Military Healthcare Data Stolen 302
An anonymous reader writes "TriWest, a federal contractor providing healthcare to the military, had computer hardware stolen from one of their offices. Social security numbers, credit card numbers, and healthcare information about 500,000 US military personnel and their families is contained on the stolen hardware. The AP picked up the story. The theft is also being covered by the Salt Lake Tribune and the Arizona Republic. This opens the door to speculation about who would be interested in the data held by a military contractor and what they will do with the information."
hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well if the military keeps a record of imunizations of its soldiers, then any country wishing to use bio weapons upon the US could use their medical record to determine which viruses/bacteria/pathogens they are weakest against.
Re:hmm... (Score:2)
Identity Theft heaven (Score:2, Interesting)
had to prep all of his vital information "in
the event of". This data probabaly contains
all the info one could ever desire to carry
out succesful ID theft:
for dependents?
the theft for an extended period
authorities busy
Dissolve the assets of the company
as a lesson for protectors of our data, and
make a slush fund to pay out when the
attacks start.
Re:hmm... (Score:2)
And I can sharpen my pencil and stab you in the eye -- instantly blinding you. But will I do it? Heck no.
The US goverment loves to use words like "could", "possibly","should have", "probably", "might", "may" to sway public opinions to their favour by instilling fear.
Yes, there were some crazy nut heads who did 9/11, but does not mean accusation without concrete evidence is justified.
Heimatsicherheitshauptamt (Score:2)
I recommend German for all government titles of such offices.
;-)
It has a certain satiric edge
Re:hmm... (Score:4, Interesting)
Anyway, a main goal of HIPAA is the Doctor-Patient confidentiality (which is in existance today, but not really upheld). Basically, the simple fact that you go to a certian doctor is concidered "secret" by federal law... I'd imagine that for the military, it's a little more strict.
Re:hmm... (Score:2, Interesting)
As far as I'm aware, the next round of extensions run out next October.
However, nothing I've seen about HIPPA would have stopped this. It just instructs them to take "reasonable precautions", and describes what types and combinations of information can't be accessed by unauthorized users.
Re:hmm... (Score:2)
my point is that data like this isn't going to help superpowers. it simply allows small factions to have greater leverage in their dealings.
Only if it's effective! An ineffective weapon remains ineffective no matter who's holding it.
as for Bio weapons, yes they can be effective.
Can you support this assertion?
The superpowers didn't pursue biowarfare much because it's just not very effective against armies, and the superpowers weren't (generally) interested in killing hordes of civilians. The potential efficacy of biological agents against civilians isn't relevant to this discussion, because stealing military health records doesn't tell you anything about the civilian targets. And, frankly, terrorists aren't really interested in attacking military forces anyway, because soldiers are harder to kill and because dead soldiers don't generate as much general fear, and therefore political influence, as dead civilians.
for a group that would like to see nothing more than the US fall, killing ones self (that is a bonus in some cultures)
Whether a group minds dying in order to effect the deaths of their enemies is irrelevant if they fail to inflict significant damage. Also, it's absolutely untrue that dying is a "bonus" to fanatical Muslims (why euphemize? "some cultures", indeed). To them, death is acceptable because they'll be rewarded, but the same reward can be achieved without suicide.
in general, superpowers worry as much about their image in the world eye as they do in winning the battle. small factions could care less... they generally beleive that anyone who dislikes their approach is an enemy anyway.
True. Relevance? Terrorists want to create terror, they commit acts that are indisputably heinous and despised by all reasonable people around the world. Fine. Why does this make them more likely to use biological agents against military forces? And how does it make those agents more effective?
Who is stupid enough... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Who is stupid enough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Big surprise? (Score:5, Insightful)
Healthcare sysadmins are often pretty poorly paid and are often people who would not make it in a business environment, and the security is often minimal. I know, I 'test' it.
I think we will have a few more of these disasters until the healthcare industry realises that IT is part of its core business and has to pay accordingly.
