD|continuous integration/continuous deployment]] model where new versions are constantly being rolled out.{{sfn|Daswani |Elbayadi|2021|pp=314–315}}
===2005===
* [[Ameriprise Financial]], stolen [[laptop]], December 24, 260,000 customer records<ref name="pri">"[http://www.privacyrights.org/data-breach Chronology of Data Breaches]", [[Privacy Rights Clearinghouse]]</ref>
* [[ChoicePoint]], February, 163,000 consumer records<ref name="nbc">"[http://www.nbcnews.com/id/11030692/ns/technology_and_science-security/t/choicepoint-pay-million-over-data-breach/ ChoicePoint to pay $15 million over data breach]", [[NBC News]]</ref>


The principle of [[least persistence]]{{sfn |Tjoa ''et al.''|2024|p=68}}—avoiding the collection of data that is not necessary and destruction of data that is no longer necessary—can mitigate the harm from breaches.{{sfn|Lenhard|2022|p=60}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=184}}{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=146}} The challenge is that destroying data can be more complex with modern database systems.{{sfn |Tjoa ''et al.''|2024|p=69}}
===2006===
===Response===
* [[AOL search data scandal]] (sometimes referred to as a "Data ''[[Exxon Valdez oil spill|Valdez]]''",<ref>''[http://www.doubletongued.org/index.php/dictionary/data_valdez/ data Valdez]'' Doubletongued dictionary</ref><ref>''[https://www.eff.org/Privacy/AOL/ AOL's Massive Data Leak] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081013104310/http://eff.org/Privacy/AOL |date=2008-10-13 }}'', [[Electronic Frontier Foundation]]</ref><ref>''[http://www.netlingo.com/lookup.cfm?term=data%20Valdez data Valdez]'', Net Lingo</ref> due to its size)
{{see also|Computer emergency response team|label1=Computer security incident response team}}
* [[United States Department of Veterans Affairs|Department of Veterans Affairs]], May, 28,600,000 veterans, reserves, and active duty military personnel<ref name="pri"/><ref>"[http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/060606-active-duty-troop-information-part-of.html?nwwpkg=slideshows Active-duty troop information part of stolen VA data] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100401045947/http://www.networkworld.com/news/2006/060606-active-duty-troop-information-part-of.html?nwwpkg=slideshows |date=2010-04-01 }}", ''[[Network World]]'', June 6, 2006</ref>
A large number of data breaches are never detected.{{sfn|Crawley|2021|p=39}} Of those that are, most breaches are detected by third parties;{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=64}}{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=25}} others are detected by employees or automated systems.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=4}} Responding to breaches is often the responsibility of a dedicated [[Computer emergency response team|computer security incident response team]], often including technical experts, [[public relations]], and legal counsel.{{sfn|Crawley|2021|p=97}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=5, 32}} Many companies do not have sufficient expertise in-house, and subcontract some of these roles;{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=86}} often, these outside resources are provided by the cyber insurance policy.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=94}} After a data breach becomes known to the company, the next steps typically include confirming it occurred, notifying the response team, and attempting to contain the damage.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=4-5}}
* [[Ernst & Young]], May, 234,000 customers of [[Hotels.com]] (after a similar loss of data on 38,000 employees of Ernst & Young clients in February)<ref name="pri"/>
* [[Boeing]], December, 382,000 employees (after similar losses of data on 3,600 employees in April and 161,000 employees in November, 2005)<ref name="pri"/>


To stop exfiltration of data, common strategies include shutting down affected servers, taking them offline, [[software patch|patching]] the vulnerability, and [[Software build|rebuilding]].{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=120-122}} Once the exact way that the data was compromised is identified, there is typically only one or two technical vulnerabilities that need to be addressed in order to contain the breach and prevent it from reoccurring.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=115}} A [[penetration test]] can then verify that the fix is working as expected.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=116}} If [[malware]] is involved, the organization must investigate and close all infiltration and exfiltration vectors, as well as locate and remove all malware from its systems.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=117-118}} If data was posted on the [[dark web]], companies may attempt to have it taken down.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=119}} Containing the breach can compromise investigation, and some tactics (such as shutting down servers) can violate the company's contractual obligations.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=124}}
===2007===
* D. A. Davidson & Co. 192,000 clients' names, customer account and social security numbers, addresses and dates of birth<ref name="D.A. Davidson & Co.">{{cite news|last=Manning|first=Jeff|title=D.A. Davidson fined over computer security after data breach|url=http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2010/04/da_davidson_fined_over_compute.html|access-date=2013-07-26|newspaper=The Oregonian|date=2010-04-13}}</ref>
* [[Jared Ilovar|The 2007 loss of Ohio and Connecticut state data by Accenture]]
* [[T.J. Maxx#Data theft|TJ Maxx]], data for 45 million credit and debit accounts<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nbcnews.com/id/17853440 |title=T.J. Maxx data theft worse than first reported |access-date=2009-02-16 |work=[[NBC News]] |date=2007-03-29 }}</ref>
* [[2007 UK child benefit data scandal]]
* [[CGI Group]], August, 283,000 retirees from [[New York City]]<ref name="pri"/>
* [[Gap (clothing retailer)|The Gap]], September, 800,000 job applicants<ref name="pri"/>
* Memorial Blood Center, December, 268,000 [[blood donor]]s<ref name="pri"/>
* Davidson County Election Commission, December, 337,000 voters<ref name="pri"/>


Gathering data about the breach can facilitate later litigation or criminal prosecution,{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=81-82}} but only if the data is gathered according to legal standards and the [[chain of custody]] is maintained.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=83}} Database forensics can narrow down the records involved, limiting the scope of the incident.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=128}} Extensive investigation may be undertaken, which can be even more expensive that [[litigation]].{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=25}} In the United States, breaches may be investigated by government agencies such as the [[Office for Civil Rights]], the [[United States Department of Health and Human Services]], and the [[Federal Trade Commission]] (FTC).{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=22}} Law enforcement agencies may investigate breaches{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=44}} although the hackers responsible are rarely caught.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=58}}
===2008===
* In January 2008, [[GE Money]], a division of [[General Electric]], disclosed that a magnetic tape containing 150,000 [[social security number]]s and in-store [[credit card]] information from 650,000 retail customers is known to be missing from an [[Iron Mountain Incorporated]] storage facility. [[J.C. Penney]] is among 230 retailers affected.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205901244|archive-url=https://archive.today/20130126070530/http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=205901244|url-status=dead|archive-date=January 26, 2013|title=GE Money Backup Tape With 650,000 Records Missing At Iron Mountain|work=InformationWeek|access-date=11 May 2016}}</ref>
* [[Horizon Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Jersey]], January, 300,000 members<ref name="pri"/>
* Lifeblood, February, 321,000 [[blood donor]]s<ref name="pri"/>
* [[Matthew Single|British National Party]] membership list leak<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7736405.stm|title=UK - BNP activists' details published|publisher=BBC|access-date=11 May 2016|date=2008-11-18}}</ref>
* In early 2008, [[Countrywide Financial]] (since acquired by [[Bank of America]]) allegedly fell victim to a data breach when, according to news reports and court documents, employee Rene L. Rebollo Jr. stole and sold up to 2.5 million customers' personal information including social security numbers.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/24/business/la-fi-countrywide-20100824 |title=Bank of America settles Countrywide data theft suits |newspaper=Los Angeles Times |date=August 24, 2010|last1=Reckard |first1=E. Scott }}</ref><ref>"[http://www.bankinfosecurity.com/articles.php?art_id=2398 Countrywide Sued For Data Breach, Class Action Suit Seeks $20 Million in Damages]", ''[[Bank Info Security]]'', April 9, 2010</ref> According to the legal complaint: "Beginning in 2008 – coincidentally after they sold their mortgage portfolios under wrongful and fraudulent 'securitization pools,' and coincidentally after their mortgage portfolio went into massive default as a result thereof – Countrywide learned that the financial information of potentially millions of customers had been stolen by certain Countrywide agents, employees or other individuals."<ref>"[http://www.courthousenews.com/2010/04/05/26129.htm Countrywide Sold Private Info, Class Claims]", ''Courthouse News'', April 5, 2010</ref> In July 2010, [[Bank of America]] settled more than 30 related class-action lawsuits by offering free credit monitoring, identity theft insurance and reimbursement for losses to as many as 17 million consumers impacted by the alleged data breach. The settlement was estimated at $56.5 million not including court costs.<ref>"[http://lessriskybiz.blogspot.com/2011/06/convergence-of-data-identity-and.html The Convergence of Data, Identity, and Regulatory Risks]", Making Business a Little Less Risky Blog</ref>


Notifications are typically sent out as required by law.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=5, 44}} Many companies offer free [[credit monitoring]] to people affected by a data breach, although only around 5 percent of those eligible take advantage of the service.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=13}} Issuing new credit cards to consumers, although expensive, is an effective strategy to reduce the risk of [[credit card fraud]].{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=13}} Companies try to restore trust in their business operations and take steps to prevent a breach from reoccurring.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=5-6}}
===2009===
* In December 2009 a [[RockYou!]] password database was breached containing 32 million usernames and plaintext passwords, further compromising the use of weak passwords for any purpose.
* In May 2009 the [[United Kingdom parliamentary expenses scandal]] was revealed by ''[[The Daily Telegraph]]''. A hard disk containing scanned receipts of UK Members of Parliament and Peers in the House of Lords was offered to various UK newspapers in late April, with ''The Daily Telegraph'' finally acquiring it. It published details in instalments from 8 May onward. Although it was intended by Parliament that the data was to be published, this was to be in redacted form, with details the individual members considered "sensitive" blanked out. The newspaper published unredacted scans which showed details of the claims, many of which appeared to be in breach of the rules and suggested widespread abuse of the generous expenses system. The resulting media storm led to the resignation of the [[Speaker of the House of Commons (United Kingdom)|Speaker of the House of Commons]] and the prosecution and imprisonment of several MPs and Lords for fraud. The expenses system was overhauled and tightened up, being put more on a par with private industry schemes. The [[Metropolitan Police Service]] continues to investigate possible frauds, and the [[Crown Prosecution Service]] is considering further prosecutions. Several MPs and Lords apologised and made whole, partial or no restitution, and retained their seats. Others who had been shamed in the media did not offer themselves for re-election at the [[2010 United Kingdom general election]]. Although numbering less than 1,500 individuals, the affair received the largest global media coverage of any data breach (as at February 2012).
* In January 2009 [[Heartland Payment Systems]] announced that it had been "the victim of a security breach within its processing system", possibly part of a "global cyber fraud operation".<ref>[http://www.2008breach.com/Information20090120.asp Heartland Payment Systems Uncovers Malicious Software In Its Processing System ] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090127041550/http://2008breach.com/Information20090120.asp |date=2009-01-27 }}</ref> The intrusion has been called the largest criminal breach of card data ever, with estimates of up to 100 million cards from more than 650 financial services companies compromised.<ref>[https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20110403072859/http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jul2009/tc2009076_891369.htm Lessons from the Data Breach at Heartland], [[MSNBC]], July 7, 2009</ref>


