|
After admitting it had security holes that allowed a security breach of more than 6.2 million customers, attorneys for TD Ameritrade this week agreed to a settlement of a class action lawsuit. The 74-page settlement outlined several efforts by Ameritrade, but it did not include any cash payments to the consumers who sued the company. Among the agreements were that Ameritrade will warn consumers about investment SPAM, pay for limited security testing, seed E-mail accounts seeking violators, pay $20,000 to the Honeynet Project and $35,000 to the National Cyber Forensics and Training Alliance as well as buy some of the impacted consumers a one-year license for an Ameritrade-selected anti-SPAM software package. Read more. |
August 13th, 2008 at 3:55 am
From AMTD’s press release: “TD AMERITRADE Holding Corporation (NASDAQ:AMTD) has discovered … unauthorized code …
that allowed access to an internal database. … While more sensitive information like account numbers, date of birth and Social Security Numbers (SSNs) is stored in this database,
there is no evidence that it was taken.” There is no evidence it was not taken either. We know the data was in a ‘compromised’ database, so it in fact WAS ‘compromised’. AMTD is simply claiming that it’s possible that the criminals that broke in and stole the email addresses left the SSNs. AMTD itself has provided no evidence that email addresses, names, addresses or phone numbers were retrieved from this database either. In other words, the only evidence of the latter is the spam itself (provided by AMTD customers). Essentially, AMTD is claiming that it’s plausible that crooks breaking into the equivalent of Fort Knox would leave the gold (the Social Security Numbers) and just take the silver (the email addresses).
Given these facts, I don’t see how you or Mark Rasch can claim that the breach is less serious than the TJX breach, which merely involved credit card numbers, not social security numbers.
For more, see my blog about the case: http://caringaboutsecurity.wordpress.com/
-Matthew Elvey (the plaintiff)