Re:Big surprise? (Score:2)
Just proves the hackers axiom (Score:5, Insightful)
if you haven't got physical security, you haven't got ANY security.
Re:Just proves the hackers axiom (Score:2)
I know, keeping the key elsewhere could have been a total pita in this case, depending on how the data was used/how often the host system was restarted, if it needed to be able to restart itself from a failure with no admin/user intervention, etc. etc...but if you can encrypt the data, at least it is just hardware you lose when your physical security breaks down.
Re:Big surprise? (Score:2)
Sweet, I know where to apply for a job now! Awesome, thanks buddy! (and to think all those big companies laughed at my resume!!)
Not sexy, but effective (Score:4, Interesting)
This makes me think of all the conference speeches I've given on security, watching folks yawn through the physical security sections.
Firewall indeed.
-JPJ
Re:Not sexy, but effective (Score:3, Insightful)
In other news... (Score:4, Funny)
What ?!?!? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What ?!?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Who wouldn't want to know all that juicy data? Just think - blackmailing GI's who haven't got their latest TB shot...
learning the secrets to healthcare in the military..
The list goes on and on
Re:What ?!?!? (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah, I can just see Agents of a Foreign Power going round to their homes and threatening them with a rusty nail.
"You for us work now, comrade, or poke you with this, we do!"
RTFA (Score:4, Insightful)
Thieves who broke into a government contractor's office snatched computer hard drives containing Social Security numbers, addresses and other records of about 500,000 members of the military and their families.
Only the harddrives were taken from the machines, so unless the thieves were desperate for more space to download mp3s onto, then it's quite probable that they were just after the data.
Re:RTFA (Score:5, Informative)
Keep in mind that when geeks like us talk about 'harddrives', that's not the same thing as what the general population refers to as 'harddrives'. Nearly every non-geek I've met thinks that the case is the hard drive.
These thieves may have stolen the computers (leaving the bulky monitors), and the non-geek reporter wrote that they only took the harddrives.
Re:RTFA (Score:3, Informative)
Whoever reported it wrote that kids were paid up to $AUS500 for each "hard drive" stolen from schools - the reality is kids were allegedly paid this much for stealing brand new fileservers and laptops.
a grrl & her server [danamania.com]
Re:RTFA (Score:3, Funny)
Re:RTFA (Score:2, Funny)
Well shit, let's call up the RIAA and let them track the f***ers down.
Re:What ?!?!? (Score:2, Insightful)
It was probably a RAID set of SCSI drives, which AFAIK aren't that easy to sell to your average stolen property fence.
That, and given the fact that this was not a random theft (planning etc.), leads me to think that the SSNs were the target. And that whoever was responsible knows how to extract the data.
500,000 SSNs must be worth a lot of money to some criminal(s) out there.
National Strategy to secure.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:National Strategy to secure.... (Score:2)
<sarcasm>Oh, clearly. Heaven forbid they try to secure both the hardware and the network!</sarcasm>
Huh?
Re:National Strategy to secure.... (Score:2)
No, maybe people should quit bitching about how the military spends so much money causing them to outsource everything. Just like how they want to outsource the whole "Big Brother" act.
stiff penalties for careless companies (Score:4, Insightful)
Bear with me a moment... (Score:2, Insightful)
Policeperson: Sorry, you should have treated that wallet with more care. In fact, here's ticket for a few hundred million dollars that will help motivate you to "take better care" of your wallet.
Re:Bear with me a moment... (Score:2)
Old woman hires person because she knows she can't protect her wallet. Person charges old woman money for it. Person gets robbed, doesn't put up a fight... says "fuck it, I'm not getting in a fight over someone else's friggin wallet"...
Old woman scratches her head.
