Slashdot Mirror


Military Healthcare Data Stolen

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."

299 comments

  1. You mean... by drmofe · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The files were IN the computer?

    1. Re:You mean... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh! Snap!

  2. hmm... by Transcendent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    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.

    1. Re:hmm... by niker · · Score: 1

      I ask: Is such information regarded as "secret" ?

      --
      Moderators: Don't agree? pray tell why.
    2. Re:hmm... by rodgerd · · Score: 2

      Way too hard. Just identify people who may have important expertise (senior staf, technical specialists, and the like), and start arranging for a string of accidents.

    3. Re:hmm... by Transcendent · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually, because of a somewhat recent (clinton... 1996) democratic idea, a new act was passed called HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996). This creates a lot of change in the way we handle patient information. New electronic billing formats, and even patient sign-ins. I think that they're also going to make it where any procedure done to you must be approved by the insurance first... which really pisses me off.

      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.

    4. Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Nah, that can not be done based on such simple yet large amount of data. Knowing vaccination programs US forces have would be of some help, but you don't need individual records? But most of that data is semi-public; that coupled with well-known data about efficiency and coverage (time span) of vaccination would be some help.

      And still... why bother? Bioweapons just suck in actual warfare, are way too slow and random... that's why they weren't really pursued all that seriously by superpowers.

    5. Re:hmm... by pyrote · · Score: 1

      from what i recall, not too many superpowers were involved in september 11th

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
    6. Re:hmm... by swillden · · Score: 1

      Therefore bioweapons are effective?

      What, exactly, is your point?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    7. Re:hmm... by pyrote · · Score: 1

      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.

      as for Bio weapons, yes they can be effective. for a group that would like to see nothing more than the US fall, killing ones self (that is a bonus in some cultures) in the process is a risk they are willing to take.

      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.

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
    8. Re:hmm... by Kashif+Shaikh · · Score: 2

      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.

      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.

    9. Re:hmm... by swillden · · 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?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:hmm... by addikt10 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While HIPPA was passed in 1996, no one has been required to implement the requirements, as all healthcare providers are scared of the act, and have filed for extensions.

      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.

    11. Re:hmm... by 5alligator · · Score: 1

      Only if it's effective

      Who cares for effective. Individuals and groups have been hijacking aircraft for decades. Sometimes they get away, sometimes they're intercepted, and sometimes they do massive amounts of damage. Sometimes, it 'works'. Think of it as 'faster, better, cheaper' (and, certainly, to some degree, 'out of control'). Point is, they'll get some hits.

      'Bio-terror', in this sense, has already occured. The Aum Shinrikyo sarin attack in Tokyo, for example. Read The Cult at the End of the World , for information about some other things they considered.

      Some peolple involved with the Bagwaan Rajneesh (sp?) group were charged with spiking local salad bars with salmonella in a bid to tilt a council vote in there favor some years ago. i believe this was in Utah.

      Some people have wondered if the recent foot & mouth flare-up in England might have been a hostile attack. Or, at least, that it could be, in the very near future.

    12. Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course the simple alternative is that the computer was stolen because someone wanted a computer (and is not interested in the slightest in what's on it).

      But feel free to continue with paranoid fantasies if it makes you feel better...

    13. Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Plus windows XP licensing conditions are incompatible with HIPAA. :-)

    14. Re:hmm... by pyrote · · Score: 1

      I was not inferring that they would be using these methods against armies. Having been part of the family behind the military, I am the "civilian" that would be in those records. killing off 80% of a populace and leaving only the military personel is stupid. this allows better effectiveness of the attacks.

      Attacks of this calibur do not occur on battlefields, they occur here, in the US, on the streets(subways, airports, etc...) as they did 9/11.

      Currently we are in a war aginst Terroisim, terror affects civilians and military alike.

      if I sound un-focused, I apologise, a headache and the flu are bluring my discussion.

