admin – Page 36 – Cyber Law Watch

Data breach penalties could cost U.K. companies £122B in 2018

Oct 18 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

U.K. businesses could face up to £122 billion in penalties for data breaches when EU legislation comes into effect in 2018, according the Payment Card Industry Security Standards Council (PCI SSC). The EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) will introduce fines for groups of companies of to €20 million or 4% of annual worldwide turnover, significantly higher than the current maximum of £500,000. This means that if data breaches remain at 2015 levels, the fines paid to the European regulator could see a near 90-fold increase, from £1.4 billion in 2015 to £122 billion, the PCI SSC calculated. For large U.K. organisations, this could see regulatory fines for data breaches soar to £70 billion, more than a 130-fold increase, rising to an average of £11 million per organisation. Regulatory fines for SMEs could see a 57-fold increase, rising to £52 billion, averaging £13,000 per SME. Read more at ComputerWeekly.com by clicking here.

Threat from hackers against Internet of Things grows

Oct 17 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

New research by Akamai Technologies has revealed that cyber criminals have cracked into as many as two million Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices at homes and businesses. IoT devices are products that connect to the internet, which now include refrigerators, sound systems, televisions and home security systems. In the report, researchers state that “Once malicious users access the web administration console of these device they can then compromise the device’s data and in some cases, take over the machine.” This report sheds much needed light on one of the most under-focused on areas of cyber security. Read the report here.

Australian organisations hit by thousands of significant cyber incidents

Oct 17 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Australian Cyber Security Centre’s (ACSC) 2016 Threat Report has revealed that Australian businesses and government have been subject to more than 15,000 significant incidents that they know of. Read the report here. They were the first to admit that given reporting is optional they cannot really determine the full impact.

Due to the current reporting regime, the ACSC has had to rely on data from callouts to CERT Australia (the national first responder to cyber incidents) to assess the extent of the problem in the private sector. CERT Australia responded to 14,804 incidents from the private sector from June 2015 to June 2016. Of those callouts, 418 involved systems of national interest and critical infrastructure. The banking, finance, energy and communications sectors were the most heavily targeted.

While the Government has introduced a bill to mandate serious data breach notification that is set to be passed in the near future (find out more about the bill here), until then, we will continue to go mostly unaware of damaging malicious cyber activity launched against Australian organisations because the private sector largely refuses report these incidents.

Victorian ruling clarifies application of privacy principles to social media accounts

Oct 13 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Victorian Supreme Court recently confirmed that an employer was not obliged to immediately notify an employee that it was accessing her Facebook messages during a disciplinary investigation. This case clarifies the manner in which the Victorian Information Privacy Principles (IPPs) apply to social media.

In this case, an employer conducted an investigation into an employee after a colleague reported her for making a number of abusive remarks over Facebook. During the investigation, the employer accessed the employee’s Facebook messages without her knowledge. She was subsequently found guilty of misconduct and given a final warning.

The employee appealed the case to the Supreme Court of Victoria after the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) found that her employer had complied with the IPPs. In her appeal, she questioned whether the ways her employer collected and used the information was necessary “for the purposes of a workplace disciplinary investigation” and whether accessing it without her knowledge or consent was “necessary for one or more of the organisations functions or activities’ for the purposes of IPP 1.1”.

The Supreme Court of Victoria confirmed VCAT’s finding that collecting further information was necessary under IPP 1.1 as the employer was conducting a misconduct investigation “which was a legitimate purpose” and said there was nothing to suggest its approach was inconsistent with the right to privacy. Furthermore, the court found that VCAT was correct in finding that IPP 1.3 (and 1.5) did not impose an obligation of immediate notification on the employer as it could have jeopardised the integrity of the disciplinary investigation. Access the IPPs here. and read the court’s decision here.

Importantly, this case demonstrates that privacy law doesn’t automatically prevent employers from accessing the social media accounts of their employees to conduct investigations in appropriate circumstances.

UK telecoms company handed record fine for data breach

Oct 10 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

Major UK telecoms company, TalkTalk has been fined £400,000 for failing to adequately safeguard personal data when they were hacked in October 2015. The Information Commissioner’s Office’s (ICO) investigation revealed that hackers obtained the details of 156,959 customers, including names, addresses, birthdates, phone numbers and email addresses. In over 15,000 cases, hackers even gained access to bank account details and sort codes. The cyber-attack triggered the launch of a committee inquiry into protection of personal data online. You can read the inquiry report here.

After in depth investigation, the ICO found that TalkTalk’s failure to implement even the most basic cyber security measures allowed hackers to easily penetrate its systems causing substantial damage and distress to its customers. See how the investigation unfolded here and read the ICO’s penalty notice here. The ICO identified TalkTalk’s principal errors as failing to actively monitor its own activities and allowing vulnerabilities to go unnoticed, failing to update its database to protect from bugs, failing to respond to two previous attacks on the same webpages and failing to fix a bug in the software for which a fix was readily available.