The other edge of the sword though is this:
Old woman... [same as above yadi yada]... Says to Person, you know, I'm paying you an awful lot to just walk next to me holding my purse. So I'll pay you just to walk and hold my purse... $<minimum wage>/hr (because, as chris rock says: "I'd pay you less, but it just ain't legal"). Person gets mugged, and thinks, "Fuck! I'm just getting paid to walk... not fight".
your analogy is wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
You see, your private information is valuable. If it falls into the wrong hands, you may lose your life savings. Companies that you entrust with it have a duty to treat it with care.
Furthermore, the tax payer shouldn't be responsible for tracking down losses that are enabled by the complete carelessness of poorly run businesses.
It's a well-established legal principle that if you entrust somebody with something valuable, in many cases, they are legally responsible if it's lost or stolen if they didn't take proper care of it. In fact, airlines are liable for loss of your luggage even if they did take proper care of it.
Since personal information is often much more valuable than luggage and since losses are hard to quantify (e.g., suffering from identity theft, etc.), penalties should be stiff.
If a company takes reasonable care to secure their computer systems physically and against break-ins, then they shouldn't be penalized for negligence when data is stolen (although they may still be liable). But this case, like most others, smacks of complete negligence on the part of the company.
Re:Bear with me a moment... (Score:2)
That's right. That bastard mugger affected your wallet, not the wallets of 500,000 other people.
Get real. People and corporations need to be held accountable for their actions - otherwise why would something like HIPAA exist in the first place? Yes, the people who stole it are deplorable and need to be punished - but the people who allowed it to be stolen so carelessly hold accountability, too.
Re:stiff penalties for careless companies (Score:2)
But the clueless (and as you seemed to have implied, "harmless") hackers have broken a law or two. They absolutely deserve whatever criminal proceedings are forthcoming. The business deserves, simply, to lose its government contract. Why you want to complicate this matter and rewrite corporate law is beyond me.
Your sensationalism would imply things like this are routine, when in fact, the rarity of these events is due to the two after-effects I've mentioned above.
Re:stiff penalties for careless companies (Score:4, Interesting)
Sure, there is. In many situations, where you entrust companies or individuals with valuable or private information, they have a responsibility to take reasonable care to keep it private. It's just that there aren't particularly stiff penalties right now. And that has resulted in an unacceptable carelessness by companies when dealing with customer information.
The business deserves, simply, to lose its government contract. Why you want to complicate this matter and rewrite corporate law is beyond me.
We have notions of "fiduciary duty" and "criminal negligence" for physical property. It makes sense to apply them to what companies do with personal information.
Re:stiff penalties for careless companies (Score:2)
>customer data with appropriate care." Punishment
>is the result of a specific law being broken,
>not some romantic H4X0R ideal.
Medical records, in particular, DO have laws respecting their confidentiality.
What's more, there is hopefully, specific language in the contract (this is a defense contractor we're talking about here!) that would be intended to ensure security.
The result of this will probably be to make it even harder for a regular geek to get work in healthcare companies which deal with military accounts... which were most of my lukewarm prospects.
Rather than? (Score:2)
It's the "rather than" that blows me away. It's not just that we have no way of knowing who was behind the crime, clueless or not, but that you somehow think there aren't the resources to go after everyone responsible.
Absent some sort of immunity, the contractor is civilly liable for consequential losses to both the government and the individuals. They appear quite aware of this judging from their remedial steps, and they have plenty on the line without the government butting in with "penalties." At worst the company was negligent -- and we don't know that, either. There is not a thing in the articles suggesting TriWest was at fault. As it now stands they may be a mere victim.
By my count thus far you're comment is riding atop three shaky assumptions. You're lucky there's no fine for ill-considered speculation.
Re:Rather than? (Score:2)
Watch for TriWest to lose all their government business in the near future; they have shown themselves unable to meet the minimal standards required to secure personal information (let alone information dealing with national security!)
Re:Rather than? (Score:2)
Punks? Where are you getting this stuff? They have no idea who the thieves were. It is this kind of prejudgment without facts that I was objecting to. I don't see the basis for your inference, not yet. My first question is why there wasn't encryption -- but then maybe there was.