===2010===
==Consequences==
===For consumers===
* Throughout the year, [[Chelsea Manning]] released large volumes of secret military data to the public.
After a data breach, criminals make money by selling data, such as usernames, passwords, [[social media]] or [[loyalty business model|customer loyalty]] account information, [[debit card|debit]] and [[credit card]] numbers,{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=13}} and personal health information (see [[medical data breach]]).{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=14}} Criminals often sell this data on the [[dark web]]—parts of the internet where it is difficult to trace users and illicit activity is widespread—using platforms like [[.onion]] or [[I2P]].{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=12–13}} Originating in the 2000s, the dark web, followed by untraceable [[cryptocurrencies]] such as [[Bitcoin]] in the 2010s, made it possible for criminals to sell data obtained in breaches with minimal risk of getting caught, facilitating an increase in hacking.{{sfn|Davidoff|2019|loc="Modern dark data brokers"}}{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=21}} One popular darknet marketplace, [[Silk Road (marketplace)|Silk Road]], was shut down in 2013 and its operators arrested, but several other marketplaces emerged in its place.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Howell |first1=Christian Jordan |last2=Maimon |first2=David |title=Darknet markets generate millions in revenue selling stolen personal data, supply chain study finds |url=https://theconversation.com/darknet-markets-generate-millions-in-revenue-selling-stolen-personal-data-supply-chain-study-finds-193506 |access-date=22 April 2024 |work=[[The Conversation]] |date=2 December 2022}}</ref> [[Telegram (software)|Telegram]] is also a popular forum for illegal sales of data.<ref>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12117-024-09532-6</ref>


This information may be used for a variety of purposes, such as [[spamming]], obtaining products with a victim's loyalty or payment information, [[identity theft]], [[drug fraud|prescription drug fraud]], or [[insurance fraud]].{{sfn|Fowler|2016|pp=13-14}} The threat of data breach or revealing information obtained in a data breach can be used for [[extortion]].{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=13}}
===2011===
* In April 2011, [[Sony]] experienced a [[PlayStation Network outage|data breach]] within its [[PlayStation Network]], compromising personal information of an estimated 77 million users.
* In March 2011, [[RSA SecurID]]'s token system seed-key warehouse was breached and the seed keys for its [[two-factor authentication]] system were stolen, allowing the thieves to replicate the hardware tokens for secure access to corporate and government environments.
* In June 2011, [[Citigroup]] disclosed a data breach within its credit card operation, affecting approximately 210,000 (1%) of its customer accounts.<ref>{{cite news| url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2011/06/09/citibank-reveals-one-percent-of-all-accounts-exposed-in-hack/ | title= Citibank Reveals One Percent Of Credit Card Accounts Exposed In Hacker Intrusion| work=Forbes | first=Andy | last=Greenberg | date=9 June 2011| access-date= 2014-09-05}}</ref>


Consumers may suffer various forms of tangible or intangible harm from the theft of their personal data, or not notice any harm.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=27}} A significant portion of those affected by a data breach become victims of [[identity theft]].{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=13}} A person's identifying information often circulates on the dark web for years, causing an increased risk of identity theft regardless of remediation efforts.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=58}}{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|pp=30-31}} Even if a customer does not end up footing the bill for [[credit card fraud]] or identity theft, they have to spend time resolving the situation.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=29}}{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=56}} Intangible harms include [[doxxing]] (publicly revealing someone's personal information), for example medication usage or personal photos.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|pp=27-29}}
===2012===
* In summer 2012, [[Wired.com]] Senior Writer Mat Honan claims that "hackers destroyed my entire digital life in the span of an hour" by hacking his Apple, Twitter, and Gmail passwords in order to gain access to his Twitter handle and in the process, claims the hackers wiped out every one of his devices, deleting all of his messages and documents, including every picture he had ever taken of his 18-month-old daughter.<ref>{{cite magazine |title=Kill the Password: Why a String of Characters Can't Protect Us Anymore |url=https://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/11/ff-mat-honan-password-hacker/all/ |magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]|date=2012-11-15|access-date=2013-01-17 |first=Mat |last=Honan}}</ref> The exploit was achieved with a combination of information provided to the hackers by Amazon's tech support through [[Social engineering (security)|social engineering]], and the password recovery system of Apple which used this information.<ref>{{cite magazine |title=How Apple and Amazon Security Flaws Led to My Epic Hacking |url=https://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2012/08/apple-amazon-mat-honan-hacking/ |magazine=[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]|date=August 6, 2012|access-date=26 Jan 2013 |first=Mat |last=Honan}}</ref> Related to his experience, Mat Honan wrote a piece outlining why passwords cannot keep users safe.<ref>{{cite web |title=Protecting the Individual from Data Breach |url=http://www.natlawreview.com/article/protecting-individual-data-breach |work=The National Law Review|publisher=Raymond Law Group |date=2014-01-14|access-date=2013-01-17}}</ref>
* In October 2012, a law enforcement agency contacted the South Carolina Department of Revenue (DoR) with evidence that Personally Identifiable Information (PII) of three individuals had been stolen.<ref>{{cite web |title=Public Incident Response Report |url=http://governor.sc.gov/Documents/MANDIANT%20Public%20IR%20Report%20-%20Department%20of%20Revenue%20-%2011%2020%202012.pdf |publisher=State of South Carolina |date=2012-11-12 |access-date=2014-10-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140823234354/http://governor.sc.gov/Documents/MANDIANT%20Public%20IR%20Report%20-%20Department%20of%20Revenue%20-%2011%2020%202012.pdf |archive-date=2014-08-23 |url-status=dead }}</ref> It was later reported that an estimated 3.6 million Social Security numbers were compromised along with 387,000 credit card records.<ref>{{cite news|title=South Carolina: The mother of all data breaches|url=http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20121103/PC16/121109713|newspaper=The Post and Courier|date=2012-11-03|access-date=2014-10-10|archive-date=2016-09-08|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160908171301/http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20121103/PC16/121109713|url-status=dead}}</ref>


===2013===
===For organizations===
There is little empirical evidence of economic harm from breaches except the direct cost, although there is some evidence suggesting a temporary, short-term decline in [[share price|stock price]].{{sfn|Makridis|2021|p=1}} Other impacts on the company can range from lost business, reduced employee productivity due to systems being offline or personnel redirected to working on the breach,{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=22}} resignation or firing of senior executives,{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=22}} [[reputational damage]],{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=22}}{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=41}} and increasing the future cost of auditing or security.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=22}} Consumer losses from a breach are usually a negative [[externality]] for the business.{{sfn|Sloan|Warner|2019|p=104}} Some experts have argued that the evidence suggests there is not enough direct costs or reputational damage from data breaches to sufficiently [[incentive|incentivize]] their prevention.{{sfn|Makridis|2021|pp=1, 7}}{{sfn|Sloan|Warner|2019|p=64}}
* In October 2013, [[Adobe Systems]] revealed its corporate database was hacked and some 130 million user records were stolen. According to Adobe, "For more than a year, Adobe’s authentication system has cryptographically hashed customer passwords using the [[SHA-256]] algorithm, including salting the passwords and iterating the hash more than 1,000 times. This system was not the subject of the attack we publicly disclosed on October 3, 2013. The authentication system involved in the attack was a backup system and was designated to be decommissioned. The system involved in the attack used [[Triple DES]] encryption to protect all password information stored."<ref>Goodin, Dan. (2013-11-01) [https://arstechnica.com/security/2013/11/how-an-epic-blunder-by-adobe-could-strengthen-hand-of-password-crackers/ How an epic blunder by Adobe could strengthen hand of password crackers]. Ars Technica. Retrieved 2014-06-10.</ref> {{Further|Adobe Systems#Customer data breach}}
* In late November to early December 2013, [[Target Corporation]] announced that data from around 70 million [[Credit card|credit]] and [[debit card|debit]] cards was stolen. It is the second largest credit and debit card breach after the [[TJX Companies#Computer systems intrusion|TJX Companies data breach]] where almost 46 million cards were affected.<ref>{{cite news|title=Target Confirms Unauthorized Access to Payment Card Data in U.S. Stores|url=https://corporate.target.com/press/releases/2013/12/target-confirms-unauthorized-access-to-payment-car|access-date=19 January 2016|agency=Target Corporation|date=19 December 2013|archive-date=24 November 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211124120538/https://corporate.target.com/press/releases/2013/12/target-confirms-unauthorized-access-to-payment-car|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* In 2013, [[Edward Snowden]] [[Global surveillance disclosures (2013–present)|published a series of secret documents]] that revealed widespread spying by the United States [[National Security Agency]] and similar agencies in other countries.