      "fanatical muslims" as you point out, are not on the same level of superpowers, financially they cannot afford to use more sophisticated methods. Bio warfare is the easiest and most effective for their financial budget. as we see with the irish attacks earlier, it does little to blow something up, heck our own twin towers did little more then piss off the US (no disrespect intended, but politically it simply gave the US the green light to kick ass).

      Personally I am worried. with data like this, on a wide scale, masses can be targeted. If i was trying to attack with bio warfare, this would be invaluable. "oh look they don't have anthrax shots. lets use that instead of X bio mix, gets the civis AND the suits"
      On the small scale, ID theft can personally cripple people and command chains.

      I have more, but I have to stop looking at the monitor now.

      --
      THE WORLD IS GOING TO END!!!! eventually.
    15. Re:hmm... by Lars+T. · · Score: 2
      'Bio-terror', in this sense, has already occured. The Aum Shinrikyo sarin attack in Tokyo, for example.

      That would be 'Chem-terror'. Keep your terrors apart.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    16. Re:hmm... by JordanH · · Score: 2
      • 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?

      It's called asymetrical warfare. Bio-weapons may not be effective in conventional warfare scenarios, but when your adversary has no fear of death and wants to "win" by spreading terror, then bio-weapons may come into play.

      Regardless of the fact of the ineffective nature of bio-weapons, you can't always count on your adversary acting rationally.

    17. Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. I cant believe people feel that was inciteful.

    18. Re:hmm... by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      'Bio-terror', in this sense, has already occured. The Aum Shinrikyo sarin attack in Tokyo, for example.

      Sarin gas is a chemical weapon. That doesn't support your claim that bioterror has already occured. The anthrax attacks of 2001 would be 'bioterror'.

      You seem not to know this simple fact, so i doubt the rest of your post is any more factual.

    19. Re:hmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      its called speculation man... that's what the guy who posted this story asked for at the end... chill...

    20. Re:hmm... by 5alligator · · Score: 1

      Agreed. i mentioned the sarin attack first as it had just come to mind. You're both correct - it's chemical in nature. i was going to mention the anthrax letters, as well. Thanks - i forgot. Oh, and Aum was workig on an anthrax angle for awhile (they tried to buy a helicopter in Russia; they wanted to dust Tokyo).

      Yes, the salmonella story is true. It was in Oregon, btw.

      Yes, i was mixing chem with bio; though i assure you that im well aware of the difference. Please don't let that slip-up keep you from learning more about this. Knee-jerk reactions get you nowhere.

      We've come a long way from having diseased corpses flung over the city walls at us. It's going to get much nastier.

    21. Re:hmm... by plague3106 · · Score: 2

      So, in the past 18 years, there have been two 'sucessful' bio attacks. One, which causes hundreds to get sick, and another which killed under 10 people if i recall.

      Not really much to worry about if you ask me.

      It's going to get much nastier.

      What makes you think that? Seems to me that bio weapons are kinda useless to anyone. If you stop and think of it, the chances of you being a victim of such an attack is very very low. Whats there to be scared of again?

    22. Re:hmm... by 5alligator · · Score: 1

      i said that it'll get much nastier; i did not say that i fear for my personal safety.

    23. Re:hmm... by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      What exactly do you mean by nastier then? I thought that you meant more people would be victim to this sort of attack. Do you mean that the diseases used will somehow be worse?

  3. Who is stupid enough... by YahoKa · · Score: 2, Informative

    To steal from somewhere the military has a huge interest. They'll probably spend the cashola on the investigation, and when they are caught someone is going to get it REALLY hard right up the ...

    1. Re:Who is stupid enough... by rodgerd · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah. Like the way the Mad Anthrax Mailer suddenly went from a "must get" when it was thought to be a filthy foriegner to a "drop like hot potato" when it started looking like ties to senior millitary research labs.

    2. Re:Who is stupid enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it was a lot harder to blame a white guy when they were trying to pin it on a brown guy....