I just looked and found a little more detail [fra.org], which suggests laxity but not waltzing. It is still hard to say, and the pub may be biased towards military personnel. It is unclear what "apparently gained access to a property manager's office" entailed doing. Inside job?:
Do they even know they have the data? (Score:4, Interesting)
talk about a HIPAA violation (Score:4, Insightful)
Data like this is a gold mine if the thieves have any idea how to use it. I hope they are advising people to put fraud alerts on their credit reports... but there are things worse than identity theft. What might that information be worth to a foreign power, or terrorist organization?
Who was the target? (Score:2)
It said that "hard drives" were stolen... what about the rest of the PC? If other electronic equipment was stolen, it could just be a simple theft.
Regardless of the target, I have a feeling the military will be doing a detailed investigation. If it's just common crooks, they could find themselves in a whole lotta trouble after messing with the military.
Re:Who was the target? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Who was the target? (Score:2)
Re:Who was the target? (Score:2)
Re:Who was the target? (Score:2)
It's pretty hard to make an educated guess/decision on something with such sparse details, hopefully we'll hear more from this a little later - and find out that "hard drives"="full PC's."
Meanwhilst, I'll bet we have a bunch of thieves with brown stains in their pants after hearing the PC's they jacked contain military property...
Bad, very bad... (Score:3, Insightful)
"Now where were we? Oh yes. Now, Lieutenant, I'd like you to begin talking. And please remember, your parents' lives depend on what you say. Name, rank and serial number are not acceptable."
Which is more disturbing? (Score:2)
Re:Bad, very bad... (Score:4, Insightful)
Suppose the following scenario: you are kidnapped, taken to a small room and tortured, then someone asks you for classified information, or to betray your country, or to do something that every fiber in your being resists. Then that person proceeds to enumerate the names, ages, addresses, and medical conditions of your family members. Perhaps they include a bit of data on where they go out to eat, or where they work, of if there's an alarm system on their house. They don't have to say where they got the data, the very fact that they have it at all could lead you to believe that they have much, much more of it. Most military members have family somewhere that doesn't live on base (parents, siblings, etc.) Information is the most valuable tool an enemy can have.
Re:Bad, very bad... (Score:2)
"No mention of family"
You missed it. It falls under "beneficiaries." What, do you think the insurance is for soldiers and soldiers only, not their dependants? Whoever has the database has the medical history of the policy holder and everybody else that falls under the policy.
Re:Bad, very bad... (Score:2)
Um, we already have a national ID card. It's flawed, but those flaws will be fixed, and no SSN thefts are necessary to motivate the changes, they're already underway.
Re:Bad, very bad... (Score:2)
I wonder... (Score:2)
In other news: Next week you'll be reading about Bill Gates harping on how this could be prevented if we all used
Re:I wonder... (Score:2)
They'd harp over their "hardware protection" bull crap... Palladium...
Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Business is not war, and war is not business, and outsourcing vital functions of our national security to private companies that don't give a shit about the welfare of people in uniform is not the way to keep our country safe. Actually, this is true of a whole bunch of governmental functions; the whole "run government like a business" bandwagon that Democrats and Republicans have jumped on with equal enthusiasm is a stupid idea. But that's a whole 'nother argument
Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (Score:2)
The big difference to me appears to be the fact that any business venture has "failure" explicitly available as an option. (If the head of a business says "Failure is not an option", it's just words; it's still an option).
"A government" might also have this luxury, but if it's stated so, it's not the US government.
Run the government like a business, indeed. We can all see where that leads.
Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (Score:2)
A-76 is biting you guys on the ass, isn't it? I swore up and down that A-76 would be the death of Comm Squadrons (Waterwalker here, former 3C2x1 from 75CS at Hill AFB). Besides, I'm willing to bet that the contractors who got brought in to man your helldesk are already telling the liaison office that they're going to need more money since they underbid the military audit statement.