Estimating the cost of data breaches is difficult, both because not all breaches are reported and also because calculating the impact of breaches in financial terms is not straightforward. There are multiple ways of calculating the cost to businesses, especially when it comes to personnel time dedicated to dealing with the breach.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|pp=8-10}} Author Kevvie Fowler estimates that more than half the direct cost incurred by companies is in the form of litigation expenses and services provided to affected individuals, with the remaining cost split between notification and detection, including forensics and investigation. He argues that these costs are reduced if the organization has invested in security prior to the breach or has previous experience with breaches. The more [[Record (computer science)|data record]]s involved, the more expensive a breach typically will be.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=21}} In 2016, researcher [[Sasha Romanosky]]<!-- redlink, probably notable --> estimated that while the mean breach cost around the targeted firm $5 million, this figure was inflated by a few highly expensive breaches, and the typical data breach was much less costly, around $200,000. Romanosky estimated the total annual cost to corporations in the United States to be around $10 billion.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=10}}
===2014===
* In August 2014, nearly 200 [[August 2014 celebrity photo leaks|photographs of celebrities]] were stolen from [[Apple Inc.|Apple]] [[iCloud]] accounts and posted to the image board website [[4chan]]. An investigation by [[Apple Inc.|Apple]] found they were obtained "by a very targeted attack on user names, passwords and security questions".<ref>{{cite news | url = http://www.streetinsider.com/Corporate+News/Apple+%28AAPL%29+Issues+Media+Advisory+Related+to+Celebrity+Photo+Theft/9798526.html |title = Apple Media Advisory: Update to Celebrity Photo Investigation |work= [[Business Wire]]|publisher = StreetInsider.com |date = September 2, 2014 | access-date= 2014-09-05}}</ref> It toughened iCloud security through an opt-in 2 factor authentication, after celebrity breach.[https://web.archive.org/web/20230422083809/https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29237469 Apple toughens iCloud security after celebrity breach- Leo Kelion; September 17, 2014; BBC]
* In September 2014, [[Home Depot]] had a data breach of 56 million credit card numbers.<ref>{{cite news |author=Melvin Backman |date=18 September 2014 |title=Home Depot: 56 million cards exposed in breach |publisher=[[CNNMoney]] |url=https://money.cnn.com/2014/09/18/technology/security/home-depot-hack/ }}</ref>
* In October 2014, [[Staples Inc.|Staples]] had a data breach of 1.16 million customer payment cards.<ref>{{cite news | url = https://fortune.com/2014/12/19/staples-cards-affected-breach/ |title = Staples: Breach may have affected 1.16 million customers' cards |work = Fortune |date = December 19, 2014 | access-date= 2014-12-21}}</ref>
* In November 2014 [[Sony Pictures Entertainment hack|and for weeks after]], [[Sony Pictures Entertainment]] had a data breach involving personal information about Sony Pictures employees and their families, e-mails between employees, information about executive salaries at the company, copies of (previously) unreleased Sony films, and other information. The hackers involved claim to have taken over 100 terabytes of data from Sony.<ref>{{cite news |author=James Cook| date=December 16, 2014 |url=http://www.businessinsider.com/the-sony-hackers-still-have-a-massive-amount-of-data-that-hasnt-been-leaked-yet-2014-12 |title=Sony Hackers Have Over 100 Terabytes Of Documents. Only Released 200 Gigabytes So Far |work=[[Business Insider]] |access-date=December 18, 2014 }}</ref>


===2015===
==Laws==
===Notification===
* In October 2015, the British telecommunications provider TalkTalk had a data breach when a group of 15-year-old hackers stole information on its four million customers. The stock price of the company fell substantially due to the issue – around 12% – owing largely to the bad publicity surrounding the leak.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://blog.check-and-secure.com/231015-talktalk-hacked-again/ |title=TalkTalk Hacked…Again |publisher=Check&Secure |date=2015-10-23 |access-date=2015-10-23 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151223111852/http://blog.check-and-secure.com/231015-talktalk-hacked-again/ |archive-date=2015-12-23 }}</ref>
{{main|Data breach notification laws}}
* In July 2015, adult website [[Ashley Madison]] had a data breach when a hacker group stole information on its 37 million users. The hackers threatened to reveal usernames and specifics if Ashley Madison and a fellow site, EstablishedMen.com, did not shut down permanently.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://krebsonsecurity.com/2015/07/online-cheating-site-ashleymadison-hacked/ |title=Online Cheating Site AshleyMadison Hacked |publisher=krebsonsecurity.com |date=2015-07-15 |access-date=2015-07-20}}</ref>
The law regarding data breaches is often found in [[privacy law|legislation to protect privacy]] more generally, and is dominated by provisions mandating notification when breaches occur.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=10}} Laws differ greatly in how breaches are defined,{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=41}} what type of information is protected, the deadline for notification,{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=42}} and who has [[standing (law)|standing]] to sue if the law is violated.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=43}} Notification laws increase [[Transparency (behavior)|transparency]] and provide an reputational incentive for companies to reduce breaches.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=44}} The cost of notifying the breach can be high if many people were affected and is incurred regardless of the company's responsibility, so it can function like a [[strict liability]] fine.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=45}}
* In February 2015, [[Anthem Inc.|Anthem]] had a data breach of nearly 80 million records, including personal information such as names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, and other sensitive details.<ref>{{cite news |date=15 February 2015 |title=Data breach at health insurer Anthem could impact millions |url=http://krebsonsecurity.com/2015/02/data-breach-at-health-insurer-anthem-could-impact-millions/ }}</ref>
* In June 2015, The [[Office of Personnel Management]] of the U.S. government had a data breach in which the records of 22.1 million current and former federal employees of the United States were hacked and stolen.<ref>"[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2015/07/09/hack-of-security-clearance-system-affected-21-5-million-people-federal-authorities-say/ Hacks of OPM databases compromised 22.1 million people, federal authorities say]". ''The Washington Post.'' July 9, 2015.</ref>


{{as of|2024}}, ''Thomas on Data Breach'' listed 62 [[United Nations member states]] that are covered by data breach notification laws.<!-- 8 in Americas + US, 5 in European + 27 EU, 14 Asia, 7 Africa --> Some other countries require breach notification in more general [[Information privacy law|data protection law]]s.{{sfn|Thomas|2023|pp=xxvii, xxix, xxxii-xxxiii, xxxiv}} Shortly after the first reported data breach in April 2002, California passed [[California Senate Bill 1386 (2002)|a law requiring notification]] when an individual's personal information was breached.{{sfn|Lesemann|2010|p=206}} In the United States, notification laws proliferated after the February 2005 [[ChoicePoint data breach]], widely publicized in part because of the large number of people affected (more than 140,000) and also because of outrage that the company initially informed only affected people in California.{{sfn|Lesemann|2010|pp=206–207}}{{sfn|Joerling|2010|pp=468-469}} In 2018, the [[European Union]]'s [[General Data Protection Regulation]] (GDPR) took effect. The GDPR requires notification within 72 hours, with very high fines possible for large companies not in compliance. This regulation also stimulated the tightening of data privacy laws elsewhere.{{sfn|Seaman|2020|pp=6-7}}{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=40}} {{as of|2022}}, the only [[United States federal law]] requiring notification for data breaches is limited to medical data regulated under [[HIPAA]], but all 50 states (since Alabama passed a law in 2018) have their own general data breach notification laws.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=40}}
===2016===
* In February 2016, the 15-year-old British hacker Kane Gamble leaked the personal details of over 20,000 [[FBI]] employees,<ref>"[https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/british-teen-hacker-kane-gamble-us-intelligence-officials-jailed-cia-fbi-a8315126.html British teenager who 'cyber-terrorised' US intelligence officials gets two years detention] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180422203933/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/british-teen-hacker-kane-gamble-us-intelligence-officials-jailed-cia-fbi-a8315126.html |date=2018-04-22 }}". ''The Independent.'' April 21, 2018.</ref> including employees' names, job titles, phone numbers and email addresses.<ref>"[https://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/08/politics/hackers-fbi-employee-info/index.html Hackers publish contact info of 20,000 FBI employees] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180422202349/https://edition.cnn.com/2016/02/08/politics/hackers-fbi-employee-info/index.html |date=2018-04-22 }}". ''CNN.'' February 8, 2016.</ref> The judge said Gamble engaged in "politically motivated cyber-terrorism."<ref>[http://www.dw.com/en/uk-teen-kane-gamble-gets-two-years-for-hacking-cia-ex-chief-john-brennan/a-43477403 UK teen Kane Gamble gets two years for hacking CIA ex-chief John Brennan] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180422202920/http://www.dw.com/en/uk-teen-kane-gamble-gets-two-years-for-hacking-cia-ex-chief-john-brennan/a-43477403 |date=April 22, 2018 }}". ''Deutsche Welle.'' April 20, 2018.</ref>
* In March 2016, the website of the [[Commission on Elections]] in the Philippines [[Commission on Elections data breach|was defaced]] by hacktivist group, "[[Anonymous (group)|Anonymous Philippines]]". A larger problem arose when a group called [[LulzSec|LulzSec Pilipinas]] uploaded COMELEC's entire database on Facebook the following day.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.aim.ph/blog/5-it-security-lessons-from-the-comelec-data-breach/|title=5 IT Security Lessons from the Comelec Data Breach|website=IT Solutions & Services Philippines - Aim.ph|access-date=2016-05-06}}</ref>
* In April 2016, news media carried information stolen from a successful network attack of the Central American law firm, [[Mossack Fonseca]], and the resulting "[[Panama Papers]]" sent reverberations throughout the world.<ref>[https://www.computerworld.com/article/3052218/security/the-massive-panama-papers-data-leak-explained.html The massive Panama Papers data leak explained]. Computerworld. April 5, 2016.</ref> Perhaps a justified vindication of illegal or unethical activity, this nonetheless illustrates the impact of secrets coming to light. The Prime Minister of Iceland was forced to resign<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/31/world/europe/icelands-prime-minister-resigns-after-pirate-party-makes-strong-gains.html|title=Iceland's Prime Minister Resigns, After Pirate Party Makes Strong Gains|last=Freytas-tamura|first=Kimiko De|date=2016-10-30|newspaper=The New York Times|issn=0362-4331|access-date=2016-11-10}}</ref> and a major reshuffling of political offices occurred in countries as far-flung as Malta.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160430/timestalk/after-the-reshuffle-will-the-panama-scandal-go-away.610448|title=Watch: Will Panama scandal go away after the reshuffle?|newspaper=Times of Malta|access-date=2016-11-10}}</ref> Multiple investigations were immediately initiated in countries around the world, including a hard look at international<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.law360.com/articles/850994/eu-must-bear-down-on-money-laundering-regulators-say|title=EU Must Bear Down on Money Laundering, Regulators Say - Law360}}</ref> or offshore banking rules in the U.S.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/panama-papers/u-s-readies-bank-rule-shell-companies-amid-panama-papers-n552231|title=U.S. Readies Bank Rule on Shell Companies Amid 'Panama Papers' Fury|newspaper=NBC News|access-date=2016-11-10}}</ref> Obviously the implications are enormous to the ability of an organization—whether a law firm or a governmental department—to keep secrets.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.ciodive.com/news/can-secrets-stay-secret-anymore/424391/|title=Can secrets stay secret anymore?|newspaper=CIO Dive|access-date=2016-11-10}}</ref>
* In September 2016, [[Yahoo]] reported that up to 500 million accounts in 2014 [[Yahoo! data breach|had been breached]] in an apparent "state-sponsored" data breach. It was later reported in October 2017 that 3 billion accounts had been breached, accounting for every Yahoo account at the time.