    3. Re:Who is stupid enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That investigation is actually still ongoing, as you would know if you tried to research a little. As they usually do, the mainstream media sources quit reporting on it when people started to lose interest. No news does not mean no investigation.

    4. Re:Who is stupid enough... by MortisUmbra · · Score: 1

      Again with the common sense? When will you people learn this is slashdot! Where people are smarter than just "whats in the news"! *sigh*

      --

      "The saddest words of mice and men, are not those which were, but should have been."
    5. Re:Who is stupid enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I'm sure it was purely a color thing.

    6. Re:Who is stupid enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Blahblahblah I'manigger blahblahblah

    7. Re:Who is stupid enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Say, that reminded me of that one wigger post by that American Taliban guy.

    8. Re:Who is stupid enough... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, since this is slashdot, the correct spelling should be "when people loose interest"

  4. Big surprise? by Sad+Loser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I work in healthcare
    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.

    --
    Humorous signatures are over-rated.
    1. Re:Big surprise? by joebagodonuts · · Score: 2

      You've got to be kidding. A good sysadmin would stop someone from breaking in and stealing the box? You might want to read the article, or even the submission.

      --
      "Give a woman two glasses of wine and some pad thai, and they'll agree to just about anything." the Sports Guy
    2. Re:Big surprise? by nege · · Score: 2

      people who would not make it in a business environment,

      Sweet, I know where to apply for a job now! Awesome, thanks buddy! (and to think all those big companies laughed at my resume!!)

    3. Re:Big surprise? by SparkyMartin · · Score: 1

      A good sysadmin would know that pumping iron and working on getting his blackbelt is simply part of the job. Heck, I keep sawed off ol' betsie under my desk just in case some riffraff wanna enter my network turf.

    4. Re:Big surprise? by Dalcius · · Score: 1

      Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if my sysadmin did do that... what an over-protective SOB.

      And you know the best part? We just ditched our three year old, unpatched SSH gateway. But we've got a firewall that blocks both incoming and outgoing traffic on all ports except a select few.

      *sigh*

      --
      ~Dalcius
      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.
    5. Re:Big surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree.
      We had an admin working on our Solaris box in accounting who knew virtually nothing about Unix. When he bailed he got a job at a large heathcare facility on....Solaris, paying 70K+/year and the guy did *NOT* know how to tar, cpio or much beyond adding and deleting users.

      He could run chmod, chown and vi, but that was it.

    6. Re:Big surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You keep a sawed-off buttplug underneath your desk?

    7. Re:Big surprise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please... I work in the healthcare environment, too (in Europe), and I can't really say that the staff is underpaid and would be incompetent in a business environment. The IT infracstructure in our hospital is very well set up and I'm proud to be one of the admins there. So, I say that this isn't always true.

      Cheers

  5. Not sexy, but effective by John+Paul+Jones · · 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

    --
    Feh.
    1. Re:Not sexy, but effective by iomud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That reminds me of the scene in wargames when the tour group enters through the obscenely thick door. Ironic to the point of insane.

    2. Re:Not sexy, but effective by cmacb · · Score: 1
      "He said the building has 'reasonable security. Not barbed wire and all of that, but reasonable security for a company.'"

      Let me guess... a standard house grade door lock on the outer door. A "computer room" with a button lock and the combo set to 2-4-6-8, and no barier to just going through the ceiling tiles to get in. Government contractors often don't make enough overhead to do their facilities properly. If they go to the government people and try and get them to pay for it there is very little interest. The government folks worry about their own comfort and security, not that of mere contractors. It's a lousy system where the mission comes last.

      Whoever stole the equipment probably just wanted to have a big-ass server at home and knew the layout of the place. Hopefully they formatted everything right away.

    3. Re:Not sexy, but effective by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Remind me to kick your ass whenever I meet you! People watching inane movies shouldn't be allowed to touch computers, let alone working in that industry.

