advertisement
advertisement


This is page 2 of:

U.S. Senate’s Data Breach Bill Full Of Flawed Assumptions

July 26th, 2009
The chairman of the powerful U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Patrick Leahy, is trying—after two failed attempts—to get his data breach bill made into law. But even though his bill would answer the pleas of many retailers by creating one single national standard for handling major retail data breaches, the bill's details don't deliver the comprehensive relief promised. In short, the bill is trying to make it more difficult for major retail chains to hide large data breaches when, in fact, the wording will make it easier for them to hide such breaches.

The core of the bill is where things get a bit dicey. It requires retailers to notify consumers impacted by a breach "without unreasonable delay" but it doesn't say how much time retailers can take. Without that specific, it would seem difficult to enforce the law. Even worse, the exemptions for notification are so broad as to make it unlikely that any retailer would actually be impacted. For example, the bill provides a blanket exemption as long as a chain "provides a written certification to the U.S. Secret Service that providing such notice would impede a criminal investigation or damage national security." The Secret Service then has to perform a review to determine if it's a warranted claim. The problem is that the claim that something might impede a criminal investigation is so broad as to be meaningless.

This Story Is Only Available For Premium Subscribers. Click Or Login In Below To Read The Rest Of This Story.


advertisement

One Comment | Read U.S. Senate’s Data Breach Bill Full Of Flawed Assumptions

  1. Read the Constitution Says:

    In regard to this statement:

    “The U.S. Senate needs to get involved, establish one federal standard for data breach procedures and put some serious teeth into it. That bill is needed.”

    Is it even worth pointing out any longer that, according to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution, the idea of a federal data breach disclosure law that supersedes the authority of the states is illegal? Never mind the fact that anything approved by the US Senate will be 90% useless and 10% indecipherable.

Leave a Reply

Readers, specifically those who want to comment on a story:
Our Comment SPAM system is getting very aggressive these days and has been blocking legitimate comments. If you post a comment and don't see it appear within 2 hours or so, can you please send a heads-up to customer-service@storefrontbacktalk.com? Ideally, please include the time you posted the comment. That will allow us to try and hunt for it. Thanks! P.S. We're working on fixing the system, but we don't want to lose any valuable comments in the meantime.

Weekly, Monthly Newsletters

Quickly catch-up on the latest in E-Commerce and Retail Tech with our free weekly report, with urgent bulletins as news merits—along with our monthlies on Mobile, Security, In-Store, E-Commerce and CRM.
advertisement

Most Recent Comments

"Careless" Systems Integrators Now Directly Under PCI DSS

This exact issue has been bothering me for years, and I was JUST talking about it with someone only yesterday. This may well be my favorite article, mostly because I'm biased and have hated this particular problem forever. Read more...
Good article, but how does this have anything to do with the DSS? Read more...
Actually, the QIR program has a lot to do with the DSS (or PCI). Since merchants rely on their reseller or integrator to implement their PA-DSS validated application, these resellers and system integrators play a critical role in merchants achieving and maintaining PCI compliance. As far as I can tell, the QIR program is designed to help merchants stay compliant by making sure their payment applications are installed according to the PA-DSS Implementation Guide, for example ensuring default passwords are changed (and protected), that the data encryption keys are properly set and secured, that the merchant's data retention policy is set, that no sensitive cardholder data are stored, and often that a firewall is in place and properly configured. Read more...
Although this is a great move forward in pushing the issue of highly trained people, it is also a good marketing ploy for the council. It begs the question: How much do they stand to make? The problem for this is that for people (like myself) that are just starting out their own business venture, PCI has typically charged a premium for their training and certifications. This change will likely force those of us with less capital to spin into the abyss. I have more than 15 years in the security and compliance fields with heavy hitter certs like CISSP, CRISC, and Sec+. There should not be a guide but a free test or a pre-requisite of either the PCI cert OR other heavy hitter certs. I just don't want the good guys in small places to get flushed out. Read more...

StorefrontBacktalk
Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.