===2017===
===Security safeguards===
Measures to protect data from a breach are typically absent from the law or vague.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=10}} Filling this gap is standards required by [[cyber insurance]], which is held by most large companies and [[insurance as regulation|functions as ''de facto'' regulation]].{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=24}}{{sfn|Talesh|2018|p=237}} Of the laws that do exist, there are two main approaches—one that prescribes specific standards to follow, and the [[reasonableness]] approach.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=48}} The former is rarely used due to a lack of flexibility and reluctance of legislators to arbitrate technical issues; with the latter approach, the law is vague but specific standards can emerge from [[case law]].{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|pp=48-49}} Companies often prefer the standards approach for providing greater [[legal certainty]], but they might check all the boxes without providing a secure product.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=52}} An additional flaw is that the laws are poorly enforced, with penalties often much less than the cost of a breach, and many companies do not follow them.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=53}}
* [[Vault 7]], [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]]'s hacking techniques revealed in data breach.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/world/europe/wikileaks-cia-hacking.html |title=WikiLeaks Releases Trove of Alleged C.I.A. Hacking Documents |last1=Shane |first1=Scott |date=7 March 2017 |last2=Mazzetti |first2=Mark |last3=Rosenberg |first3=Matthew |newspaper=[[The New York Times]]}}</ref> Leaked documents, codenamed Vault 7 and dated from 2013–2016, detail the capabilities of the CIA to perform electronic surveillance and cyber warfare,<ref>{{Cite magazine|url=https://www.wired.com/2017/03/cia-can-hack-phone-pc-tv-says-wikileaks/|title=How the CIA Can Hack Your Phone, PC, and TV (Says WikiLeaks) |last=Greenberg|first=Andy|date=2017-03-07|magazine=[[WIRED]]}}</ref> such as the ability to compromise the operating systems of most [[smartphone]]s (including [[Apple Inc.|Apple]]'s [[iOS]] and [[Google]]'s [[Android (operating system)|Android]]), as well as other operating systems such as [[Microsoft Windows]], [[macOS]], and [[Linux]].<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.computing.co.uk/ctg/news/3006021/vault-7-wikileaks-reveals-details-of-cias-hacks-of-android-iphone-windows-linux-macos-and-even-samsung-tvs |title=Vault 7: Wikileaks reveals details of CIA's hacks of Android, iPhone Windows, Linux, MacOS, and even Samsung TVs |website=[[Computing (magazine)|Computing]] |date=7 March 2017}}</ref> [[Joshua Schulte|Joshua Adam Schulte]], a former CIA employee, has been convicted of leaking CIA hacking secrets to WikiLeaks.<ref>{{cite news |title=Who Is Joshua Adam Schulte? Former CIA Employee Charged Over Vault 7 Leak |url=https://www.newsweek.com/who-joshua-adam-schulte-former-cia-employee-charged-over-vault-7-leak-982899 |work=Newsweek |date=19 June 2018}}</ref>
===Litigation===
* [[Equifax]], July 2017, 145,500,000 consumer records, the largest known data breach in history at the time<ref name="Forbes">Mathews, Lee, [https://www.forbes.com/sites/leemathews/2017/09/07/equifax-data-breach-impacts-143-million-americans/#6f6ed8d3356f "Equifax Data Breach Impacts 143 Million Americans"], ''[[Forbes]]'', September 7, 2017.</ref> leading to the potential for the largest class action lawsuit in history.<ref name="BGR">Mills, Chris, [http://bgr.com/2017/09/08/equifax-hack-lawsuit-class-action-how-to-join/ "Equifax is already facing the largest class-action lawsuit in US history"], [[Boy Genius Report|BGR]], September 8, 2017.</ref> As of early October 2017, the cities of [[Chicago]] and [[San Francisco]] and the Commonwealth of [[Massachusetts]] have filed enforcement actions against [[Equifax]] following the July 2017 data breach, in which hackers allegedly exploited a vulnerability in the open-source software used to create Equifax's online consumer dispute portal.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Reise|first1=Sarah T.|title=State and Local Governments Move Swiftly to Sue Equifax|journal=The National Law Review|date=3 October 2017|url=https://www.natlawreview.com/article/state-and-local-governments-move-swiftly-to-sue-equifax|access-date=7 October 2017}}</ref> The hackers had not only information of U.S. residents but also U.K. and Canadians as well.<ref>{{Cite news|title=Washington Wrap Up|last=DeMarco|first=Edward|id = {{ProQuest|2043172601}}}}</ref>
Many [[class-action lawsuit]]s, [[derivative suit]]s, and other litigation have been brought after data breaches.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=5}} They are often [[Settlement (litigation)|settled]] regardless of the merits of the case due to the high cost of litigation.{{sfn|Fowler|2016|p=222}}{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|pp=55, 59}} Even if a settlement is paid, few affected consumers receive any money as it usually is only cents to a few dollars per victim.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=22}}{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|pp=55, 59}} Legal scholars [[Daniel J. Solove]] and [[Woodrow Hartzog]]<!-- redlink, notable --> argue that "Litigation has increased the costs of data breaches but has accomplished little else."{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=55}} Plaintiffs often struggle to prove that they suffered harm from a data breach.{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=55}} The contribution of a company's actions to a data breach varies,{{sfn|Solove |Hartzog|2022|p=53}}{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=23}} and likewise the liability for the damage resulting for data breaches is a contested matter. It is disputed what standard should be applied, whether it is strict liability, [[negligence]], or something else.{{sfn|National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine|2016|p=23}}
* [[United States]]–[[South Korea]] classified military documents, October 2017. A South Korean lawmaker claimed that North Korean hackers stole over 235 [[gigabytes]] of military documents from the Defense Integrated Data Center in September 2016. Leaked documents included South Korea-U.S. wartime operational plans.<ref>[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-cybercrime-southkorea/north-korea-hackers-stole-south-korea-u-s-military-plans-to-wipe-out-north-korea-leadership-lawmaker-idUSKBN1CF1WT North Korea hackers stole South Korea-U.S. military plans to wipe out North Korea leadership: lawmaker], Reuters, Christine Kim, October 10, 2017</ref>
* In November 2017 14.3 million documents were leaked regarding [[tax avoidance]] schemes of notable entities such as celebrities and companies like [[Apple Inc.|Apple]], [[McDonald's]] and [[Nike, Inc.|Nike]]. The documents consisted of data from 1950 to 2016. This revelation was known as the [[Paradise Papers]].<ref>{{Citation |last=De Sanctis |first=Fausto Martin |title=Money Laundering Typologies Evidenced in the “Panama Papers” |date=2017 |work=International Money Laundering Through Real Estate and Agribusiness |pages=31–83 |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52069-8_3 |access-date=2024-01-26 |place=Cham |publisher=Springer International Publishing |isbn=978-3-319-52068-1}}</ref>