Not all contractors are bad, though. The folks who picked up the bid for the Hill AFB dining hall beat the hell out of the 75th Services Squadron's cooks.
Oh, and how's Lackland? If you're an A1C, you were probably there pretty recently. I haven't been down there since '99, when I went through SNS at Jones Hall (and stayed in the Locker House...ugh).
Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (Score:2)
Sorry about that -- meant to say Keesler and it came out Lackland. New dorms in the Triangle? That's terrible. I personally think every airman should be required to live in 1950's-relic housing at least once. Builds character. You probably never even saw a roach in your barracks; some of the "palmetto bugs" in mine were big enough that they wore their own blue ropes. :-) You haven't lived until you've had to give up a 341 to a bug.
BTW, what's your AFSC? And do they still warn you about Dumpster Lovin' and Golf Course Lovin' down there?
Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (Score:4, Informative)
Northeast, Mid-atlantic, Gulfsouth, etc.
There is no TRICARE West region... but judging by the number of states mentioned in the article, I'd guess this contractor was dealing with the Central region (15 states), with the possible addition of california (1 state, obviously), or the Northwest region (2 states)
Just FYI.
Lowest Bidder (Score:2)
Bring on the TIA! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Bring on the TIA! (Score:2)
What obviously happened (Score:2)
HIPAA? (Score:2)
Re:HIPAA? (Score:2)
however, the primary point we've had drilled into us is that all data not being actively used must be encrypted or deleted. nothing just sitting around.
so in that respects, if this computer was in an office that was locked up at night, the physical security isn't really a hipaa violation (as far as I know). the unsecure data is.
On top of that, HIPAA isn't even fully enacted yet, so they don't have to worry about it to begin with. just because a law has been passed and people aer getting 'ready' and 'compliant' doesn't mean it is enforced yet.
hope that clears some stuff up. i'd use more caps, but it's late and i'm tired =)
Terrorists (Score:2)
-psy
Re:Terrorists (Score:2)
Imagine how much fear a terrorist group could [instill] in US military personnel with that sort of [data]. Makes you think.
Yes, it certainly does make me think. For about ten seconds. I was in the USAF myself, and I have a pretty good idea exactly how much fear there will be. Very little.
The fact that TriWest is essentially an HMO for soldiers, sailors, and airmen doesn't really make them all that different in the broad strokes from any other HMO. If your health care data were stolen from your HMO, would you be afraid that some nefarious group of terrorists was planning to use it for some sort of bioweapon attack, or would you be more worried about the more pedestrian implications: identity theft and credit card abuse? That's what my father (who's still using Tricare's veterans' program) is concerned about.
I doubt that you'll hear from a lot of servicemen quaking in their combat boots about this. Now, if the terrorists could interrupt the beer deliveries to every NCO club in the world...that's frightening.identity theft already rampant (Score:2)
The number of credit card numbers that TriWest has is probably relatively small. I know they don't have mine. I think the only reason they would have to need credit card information is if a soldier had to pay for a medical procedure that isn't 100% covered (usually involving dependants/spouses).
The biggest threat that this theft creates would likely be identity theft, although due to the aforementioned prevalent use of the SSN in nearly all military records, this might not even substanially raise the exposure service members already face. Google shows scores of web sites and articles regarding military identity theft.
I guess that's what I get for serving my country.
Encrypted Files? (Score:2)
I may not be the most paranoid person I know and I think it's a bit crazy to go to such lengths but if a file is that important why wouldn't you?
Why not go the extra mile and use and encrypted file system as well? Wait, that's the paranoid side of my thinking again.
I guess it takes a lot of high profile incidents like this to get folks to wise up about security on all levels.
tricare is a POS (Score:4, Interesting)
It is *the* worst insurance system in the world.
Call them twice - ask the same question - you will get a different answer 85% of the time. There are times, infact, where it's been better to *not* use them at all, and just pay outright.
I feel for all you who are forced to use tricare, and are now possibly screwed somehow because your info was stolen. Keep your eye on your accounts and whatnot, I know we will be doing so more then ever.