It would seem regulators are losing patience with organizations that don’t take their security obligations seriously.

ABS blames IBM for Census fail in damning report

Sep 26 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has blamed the 2016 Census website failure on IBM in a damning Senate inquiry submission. ABS chief statistician David Kalisch said the infrastructure offered by IBM did not adequately prepare for “not unusual” and “anticipated” denial of service attacks on Census night, which ultimately caused the site to be taken down for security reasons. You can read the submission, which was made available online by The Guardian here.

Volkswagen, Israeli experts to establish automotive cybersecurity company

Sep 16 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The increasing connectivity of modern cars has enhanced the modern driving experience beyond what we could imagine only a few decades ago. However, with increasing connectivity comes an increasing risk. Features such as autonomous and intelligent parking and driving systems have increased the number of interfaces in vehicles and therefore the risk of malicious attack. To demonstrate how easily vehicles can be targeted, last year, two hackers developed a tool that can hijack a Jeep remotely over the internet. You can watch the remote hacking of the Jeep featured by WIRED here.

In response to this growing threat, Volkswagen along with three Israeli experts and their team are jointly establishing an automotive cyber security company. The newly founded CYMOTIVE Technologies will develop advanced cyber security for next generation connected cars. CYMOTIVE has announced that it aims to take an innovative and strategic approach to the significant technological challenges that will face the connected car and the development of the autonomous car in the future.

Have I been pwned?

Sep 13 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

Information security blog {ride the lightning} has featured Troy Hunt’s “Have I been pwned” website which identifies whether your online account has ever been compromised in a data breach when you enter your account’s login ID.

Troy Hunt describes himself on his website as a Microsoft Regional Director, a Microsoft Most Valuable Professional awardee for Developer Security, blogger at troyhunt.com, international speaker on web security and the author of many top-rating security courses for web developers on Pluralsight. While we don’t know much about his site, it is reported to be safe and provides a very handy tool to determine if you have been unknowingly hacked. Of course, even if the site is legitimate, who is to say it won’t be breached? It’s just that it’s so useful.

See if you have been pwned here…and yes…we both have been.

Bitcoin operators exposed to cyber threats

Sep 01 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

Reuters has reported that a third of bitcoin trading platforms have been hacked, and nearly half have closed since they entered the scene 6 years ago. This increasing risk for bitcoin holders is compounded by the fact there is no depositor’s insurance to absorb the loss. That approach heightens cybersecurity risks and also exposes the fact that bitcoin investors have little choice but to do business with under-capitalized exchanges.

This issue was evident when Bitfinex was hacked earlier this month and an estimated $70 million in bitcoin was stolen. The virtual bank’s customers were forced to share the losses resulting in a generalized loss percentage of 36.067%. Read our blog post on this hacking here.

Experts say trading venues acting like banks such as Bitfinex will remain vulnerable. These exchanges act as custodial wallets in which they control users’ digital currencies like banks control customer deposits. However, unlike their brick-and-mortar counterparts, when customers’ bitcoin accounts are hacked, there is currently no third party that can step in to deal with the theft. As a result, these underfunded exchanges require nearly perfect security.

Given this it is not surprising that certain governments around the world are exploring the possibility of central bank issued digital currencies using distributed ledger technology which could compete with the private digital currency systems such as bitcoin. Read more on this here.

Ashley Madison data breach joint findings released

Sep 01 2016

By Cameron Abbott and Rebecca Murray

The Australian Privacy Commissioner, Timothy Pilgrim and The Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Daniel Therrien have released a joint report on the data breach of cheating website Ashley Madison which affected approximately 36 million Ashley Madison user accounts last year. Read our post on the breach here.

Controversially, despite the company not having a physical presence in Australia, the Commissioners found that Ashley Madison’s parent company Avid Life Media (ALM) was regulated as an “APP entity” due to the fact that it carried on business and collected personal information in Australia. This finding was based on the fact that ALM conducted marketing in Australia, targeted Australian residents for its services and collected the personal information of Australians.

ALM agreed to a number of enforceable undertakings to the Commissioner. Amongst other things, ALM has undertaken to augment its security framework, provide extensive security training for staff and cease its practice of retaining the information of users with deleted, deactivated or inactive accounts. Consistent with the trend in undertakings it requires independent verification of certain compliance steps. Find the undertakings here.

It also seeks to address the accuracy of the records, which is a challenge for a cheating website. Letting someone sign up using for example Tony Blair’s email address captured the attention of the regulators. They focused on the interests under Privacy laws of those whose email addresses were falsely added to the sign up. A confirming email with an option to opt out was not considered an adequate measure.

Author - admin