===2018===
* [[Facebook and Cambridge Analytica data scandal]] in March.<ref name="guardian original">{{cite news|last1=Graham-Harrison|first1=Emma|last2=Cadwalladr|first2=Carole|title=Revealed: 50 million Facebook profiles harvested for Cambridge Analytica in major data breach|url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election|newspaper=[[The Guardian]]|date=17 March 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180318001541/https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/mar/17/cambridge-analytica-facebook-influence-us-election|archive-date=18 March 2018}}</ref>
* In March, [[Google]] identified a vulnerability exposing the personal information of nearly half a million users. It patched the vulnerability and kept the exposure private from users until the issue was reported on by ''[[The Wall Street Journal]]'' six months after the fact.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/oct/08/google-plus-security-breach-wall-street-journal|title=Google to shut down Google+ after failing to disclose user data breach|last1=Wong|first1=Julia Carrie|author-link=Julia Carrie Wong|last2=Solon|first2=Olivia|date=2018-10-09|website=The Guardian|access-date=2018-10-10}}</ref>
* On 29 March, [[Under Armour]] disclosed a data breach of 150 million accounts at [[MyFitnessPal]], with compromised data consisting of user names, the users' e-mail addresses and hashed passwords. Under Armour were notified of the breach on the week of 19–25 March, and that the leak happened sometime in February.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.javarosa.org/2018/03/myfitness-pal-data-breach-march-15-2018.html|title=MyFitness Pal Data Breach March 15, 2018 - Hacked|website=www.javarosa.org|access-date=2018-04-03|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180331040524/http://www.javarosa.org/2018/03/myfitness-pal-data-breach-march-15-2018.html|archive-date=2018-03-31|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* It was reported on 1 April that a data breach occurred at [[Saks Fifth Avenue]] / [[Lord & Taylor]]. About five million credit card holders may have had their data compromised in stores in North America.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://money.cnn.com/2018/04/01/technology/saks-hack-credit-debit-card/index.html|title=Saks, Lord & Taylor breach: Data stolen on 5 million cards|publisher=[[CNNMoney]]|access-date=2018-04-03|date=April 2018}}</ref>
* It was reported on 20 July that a [[2018 SingHealth data breach|data breach]] on [[SingHealth]], one of Singapore's largest health organizations, happened on 4 July, with about 1.5 million personal data (including data of some ministers, including [[Prime Minister of Singapore|Singapore's Prime Minister]] [[Lee Hsien Loong]]) being compromised. Ministers on a press conference dubbed the data breach as the "most serious breach of personal data".<ref>{{cite web|title=Singapore health system hit by 'most serious breach of personal data' in cyberattack; PM Lee's data targeted|url=https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singhealth-health-system-hit-serious-cyberattack-pm-lee-target-10548318|access-date=2018-07-20|archive-date=2018-07-26|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180726060044/https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/singhealth-health-system-hit-serious-cyberattack-pm-lee-target-10548318|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Personal info of 1.5m SingHealth patients, including PM Lee, stolen in Singapore's worst cyber attack|newspaper=The Straits Times|url=https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/personal-info-of-15m-singhealth-patients-including-pm-lee-stolen-in-singapores-most|date=2018-07-20|last1=Tham|first1=Irene}}</ref>
* On 1 August, [[Reddit]] disclosed it was hacked. The [[hacker]] compromised employee accounts even though they used [[SMS]] based [[two-factor authentication]]. Reddit refused to disclose the number of affected users.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.siliconrepublic.com/enterprise/reddit-data-breach|title=Everything you need to know about the Reddit data breach|date=2018-08-02|website=siliconrepublic.com|access-date=2018-12-05}}</ref>
* On September 7 it was reported that British Airways experienced a data theft of about 380,000 customer records including full bank details.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.britishairways.com/en-us/information/incident/data-theft/latest-information|title=Customer Data Theft|website=British Airways|access-date=October 20, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iag-cybercrime-british-airways/ba-apologizes-after-380000-customers-hit-in-cyber-attack-idUSKCN1LM2P6|title=BA apologizes after 380,000 customers hit in cyber attack|last=Sandle|first=Paul|date=September 6, 2018|newspaper=Reuters|access-date=October 20, 2018}}</ref>
* On October 19, the US [[Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services|Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services]] (CMS) reported a data breach that exposed files of 75,000 individuals.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.deccanchronicle.com/technology/in-other-news/201018/us-cms-says-75000-individuals-files-accessed-in-data-breach.html|title=US CMS says 75,000 individuals' files accessed in data breach|date=October 20, 2018|website=Deccan Chronicle|access-date=October 20, 2018}}</ref>
* On December 3, [[Quora]] reported a data breach that affected its 100 million users data.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/12/04/passwords-100-million-quora-users-stolen-data-breach/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220112/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/12/04/passwords-100-million-quora-users-stolen-data-breach/ |archive-date=2022-01-12 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|title=Passwords from 100 million Quora users stolen in data breach|date=December 4, 2018|access-date=January 27, 2019}}{{cbignore}}</ref>
* In late 2018, the [[Epic Games]] [[Fortnite]] game was discovered to have a security vulnerability which would have allowed an attacker to use victims' payment card data.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/computing/fortnite-had-a-security-vulnerability-that-let-hackers-take-over-accounts/ |title=Fortnite had a security vulnerability that let hackers take over accounts|website=CNET|date=16 January 2019|last=Ng|first=Alfred}}</ref> That and other breaches are estimated to have led to stolen Fortnite accounts being illegally sold to a value of over a million US dollars a year in underground forums.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Stolen Fortnite Accounts Earn Hackers Millions Per Year |last=O'Donnell |first=Lindsey |website=threat post |date=31 August 2020 |url= https://threatpost.com/stolen-fortnite-accounts-earn-hackers-millions/158796/}}</ref> A class action lawsuit against Epic Games was forming in 2019.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Epic Games faces class action lawsuit over Fortnite data breach |last=Batchelor |first=James |website=GamesIndustry.biz |date=12 August 2019 |url= https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2019-08-12-epic-games-faces-class-action-lawsuit-over-fortnite-data-breach}}</ref>

===2019===

* In March, [[Capital One]] was attacked as unauthorized access to [[Amazon Web Services]] (AWS) led to a data breach affecting 106 million customers of the financial service. This breach was discovered in June by the entity.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Novaes Neto |first=Nelson |last2=Madnick |first2=Stuart E. |last3=Moraes G. de Paula |first3=Anchises |last4=Malara Borges |first4=Natasha |date=2020 |title=A Case Study of the Capital One Data Breach |url=http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3542567 |journal=SSRN Electronic Journal |doi=10.2139/ssrn.3542567 |issn=1556-5068}}</ref>

* In May, personal data of roughly 139 million users of the graphic design service [[Canva]] were exposed, including real names of users, usernames, addresses and geographical information, and password hashes.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/australian-tech-unicorn-canva-suffers-security-breach/|title=Australian tech unicorn Canva suffers security breach|website=ZDNet|language=en|access-date=2019-12-07}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.tomsguide.com/us/canva-data-breach,news-30165.html|title=139 Million Users Hit in Canva Data Breach|website=Tom's Guide|date=24 May 2019|language=en|access-date=2019-12-07}}</ref>
* On July 16 Bulgaria’s National Revenue Agency, a branch of the country’s Ministry of Finance.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://gdpr.report/news/2019/07/16/hacker-causes-mass-data-breach-in-bulgaria/|title=Hacker causes mass data breach in Bulgaria|access-date=2019-07-17|archive-date=2020-09-29|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200929041113/https://gdpr.report/news/2019/07/16/hacker-causes-mass-data-breach-in-bulgaria/|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* In September, personal data of Ecuador's entire population of 17 million along with deceased people was breached after a marketing analytics firm Novestrat managed unsecured server leaked out full names, dates, places of birth, education, phone numbers and national identity numbers.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.zdnet.com/article/database-leaks-data-on-most-of-ecuadors-citizens-including-6-7-million-children/|title=Database leaks data on most of Ecuador's citizens, including 6.7 million children|date=September 16, 2019|website=ZDNet|access-date=2019-09-16}}</ref>

===2020===
* On July 7, the writing site [[Wattpad]] had a major data breach by [[ShinyHunters]], involving over 270 million users; users' data were sold on a forum in the [[darknet]], including password hashes.<ref name=WDB_1>{{cite web| title=Wattpad data breach exposes account info for millions of users| author=Abrams, L.| url=https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/wattpad-data-breach-exposes-account-info-for-millions-of-users| publisher=Bleeping Computer| date=14 July 2020| access-date=29 December 2023}}</ref>
* On November 11, the infamous game [[Animal Jam Classic]] and its sister game, Animal Jam, had its information leaked, with over 46 million accounts, including usernames, emails, passwords, and more, it was caused by a website hacking entity known as ShinyHunters.<ref name=anj_1>{{cite web| title=Animal Jam Data Breach Threatens Privacy of Children| url=https://www.manageengine.com/ems/cyber-town/animal-jam-data-breach-threatens-privacy-of-children.html| publisher=Zoho Corporation| date=2023| access-date=29 December 2023}}</ref>
* In mid December 2020, it was reported that multiple US federal government entities and many private organizations across the globe that were using [[SolarWinds]], [[Microsoft]] and [[VMWare]] products, became victims of an [[2020 United States federal government data breach|extensive data breach and hack]].<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/us/politics/russia-hack-nsa-homeland-security-pentagon.html|title = Scope of Russian Hacking Becomes Clear: Multiple U.S. Agencies Were Hit|newspaper = The New York Times|date = 15 December 2020|last1 = Sanger|first1 = David E.|last2 = Perlroth|first2 = Nicole|last3 = Schmitt|first3 = Eric}}</ref>

===2021===
* [[2021 Microsoft Exchange Server data breach]]<ref>{{Cite news|date=2021-03-12|title=Microsoft hack: 3,000 UK email servers remain unsecured|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-56372188|access-date=2021-03-12}}</ref>
* [[2021 Epik data breach]]
* [[Pandora Papers]]<ref>{{cite news |author=Díaz-Struck, Emilia |display-authors=et al. |title=Pandora Papers: An offshore data tsunami – The Pandora Papers's 11.9 million records arrived from 14 different offshore services firms in a jumble of files and formats – even ink-on-paper – presenting a massive data-management challenge |url=https://www.icij.org/investigations/pandora-papers/about-pandora-papers-leak-dataset/ |date=3 October 2021 |work=[[International Consortium of Investigative Journalists]] |accessdate=5 October 2021 }}</ref>

===2022===
* March: [[Anonymous (hacker group)|Anonymous]] leaked the contents of a database from [[Roscosmos]] amidst the [[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine]].<ref>{{cite web |last1=Faife |first1=Corin |title=Anonymous-linked group hacks Russian space research site, claims to leak mission files |url=https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/3/22960183/anonymous-hack-russian-space-research-roscosmos-ukraine |website=The Verge |access-date=9 March 2022 |language=en |date=3 March 2022}}</ref>
* July: Leak of [[Shanghai National Police Database]].
* September: [[Lapsus$]] leaked footage of [[Rockstar Games]]'s upcoming video game [[Grand Theft Auto VI]].