Re:tricare is a POS (Score:2, Insightful)
Give me my mom's kaiser any day. They might make me drive the same distance but at least it'll be to a real hospital with doctors that know what they're doing....
Oh well. Guess I won't have to deal with them again come June when I get my degree...good riddance.
But if Tricare's security is anything like the rest of their organization I can only say I'm surprised that it took this long for this to happen...
Or... (Score:2, Funny)
Just after the SSN? (Score:5, Insightful)
Someone mentioned immunization records. But who cares if some 80 yr old retired Sgt Major had his TB recently? And untill you correlate Soldiers with Units, that info won't do you much good. If you wanted to know that, why not steal if from the Unit... it wouldn't be to much harder; and would provide
I personally think that they where after SSN's, and just happened to view a haul of 500k as too good to pass up. I don't believe that the fact it was military was of consequence. Which is why I also believe that it was American Civilians that did it, not some Foreign Agent. If so, I'm f*'ing pissed.
I don't need to say how well you can screw someone over with thier SSN; imagine the entire Military preoccupied with sorting out thier lifes; worried about a wife (or husband) and children having to deal with identity thieft while the soldier is busy overseas.
--Cam
Simple solution (Score:2, Funny)
Hot lead in the case... (Score:2)
Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? (Score:4, Interesting)
We had a lot of questions about this such as; storage (where, how long), would they be destroyed after discharge, could it be used against us(in legal proceeding, for insurance purposes)?
We weren't given the answers to those questions. Now I'm wondering where the hell that vial of blood and cotton swab is right now. How secure is it? How could a DNA sample labeled with my SSN be used against me?
Oh, I feel safer now -- NOT! (Score:2)
Why the hardware was stolen ... (Score:2)
That the thieves had no idea what data was stored on the computer(s), and just wanted to sell the hardware.
Needless to say, Triwest and the miltary have to plan for the worst, and have to assume that the data is actually going to be used for something, rather than just wiped when somebody fdisk's the computers and installs their OS of choice.
Unless the theives knew what they were stealing and stole it for the data (which I imagine would be worth way way way more than the hardware it's installed on -- the military and Triwest certainly will consider it so) and so they destroy the hardware rather than trying to pawn it, they're *very* likely to get caught. The serial numbers are likely to be known, and the police will be looking for them very actively.
And if they don't even bother to wipe the disk (quite common in stolen computers, apparantly), the buyer of the computer may find all this stuff on the computer, and may have heard of this story, and will call the police ...
And if they do catch somebody, that guy is going to get hit with a lot more than just a simple burglary rap. He'll probably be lucky if they don't classify him as a terrorist (with all the civil rights violations that go along with that) ... even if he's just a simple (but stupid!) burglar ...
Data on all media should be encrypted (Score:2)
The data on all media, including hard drives, should be encrypted. When a computer boots up and needs access to that data, an unswappable process needs to get the passphrase/key so that the information can be made available at run time.
Problem of Putting All Keys in One Place... (Score:2)
Though it could be worse...at least most "keys" government/industry have for individuals can be changed in instances of severe abuse of one's identity. But as biometrics come more into use, then the stakes become even greater...how does one revoke themselves?...Suicide perhaps?
Anyways, hope folks who design and implement these security schemes dispense with this "let's put everything in one place" mentality and design and build systems that feature more distributed security...otherwise there will continue to more and larger incidences of identity theft, etc.
Re:Problem of Putting All Keys in One Place... (Score:2)
My point is they should NOT store all that information together anywhere! No single entity (business, hospital, etc) should ever have all of the same information on a particular person that any other entity does - and better yet each entity should assign one or pieces of unique information that no other entity, nor perhaps even the individual themself, would ever know.
Simple example...instead of a college or whatnot using one's social security number (which isn't truly unique - amazing how many people don't know that) as the person's record number, use a unique in-house number instead; many colleges, etc already now do this.
