Quantcast StorefrontBacktalk » Blog Archive » TJX Revises Consumer Settlement, Agrees To Pay Cash
advertisement
advertisement

TJX Revises Consumer Settlement, Agrees To Pay Cash

Written by Evan Schuman
October 9th, 2007
Like this story? Share it
To share this story with people in your social network, please click on the network icons below.

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the TJX break-in started in July 2005 with a wireless hack of a Marshalls in St. Paul, Minn, where the thieves “pointed a telescope-shaped antenna toward the store and used a laptop computer to decode data streaming through the air between hand-held price-checking devices, cash registers [POS presumably]and the store’s computers. That helped them hack into the central database of Marshalls’ parent, TJX Cos. in Framingham, Mass., to repeatedly purloin information about customers.”

The news that the attack was wireless is not unexpected, as wireless attacks have become very popular means of attacking retail chains and because hints that the TJX attacks were wirelessly based have been frequent. But the level of specifics in the Journal story are surprising.

The story also said that an auditor found that TJX “failed to install firewalls and data encryption on many of its computers using the wireless network, and didn’t properly install another layer of security software it had bought.”

That software could very well have been encryption software from Ingrian Networks. We have reported that Ingrian had sold software to TJX, which hadn’t installed it at the time the data breach was discovered.

One PCI auditor who has been involved in the TJX probe couldn’t confirm all of the details in the Journal but said that a wireless hack is not surprising, as it’s the most common attack method with retail chains today.

“By focusing on those little handheld (pricecheck) guns and their interactions with the database controller, you can capture IP addresses. That’s your gateway,” the auditor told StorefrontBacktalk. [Note to readers: We typically resist referring to ourselves in text, but it's necessary here to differentiate what our sources told us from what the Journal is quoting sources as telling them.] Even if a store IT manager is watching the traffic, the source said, it often won’t even look suspicious. “They won’t see any difference between you and one of their handheld devices.”

The Journal also reported that the attackers performed “most of their break-ins during peak sales periods to capture lots of data” and then “used that data to crack the encryption code” and then they “digitally eavesdropped on employees logging into TJX’s central database in Framingham and stole one or more user names and passwords. With that information, they set up their own accounts in the TJX system and collected transaction data including credit-card numbers into about 100 large files for their own access. They were able to go into the TJX system remotely from any computer on the Internet,” according to sources who spoke with the Journal. “They were so confident of being undetected that they left encrypted messages to each other on the company’s network, to tell one another which files had already been copied and avoid duplicating work.”

The Journal also referenced a Sept. 29 audit report that it wasn’t PCI compliance. ” The auditor’s report cited the outmoded WEP encryption and missing software patches and firewalls. Then on Dec. 18, another auditor found anomalies in the company’s card data. At that point, TJX hired forensics experts from International Business Machines Corp. and General Dynamics Corp. and notified the U.S. Secret Service, which spent a month trying to catch the hackers in the act. But the data thefts stopped and the hackers had obscured their whereabouts by using the Internet addresses of private individuals and public places such as coffee houses. Investigators did find traces of the hackers: altered computer files, suspicious software and some mixed-up data such as time stamps in the wrong order.”


advertisement

2 Comments | Read TJX Revises Consumer Settlement, Agrees To Pay Cash

  1. RabidWolf Says:

    Oh, this is a total crock. $30 vouchers for merchandise that already didn’t sell at ’suggested retail’? They won’t have my size, or anything I like anyway!
    And now, perhaps, the time money I had to spend to get a new credit card and number, repair anything that may have automatically used the old number, etcetera, is worth $15? What is that per hour? 37 cents?

    I am totally disgusted. At least the lawyers are happy.

    RW

  2. Evan Schuman Says:

    Editor’s Note: Actually, TJX’s proposed settlement has its own area for whatever time a consumer can prove was spent chasing down things to fix the credit problem. But it had a low cap (http://storefrontbacktalk.com/story/092207TJXsettlement.php) and it assumed that consumers’ time was worth only $10/hour.
    One lawyer involved defended the hourly, saying that it was presumably time spent at home that would not have otherwise been billed at a corporate rate. Maybe.

Leave a Reply

Newsletter

Quickly catch-up on the latest in E-Commerce and Retail Tech with our free weekly newsletter, with urgent bulletins as news merits.
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

Kill All The Passwords

This article does mention, but does not give enough attention to, the fact that the attacks discussed are only feasible when the encrypted password file can be copied and subjected to an offline attack. The trick is to have authentication performed on a separate, much more strongly secured host - such as an Active Directory Domain Controller, or a Kerberos server, or a NIS+ server, or even using something as banal as an LDAP-over-SSL authentication dialog. In these environments, the odds of the "password file" being stolen and subjected to an offline attack go to near zero, and only online attacks may be carried out by the attacker. With sensible exponential backoff between failed password attempts, lockout after a modest number of failed attempts on a single account, and pattern detection, that minimum 7 character password is quite secure enough. Passwords aren't dead yet for security purposes, and they will be with us for a very long while to come for practical purposes. The trick is to employ them correctly. Read more...
The possibilities you describe are years away from being implemented at best, so for the moment passwords are an ugly reality. Luckily, password managers can easily manage hundreds of passwords of any length. The only thing a user needs to remember is the master password. It seems like an easier task to educate users on how to use password managers rather than implement complex security technology on a global basis. Read more...