===2023===
* March: A ransomware attack on a company in [[Northern Ireland]] results in a [[Evide data breach|data breach affecting charities]], including one supporting adult survivors of child abuse.<ref name=tj-investigation-underway-into-cyber-attack>{{Cite news |title=Investigation underway into cyber attack affecting charities for sexual assault survivors |url=https://www.thejournal.ie/investigation-cyber-attack-ireland-charities-6045882-Apr2023/ |last=Boland |first=Lauren |date=2023-04-17 |access-date=2023-04-18 |work=[[TheJournal.ie]]}}</ref>
* December: [[Insomniac Games]] was the target of a hacker group [[Rhysida (hacker group)|Rhysida]]. The hackers leaked 1.7 terabytes of confidential information, including Insomniac’s plans for the next ten years. The leaks also include Marvel’s Wolverine gameplay, Sony and Marvel contracts, and more. The hackers also released personal information of Insomniac employees.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Hollingworth |first=David |date=2023-12-19 |title=Snikt! Rhysida dumps more than a terabyte of Insomniac Games’ internal data |url=https://www.cyberdaily.au/culture/9959-snikt-rhysida-dumps-more-than-a-terabyte-of-insomniac-games-internal-data |access-date=2024-02-17 |website=www.cyberdaily.au |language=en}}</ref>

=== 2024 ===
* January: A data breach dubbed the "mother of all breaches", or MOAB, was uncovered.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Winder |first=Davey |author-link=Davey Winder |date=Jan 23, 2024 |title=Warning As 26 Billion Records Leak: Dropbox, LinkedIn, Twitter Named |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2024/01/23/massive-26-billion-record-leak-dropbox-linkedin-twitterx-all-named/ |access-date=2024-03-11 |website=[[Forbes]] |language=en}}</ref> Over 26 billion records, including some from [[Twitter]], [[Adobe Inc.|Adobe]], [[Canva]], [[LinkedIn]], and [[Dropbox]], were found in the database.<ref>{{Cite news |date=Jan 25, 2024 |title=Massive data breach containing more than 26 billion leaked records |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODCcbwCVl9s |work=WKBW TV {{!}} Buffalo, NY |via=YouTube}}</ref> [[LinkedIn]] said in a statement that they had seen no evidence of their information being breached.<ref>{{Cite news |date=2024-01-29 |title=26 billion records exposed in "Mother of All Breaches": Report |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/gadgets-news/massive-database-with-26-billion-leaked-records-mother-of-all-breaches/articleshow/107097358.cms |access-date=2024-03-11 |work=The Times of India |issn=0971-8257}}</ref> No organization immediately claimed responsibility.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Dhaliwal |first=Jasdev |date=Jan 24, 2024 |title=26 Billion Records Released in “The mother of all breaches” |url=https://www.mcafee.com/blogs/internet-security/26-billion-records-released-the-mother-of-all-breaches/ |website=[[McAfee]]}}</ref>


==See also==
==See also==
* [[Full disclosure (computer security)]]
* [[Full disclosure (computer security)]]
* [[List of data breaches]]
* [[Medical data breach]]
* [[Surveillance capitalism]]
* [[Surveillance capitalism]]
* [[Data breaches in India]]
* [[Data breaches in India]]
Line 167: Line 88:
==References==
==References==
{{reflist|32em}}
{{reflist|32em}}
==Sources==

{{refbegin|indent=yes}}
==External links==
*{{cite book |last1=Ablon |first1=Lillian |last2=Bogart |first2=Andy |title=Zero Days, Thousands of Nights: The Life and Times of Zero-Day Vulnerabilities and Their Exploits |date=2017 |publisher=Rand Corporation |isbn=978-0-8330-9761-3 |language=en|url=https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1700/RR1751/RAND_RR1751.pdf}}
* "[https://wayback.archive-it.org/all/20150919100714/http://datalossdb.org/ Data Loss Database]" is a research project aimed at documenting known and reported data loss incidents world-wide.
*{{cite book |last1=Crawley |first1=Kim |title=8 Steps to Better Security: A Simple Cyber Resilience Guide for Business |date=2021 |publisher=John Wiley & Sons |isbn=978-1-119-81124-4 |language=en|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=51U-EAAAQBAJ}}
* "[https://web.archive.org/web/20130829050650/http://www.hhs.gov/ocr/privacy/hipaa/administrative/breachnotificationrule/breachtool.html Breaches Affecting 500 or More Individuals]", Breaches reported to the [[United States Department of Health and Human Services|U.S. Department of Health and Human Services]] by ([[Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act|HIPAA-covered]]) entities
*{{cite book |last1=Daswani |first1=Neil|authorlink=Neil Daswani |last2=Elbayadi |first2=Moudy |title=Big Breaches: Cybersecurity Lessons for Everyone |date=2021 |publisher=Apress |isbn=978-1-4842-6654-0 |language=en|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=HtkHzgEACAAJ}}

*{{cite book |last1=Davidoff |first1=Sherri |title=Data Breaches: Crisis and Opportunity |date=2019 |publisher=Addison-Wesley Professional |isbn=978-0-13-450772-9 |language=en}}
*{{cite report |last1=Fisher |first1=William |last2=Craft |first2=R. Eugene |last3=Ekstrom |first3=Michael |last4=Sexton |first4=Julian |last5=Sweetnam |first5=John |title=Data Confidentiality: Identifying and Protecting Assets Against Data Breaches |date=2024 |url=https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/SpecialPublications/NIST.SP.1800-28.pdf |series=NIST Special Publications |publisher=[[National Institute of Standards and Technology]]|ref={{sfnref|Fisher et al.|2024}}}}
*{{cite book |last1=Fowler |first1=Kevvie |title=Data Breach Preparation and Response: Breaches are Certain, Impact is Not |date=2016 |publisher=Elsevier Science |isbn=978-0-12-803451-4 |language=en|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=m5SZBgAAQBAJ}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Joerling |first1=Jill |title=Data Breach Notification Laws: An Argument for a Comprehensive Federal Law to Protect Consumer Data |journal=Washington University Journal of Law and Policy |date=2010 |volume=32 |pages=467 |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/wajlp32&div=16&id=&page=}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Kaster |first1=Sean D. |last2=Ensign |first2=Prescott C. |title=Privatized espionage: NSO Group Technologies and its Pegasus spyware |journal=Thunderbird International Business Review |date=2023 |volume=65 |issue=3 |pages=355–364 |doi=10.1002/tie.22321|doi-access=free }}
*{{cite book |last1=Lenhard |first1=Thomas H. |title=Data Security: Technical and Organizational Protection Measures against Data Loss and Computer Crime |date=2022 |publisher=Springer Nature |isbn=978-3-658-35494-7 |language=en}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Lesemann |first1=Dana J. |title=One More unto the Breach: An Analysis of Legal, Technological, and Policy Issues Involving Data Breach Notification Statutes |journal=Akron Intellectual Property Journal |date=2010 |volume=4 |pages=203 |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/akrintel4&div=12&id=&page=}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Makridis |first1=Christos A |title=Do data breaches damage reputation? Evidence from 45 companies between 2002 and 2018 |journal=Journal of Cybersecurity |date=2021 |volume=7 |issue=1 |doi=10.1093/cybsec/tyab021|doi-access=free }}
*{{cite book |author1=[[National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine]] |title=Data Breach Aftermath and Recovery for Individuals and Institutions: Proceedings of a Workshop |date=2016 |publisher=National Academies Press |isbn=978-0-309-44505-4 |language=en |chapter=Forum on Cyber Resilience Workshop Series|url=https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/23559/data-breach-aftermath-and-recovery-for-individuals-and-institutions-proceedings}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Ntantogian |first1=Christoforos |last2=Malliaros |first2=Stefanos |last3=Xenakis |first3=Christos |title=Evaluation of password hashing schemes in open source web platforms |journal=Computers & Security |date=2019 |volume=84 |pages=206–224 |doi=10.1016/j.cose.2019.03.011}}
*{{cite book |last1=Seaman |first1=Jim |title=PCI DSS: An Integrated Data Security Standard Guide |date=2020 |publisher=Apress |isbn=978-1-4842-5808-8 |language=en}}
*{{cite book |last1=Shukla |first1=Samiksha |last2=George |first2=Jossy P. |last3=Tiwari |first3=Kapil |last4=Kureethara |first4=Joseph Varghese |title=Data Ethics and Challenges |date=2022 |publisher=Springer Nature |isbn=978-981-19-0752-4 |language=en|ref={{sfnref|Shukla et al.|2022}}}}
*{{cite book |last1=Sloan |first1=Robert H. |last2=Warner |first2=Richard |title=Why Don't We Defend Better?: Data Breaches, Risk Management, and Public Policy |date=2019 |publisher=CRC Press |isbn=978-1-351-12729-5 |language=en}}
*{{cite book |last1=Solove |first1=Daniel J.|authorlink=Daniel J. Solove |last2=Hartzog |first2=Woodrow |title=Breached!: Why Data Security Law Fails and How to Improve it |date=2022 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-094057-7 |language=en|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EenMzQEACAAJ}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Talesh |first1=Shauhin A. |title=Data Breach, Privacy, and Cyber Insurance: How Insurance Companies Act as "Compliance Managers" for Businesses |journal=Law & Social Inquiry |date=2018 |volume=43 |issue=2 |pages=417–440 |doi=10.1111/lsi.12303}}
*{{cite book |last1=Thomas |first1=Liisa M. |title=Thomas on Data Breach: A Practical Guide to Handling Data Breach Notifications Worldwide |date=2023 |publisher=[[Thomson Reuters]] |isbn=978-1-7319-5405-3 |language=en|url=https://static.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/product_files/relateddocs/243610_20248_1038.pdf}}
*{{cite book |last1=Tjoa |first1=Simon |last2=Gafić |first2=Melisa |last3=Kieseberg |first3=Peter |title=Cyber Resilience Fundamentals |date=2024 |publisher=Springer Nature |isbn=978-3-031-52064-8 |language=en|ref={{sfnref|Tjoa et al.|2024}}}}
{{refend}}
{{Information security}}
{{Information security}}
{{Authority control}}
{{Authority control}}

Revision as of 16:10, 5 May 2024

A data breach, also known as data leakage, is "the unauthorized exposure, disclosure, or loss of personal information".[1]

Attackers have a variety of motives, from financial gain to political activism, political repression, and espionage. There are several technical root causes of data breaches, including accidental or intentional disclosure of information by insiders, loss or theft of unencrypted devices, hacking into a system by exploiting software vulnerabilities, and social engineering attacks such as phishing where insiders are tricked into disclosing information. Although prevention efforts by the company holding the data can reduce the risk of data breach, it cannot bring it to zero.