Solitaire and Porn.... (Score:2)
Probably nothing sinister....
I know who did it! (Score:3, Funny)
Expect more of these -- and a few clarifications (Score:3, Insightful)
Large databases with diverse pieces of personal information one database with inadequate protection are just too attractive a target -- 500,000 social security numbers? The amount of money identity thieves can make from the sale of those ssns, and the damage done to individuals, is staggering. But will there be any penalty beyond a slap on the wrist for insufficient security?
To clear up a few misconceptions that I've seen from the posts:
HIPAA is now worded in such a way that it allows health care providers (and other "covered entities") to share medical information about a patient without consent for a number of reasons. The result is that information in your file may be shared with others without you ever finding out. The best place I've found for information on HIPAA is at the Health Privacy Project [healthprivacy.org] . Go to their page and do a search on "HIPAA" and you will find out everything you ever wanted to know about HIPAA.
HIPAA makes it easier to circulate information once gathered, but it is not itself a storage system. For a huge storage system, go check out the Medical Information Bureau [mib.com] (MIB) web site. They have a FAQ [mib.com] about what they do, what medical information they store, and who they share it with. MIB exists to prevent fraud (a good thing), but I'd sure like to know what their security is like.
Finally, for another reason to repeal HIPAA and decentralize information, read about the "Emergency Health Powers Act" [healthprivacy.org]. Again, designed for good reasons, but could be applied in very heavy-handed ways. The Health Powers Act specifically shields companies from liability.
Re:Security (Score:2, Insightful)
Encryption is a good point, but what do you think the chances are any of the data is encrypted. Slim?
Re:Security (Score:2, Informative)
The real guts of story might be that this will be a poster child for what can go wrong with centralized health care databases. In the long run, this might be a good thing to have happened.
Re:Security (Score:2)
For the same reason that basically any kind of media out there ultimately can't be hack proof, a compromised box will be hackable regardless of the OS. In fact, that's quite independant of the OS. It's only the FS that would determine how 'readable' the data on a box is...
See the issue is: no matter how strong crypto you use, you need to store the key somewhere. And I'm pretty sure these guys didn't have some sort of centralized key server...
At best, all they need is some guys with scruffy beards and pimples stuck in a basement for a week, and a never ending supply of Mountain Dew.
At worst, they boot the system and it's ready to fly.
Whamo.
*sound of smacking forehead* (Score:2)
Re:*sound of smacking forehead* (Score:2)
Re:Security (Score:2)
he said linux!!! mod him up!!!!!
Re:How? (Score:2)
Smash window, climb through, grab computer, walk out.
Isnt the data encrypted on disk?
Don't count on it.
Why does a contractor even need SSN's, etc?
A soldier's military service number is his SSN (been that way since the 70's or so). All of a soldier's records are tied to it.
Re:How? (Score:2)
nerd joke rimshot!!
Re:How? (Score:2, Informative)
In the military everything is tied to your social security number. It's on all my paperwork from the enlistment contract to the piece of paper where I agreed not to have sex w/my recruiter. They put it on the ID cards. I had to use it whenever it went to sick call. It's spray painted on the outside of my duffle bag. It's even on a chain that I'm wearing around my neck right now (aka, my dog tags).
But even out in normal civilian life, the social security number is extreamly overused. I tried to test drive a car once and the dealer wouldn't let me because I wouldn't give them my SSN.
Re:How? (Score:2)
Re:How? (Score:2)
You cannot just encrypt the data, you can only
encrypt a data with a key.
Storing key on the same computer with the data
is a waste of time and money, it's the same situation as storing the key from your apartment
under the rug at the apartment's door.
Of course some data can be mangled by MD5ng or
SHAing (hashing) it -
a good read about this (and related) technique is at Translucent Databases [slashdot.org],
but technically it's not an encryption.
It isn't. (Score:2)
Healthcare data isn't classified.
Re:Protection (Score:2)