The first reported breach was in 2002 and the number occurring each year has grown since then. A large number of data breaches are never detected. If a breach is made known to the company holding the data, post-breach efforts commonly include containing the breach, investigating its scope and cause, and notifications to people whose records were compromised, as required by law in many jurisdictions. Law enforcement agencies may investigate breaches, although the hackers responsible are rarely caught.

Many criminals sell data obtained in breaches on the dark web. Thus, people whose personal data was compromised are at elevated risk of identity theft for years afterwards and a significant number will become victims of this crime. Data breach notification laws in many jurisdictions, including all states of the United States and European Union member states, require the notification of people whose data has been breached. Lawsuits against the company that was breached are common, although few victims receive money from them. There is little empirical evidence of economic harm to firms from breaches except the direct cost, although there is some evidence suggesting a temporary, short-term decline in stock price.

Definition

A data breach is a violation of "organizational, regulatory, legislative or contractual" law or policy[2] that causes "the unauthorized exposure, disclosure, or loss of personal information".[1] Legal and contractual definitions vary.[3][2] Some researchers include other types of information, for example intellectual property or classified information.[4] However, companies mostly disclose breaches because it is required by law,[5] and only personal information is covered by data breach notification laws.[6][7]

Prevalence

Data breaches reported in the United States by year, 2005–2023

The first reported data breach occurred on 5 April 2002[8] when 250,000 social security numbers collected by the State of California were stolen from a data center.[9] Before the widespread adoption of data breach notification laws around 2005, the prevalence of data breaches is difficult to determine. Even afterwards, statistics per year cannot be relied on because data breaches may be reported years after they occurred,[10] or not reported at all.[11] Nevertheless, the statistics show a continued increase in the number and severity of data breaches that continues as of 2022.[12] In 2016, researcher Sasha Romanosky estimated that data breaches (excluding phishing) outnumbered other security breaches by a factor of four.[13]

Perpetrators

According to a 2020 estimate, 55 percent of data breaches were caused by organized crime, 10 percent by system administrators, 10 percent by end users such as customers or employees, and 10 percent by states or state-affiliated actors.[14] Opportunistic criminals may cause data breaches—often using malware or social engineering attacks, but they will typically move on if the security is above average. More organized criminals have more resources and are more focused in their targeting of particular data.[15] Both of them sell the information they obtain for financial gain.[16] Another source of data breaches are politically motivated hackers, for example Anonymous, that target particular objectives.[17] State-sponsored hackers target either citizens of their country or foreign entities, for such purposes as political repression and espionage. Often they use undisclosed zero-day vulnerabilities for which the hackers are paid large sums of money.[18] The Pegasus spyware—a no-click malware developed by the Israeli company NSO Group that can be installed on most cellphones and spies on the users' activity—has drawn attention both for use against criminals such as drug kingpin El Chapo as well as political dissidents, facilitating the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.[19]

Causes

Technical causes

Despite developers' goal of delivering a product that works entirely as intended, virtually all software and hardware contains bugs.[20] If a bug creates a security risk, it is called a vulnerability.[21][22][23] Patches are often released to fix identified vulnerabilities, but those that remain unknown (zero days) as well as those that have not been patched are still liable for exploitation.[24] Both software written by the target of the breach and third party software used by them are vulnerable to attack.[22] The software vendor is rarely legally liable for the cost of breaches, thus creating an incentive to make cheaper but less secure software.[25]

Vulnerabilities vary in their ability to be exploited by malicious actors. The most valuable allow the attacker to inject and run their own code (called malware), without the user being aware of it.[21] Some malware is downloaded by users via clicking on a malicious link, but it is also possible for malicious web applications to download malware just from visiting the website (drive-by download). Keyloggers, a type of malware that records a user's keystrokes, are often used in data breaches.[26] The majority of data breaches could have been averted by storing all sensitive information in an encrypted format. That way, physical possession of the storage device or access to encrypted information is useless unless the attacker has the encryption key.[27] Hashing is also a good solution for keeping passwords safe from brute-force attacks, but only if the algorithm is sufficiently secure.[28]

Many data breaches occur on the hardware operated by a partner of the organization targeted—including the 2013 Target data breach and 2014 JPMorgan Chase data breach.[29] Outsourcing work to a third party leads to a risk of data breach if that company has lower security standards; in particular, small companies often lack the resources to take as many security precautions.[30][29] As a result, outsourcing agreements often include security guarantees and provisions for what happens in the event of a data breach.[30]

Human causes

Human causes of breach are often based on trust of another actor that turns out to be malicious. Social engineering attacks rely on tricking an insider into doing something that compromises the system's security, such as revealing a password or clicking a link to download malware.[31] Data breaches may also be deliberately caused by insiders.[32] One type of social engineering, phishing,[31] obtains a user's credentials by sending them a malicious message impersonating a legitimate entity, such as a bank, and getting the user to enter their credentials onto a malicious website controlled by the cybercriminal. Two-factor authentication can prevent the malicious actor from using the credentials.[33] Training employees to recognize social engineering is another common strategy.[34]

Another source of breaches is accidental disclosure of information, for example publishing information that should be kept private.[35][36] With the increase in remote work and bring your own device policies, large amounts of corporate data is stored on personal devices of employees. Via carelessness or disregard of company security policies, these devices can be lost or stolen.[37] Technical solutions can prevent many causes of human error, such as encrypting all sensitive data, preventing employees from using insecure passwords, installing antivirus software to prevent malware, and implementing a robust patching system to ensure that all devices are kept up to date.[38]

Breach lifecycle

Prevention

Although attention to security can reduce the risk of data breach, it cannot bring it to zero. Security is not the only priority of organizations, and an attempt to achieve perfect security would make the technology unusable.[39] Many companies hire a chief information security officer (CISO) to oversee the company's information security strategy.[40] To obtain information about potential threats, security professionals will network with each other and share information with other organizations facing similar threats.[41] Defense measures can include an updated incident response strategy, contracts with digital forensics firms that could investigate a breach,[42] cyber insurance,[43][7] and monitoring the dark web for stolen credentials of employees.[44] In 2024, the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) issued a special publication, "Data Confidentiality: Identifying and Protecting Assets Against Data Breaches".[45] The NIST Cybersecurity Framework also contains information about data protection.[46] Other organizations have released different standards for data protection.[47]

The architecture of a company's systems plays a key role in deterring attackers. Daswani and Elbayadi recommend having only one means of authentication,[48] avoiding redundant systems, and making the most secure setting default.[49] Defense in depth and distributed privilege (requiring multiple authentications to execute an operation) also can make a system more difficult to hack.[50] Giving employees and software the least amount of access necessary to fulfill their functions (principle of least privilege) limits the likelihood and damage of breaches.[48][51] Several data breaches were enabled by reliance on security by obscurity; the victims had put access credentials in publicly accessible files.[52] Nevertheless, prioritizing ease of use is also important because otherwise users might circumvent the security systems.[53] Rigorous software testing, including penetration testing, can reduce software vulnerabilities, and must be performed prior to each release even if the company is using a continuous integration/continuous deployment model where new versions are constantly being rolled out.[54]

The principle of least persistence[55]—avoiding the collection of data that is not necessary and destruction of data that is no longer necessary—can mitigate the harm from breaches.[56][57][58] The challenge is that destroying data can be more complex with modern database systems.[59]

Response

A large number of data breaches are never detected.[60] Of those that are, most breaches are detected by third parties;[61][62] others are detected by employees or automated systems.[63] Responding to breaches is often the responsibility of a dedicated computer security incident response team, often including technical experts, public relations, and legal counsel.[64][65] Many companies do not have sufficient expertise in-house, and subcontract some of these roles;[66] often, these outside resources are provided by the cyber insurance policy.[67] After a data breach becomes known to the company, the next steps typically include confirming it occurred, notifying the response team, and attempting to contain the damage.[68]

To stop exfiltration of data, common strategies include shutting down affected servers, taking them offline, patching the vulnerability, and rebuilding.[69] Once the exact way that the data was compromised is identified, there is typically only one or two technical vulnerabilities that need to be addressed in order to contain the breach and prevent it from reoccurring.[70] A penetration test can then verify that the fix is working as expected.[71] If malware is involved, the organization must investigate and close all infiltration and exfiltration vectors, as well as locate and remove all malware from its systems.[72] If data was posted on the dark web, companies may attempt to have it taken down.[73] Containing the breach can compromise investigation, and some tactics (such as shutting down servers) can violate the company's contractual obligations.[74]

Gathering data about the breach can facilitate later litigation or criminal prosecution,[75] but only if the data is gathered according to legal standards and the chain of custody is maintained.[76] Database forensics can narrow down the records involved, limiting the scope of the incident.[77] Extensive investigation may be undertaken, which can be even more expensive that litigation.[62] In the United States, breaches may be investigated by government agencies such as the Office for Civil Rights, the United States Department of Health and Human Services, and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).[78] Law enforcement agencies may investigate breaches[79] although the hackers responsible are rarely caught.[80]

Notifications are typically sent out as required by law.[81] Many companies offer free credit monitoring to people affected by a data breach, although only around 5 percent of those eligible take advantage of the service.[82] Issuing new credit cards to consumers, although expensive, is an effective strategy to reduce the risk of credit card fraud.[82] Companies try to restore trust in their business operations and take steps to prevent a breach from reoccurring.[83]

Consequences

For consumers

After a data breach, criminals make money by selling data, such as usernames, passwords, social media or customer loyalty account information, debit and credit card numbers,[16] and personal health information (see medical data breach).[84] Criminals often sell this data on the dark web—parts of the internet where it is difficult to trace users and illicit activity is widespread—using platforms like .onion or I2P.[85] Originating in the 2000s, the dark web, followed by untraceable cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin in the 2010s, made it possible for criminals to sell data obtained in breaches with minimal risk of getting caught, facilitating an increase in hacking.[86][87] One popular darknet marketplace, Silk Road, was shut down in 2013 and its operators arrested, but several other marketplaces emerged in its place.[88] Telegram is also a popular forum for illegal sales of data.[89]

This information may be used for a variety of purposes, such as spamming, obtaining products with a victim's loyalty or payment information, identity theft, prescription drug fraud, or insurance fraud.[90] The threat of data breach or revealing information obtained in a data breach can be used for extortion.[16]

Consumers may suffer various forms of tangible or intangible harm from the theft of their personal data, or not notice any harm.[91] A significant portion of those affected by a data breach become victims of identity theft.[82] A person's identifying information often circulates on the dark web for years, causing an increased risk of identity theft regardless of remediation efforts.[80][92] Even if a customer does not end up footing the bill for credit card fraud or identity theft, they have to spend time resolving the situation.[93][94] Intangible harms include doxxing (publicly revealing someone's personal information), for example medication usage or personal photos.[95]

For organizations

There is little empirical evidence of economic harm from breaches except the direct cost, although there is some evidence suggesting a temporary, short-term decline in stock price.[96] Other impacts on the company can range from lost business, reduced employee productivity due to systems being offline or personnel redirected to working on the breach,[97] resignation or firing of senior executives,[78] reputational damage,[78][98] and increasing the future cost of auditing or security.[78] Consumer losses from a breach are usually a negative externality for the business.[99] Some experts have argued that the evidence suggests there is not enough direct costs or reputational damage from data breaches to sufficiently incentivize their prevention.[100][101]

Estimating the cost of data breaches is difficult, both because not all breaches are reported and also because calculating the impact of breaches in financial terms is not straightforward. There are multiple ways of calculating the cost to businesses, especially when it comes to personnel time dedicated to dealing with the breach.[102] Author Kevvie Fowler estimates that more than half the direct cost incurred by companies is in the form of litigation expenses and services provided to affected individuals, with the remaining cost split between notification and detection, including forensics and investigation. He argues that these costs are reduced if the organization has invested in security prior to the breach or has previous experience with breaches. The more data records involved, the more expensive a breach typically will be.[103] In 2016, researcher Sasha Romanosky estimated that while the mean breach cost around the targeted firm $5 million, this figure was inflated by a few highly expensive breaches, and the typical data breach was much less costly, around $200,000. Romanosky estimated the total annual cost to corporations in the United States to be around $10 billion.[104]

Laws

Notification

The law regarding data breaches is often found in legislation to protect privacy more generally, and is dominated by provisions mandating notification when breaches occur.[105] Laws differ greatly in how breaches are defined,[3] what type of information is protected, the deadline for notification,[6] and who has standing to sue if the law is violated.[106] Notification laws increase transparency and provide an reputational incentive for companies to reduce breaches.[107] The cost of notifying the breach can be high if many people were affected and is incurred regardless of the company's responsibility, so it can function like a strict liability fine.[108]

As of 2024, Thomas on Data Breach listed 62 United Nations member states that are covered by data breach notification laws. Some other countries require breach notification in more general data protection laws.[109] Shortly after the first reported data breach in April 2002, California passed a law requiring notification when an individual's personal information was breached.[9] In the United States, notification laws proliferated after the February 2005 ChoicePoint data breach, widely publicized in part because of the large number of people affected (more than 140,000) and also because of outrage that the company initially informed only affected people in California.[110][111] In 2018, the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) took effect. The GDPR requires notification within 72 hours, with very high fines possible for large companies not in compliance. This regulation also stimulated the tightening of data privacy laws elsewhere.[112][113] As of 2022, the only United States federal law requiring notification for data breaches is limited to medical data regulated under HIPAA, but all 50 states (since Alabama passed a law in 2018) have their own general data breach notification laws.[113]

Security safeguards

Measures to protect data from a breach are typically absent from the law or vague.[105] Filling this gap is standards required by cyber insurance, which is held by most large companies and functions as de facto regulation.[114][115] Of the laws that do exist, there are two main approaches—one that prescribes specific standards to follow, and the reasonableness approach.[116] The former is rarely used due to a lack of flexibility and reluctance of legislators to arbitrate technical issues; with the latter approach, the law is vague but specific standards can emerge from case law.[117] Companies often prefer the standards approach for providing greater legal certainty, but they might check all the boxes without providing a secure product.[118] An additional flaw is that the laws are poorly enforced, with penalties often much less than the cost of a breach, and many companies do not follow them.[119]

Litigation

Many class-action lawsuits, derivative suits, and other litigation have been brought after data breaches.[120] They are often settled regardless of the merits of the case due to the high cost of litigation.[121][122] Even if a settlement is paid, few affected consumers receive any money as it usually is only cents to a few dollars per victim.[78][122] Legal scholars Daniel J. Solove and Woodrow Hartzog argue that "Litigation has increased the costs of data breaches but has accomplished little else."[123] Plaintiffs often struggle to prove that they suffered harm from a data breach.[123] The contribution of a company's actions to a data breach varies,[119][124] and likewise the liability for the damage resulting for data breaches is a contested matter. It is disputed what standard should be applied, whether it is strict liability, negligence, or something else.[124]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 5.
  2. ^ a b Fowler 2016, p. 2.
  3. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 41.
  4. ^ Shukla et al. 2022, pp. 47–48.
  5. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 18.
  6. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 42.
  7. ^ a b Fowler 2016, p. 45.
  8. ^ Joerling 2010, p. 468 fn 7.
  9. ^ a b Lesemann 2010, p. 206.
  10. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 18.
  11. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 29.
  12. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, pp. 17–18.
  13. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 9.
  14. ^ Crawley 2021, p. 46.
  15. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 7–8.
  16. ^ a b c Fowler 2016, p. 13.
  17. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 9–10.
  18. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 10–11.
  19. ^ Kaster & Ensign 2023, p. 355.
  20. ^ Ablon & Bogart 2017, p. 1.
  21. ^ a b Ablon & Bogart 2017, p. 2.
  22. ^ a b Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 25.
  23. ^ Seaman 2020, pp. 47–48.
  24. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 26–27.
  25. ^ Sloan & Warner 2019, pp. 104–105.
  26. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 19–22.
  27. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 15.
  28. ^ Ntantogian, Malliaros & Xenakis 2019.
  29. ^ a b Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 22–23.
  30. ^ a b Fowler 2016, pp. 19–20.
  31. ^ a b Sloan & Warner 2019, p. 94.
  32. ^ Makridis 2021, p. 3.
  33. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 16–19.
  34. ^ Sloan & Warner 2019, pp. 106–107.
  35. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 28.
  36. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 19.
  37. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 18–19.
  38. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 31–32.
  39. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, pp. 69–70.
  40. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 7, 9–10.
  41. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 200–201.
  42. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 203–204.
  43. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 205.
  44. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 206–207.
  45. ^ Fisher et al. 2024, Title page.
  46. ^ Fisher et al. 2024, p. 2.
  47. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 210.
  48. ^ a b Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 217.
  49. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 215–216.
  50. ^ Tjoa et al. 2024, p. 14.
  51. ^ Lenhard 2022, p. 53.
  52. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, p. 218.
  53. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 218–219.
  54. ^ Daswani & Elbayadi 2021, pp. 314–315.
  55. ^ Tjoa et al. 2024, p. 68.
  56. ^ Lenhard 2022, p. 60.
  57. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 184.
  58. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 146.
  59. ^ Tjoa et al. 2024, p. 69.
  60. ^ Crawley 2021, p. 39.
  61. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 64.
  62. ^ a b National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 25.
  63. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 4.
  64. ^ Crawley 2021, p. 97.
  65. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 5, 32.
  66. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 86.
  67. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 94.
  68. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 4–5.
  69. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 120–122.
  70. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 115.
  71. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 116.
  72. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 117–118.
  73. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 119.
  74. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 124.
  75. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 81–82.
  76. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 83.
  77. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 128.
  78. ^ a b c d e National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 22.
  79. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 44.
  80. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 58.
  81. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 5, 44.
  82. ^ a b c National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 13.
  83. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 5–6.
  84. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 14.
  85. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 12–13.
  86. ^ Davidoff 2019, "Modern dark data brokers".
  87. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 21.
  88. ^ Howell, Christian Jordan; Maimon, David (2 December 2022). "Darknet markets generate millions in revenue selling stolen personal data, supply chain study finds". The Conversation. Retrieved 22 April 2024.
  89. ^ https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12117-024-09532-6
  90. ^ Fowler 2016, pp. 13–14.
  91. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 27.
  92. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, pp. 30–31.
  93. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 29.
  94. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 56.
  95. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, pp. 27–29.
  96. ^ Makridis 2021, p. 1.
  97. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 22.
  98. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 41.
  99. ^ Sloan & Warner 2019, p. 104.
  100. ^ Makridis 2021, pp. 1, 7.
  101. ^ Sloan & Warner 2019, p. 64.
  102. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, pp. 8–10.
  103. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 21.
  104. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 10.
  105. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 10.
  106. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 43.
  107. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 44.
  108. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 45.
  109. ^ Thomas 2023, pp. xxvii, xxix, xxxii–xxxiii, xxxiv.
  110. ^ Lesemann 2010, pp. 206–207.
  111. ^ Joerling 2010, pp. 468–469.
  112. ^ Seaman 2020, pp. 6–7.
  113. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 40.
  114. ^ National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 24.
  115. ^ Talesh 2018, p. 237.
  116. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 48.
  117. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, pp. 48–49.
  118. ^ Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 52.
  119. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 53.
  120. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 5.
  121. ^ Fowler 2016, p. 222.
  122. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, pp. 55, 59.
  123. ^ a b Solove & Hartzog 2022, p. 55.
  124. ^ a b National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2016, p. 23.

Sources