  6. In other news... by bheerssen · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Defence Department learns that Windows are a problem in information security.

    --
    (Score: -1, Stupid)
  7. Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Well, hopefully the systems were using linux or a BSD, had difficult passwords, and encrypted the records......

    1. Re:Security by bheerssen · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nah, if the thieves were really after the information and not the hardware, they'd just mount the drives on a new computer. Access the files that way. This just proves that physical security is just as important as on-line security. Does you no good to secure a critical server against online attacks if you put the server in an insecure physical environment. The article implies that the building that contained these servers are standard office buildings. Simple locks on interior doors and many people with access to the building. Not exactly what I'd call secure.

      Encryption is a good point, but what do you think the chances are any of the data is encrypted. Slim?

      --
      (Score: -1, Stupid)
    2. Re:Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      none... they even probably used win32 or mac

    3. Re:Security by Oob+the+Rhox · · Score: 2, Informative
      Because this is health care information, HIPAA, the health information portability and accountability act applies. Unfortunately, encryption is not required: under technical controls, they state:The following implementation feature must be implemented: Procedure for emergency access. In addition, at least one of the following three implementation features must be implemented: Context-based access, Role-based access, User-based access. The use of Encryption is optional. However, there are also physical access controls required, and clearly those failed.

      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.

    4. Re:Security by pVoid · · Score: 2
      Nope.

      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.

    5. Re:Security by mackstann · · Score: 2

      what a boring comment to be modded up.

      he said linux!!! mod him up!!!!!

    6. Re:Security by blankmange · · Score: 2

      Stop hoping for the absurd: Government contractor in the healthcare field, using something out of the ordinary (anything other than Windows..) and using something other than a log-in password???? As an former healthcare employee and now a government employee, I can tell you that the security measures you are hoping for do not exist. Bone-stock Compaqs or Dell workstations, running Win98 or Win2K with nothing but log-in passwords (which are specified by the employees, not sysadmins...). The security beyond the physical security (obviously slim and none in this instance) is absurd and virtually nonexistent.

      --
      ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
  8. Protection by lamery · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Hopefully the data is encrypted? You'd think (and hope) that having a government contract would mean the company has some decent security. This much information can be abused in any number of ways, not just by terrorists. Perhaps this is an argument against having people's entire lives stored in a database.

    1. Re:Protection by Anal+Surprise · · Score: 2

      Haha, very funny. You want to know what a military contract means? It means that the private firm will get PAID. It's not much of a stretch to blame this on privatization. Sure, government agencies aren't much better, but they're a bit less of a hodge-podge of security policies and standards. Emphasis on the "bit".

  9. What ?!?!? by Tin+Weasil · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What makes people so sure they were after the computer for that data? They probably stole it so they could play The Sims Online.

    1. Re:What ?!?!? by Hex4def6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Come one...
      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 ;)

    2. Re:What ?!?!? by lgftsa · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just think - blackmailing GI's who haven't got their latest TB shot...

      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!"

    3. Re:What ?!?!? by really? · · Score: 1

      are we perhaps confusing TB with tetanus? ;-)

      --

      "Consistency is contrary to nature, contrary to life. The only completely consistent people are the dead." A. Huxley
    4. Re:What ?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      look, It's Christmas, and nobody got what they wanted. I got a fancy cd holder, but I don't even have anymore cd-r's left! Some fool just wanted a new box, any box at all, and probably installed something on the Hdd, and erased all the data. Either that, or someone wanted some cash, stole the boxes, then sold them on the streetcorner, after stopping long enough to plug the things in and format the drive, (to erase all trace, etc.)
      All this sound fancyful? Just read today's WSJ (print edition) about selling bootleg cigarettes in NYC! People will do anything for extra $$.

    5. Re:What ?!?!? by lgftsa · · Score: 1

      Tuberculosis(sp?), Tetanus Booster, whatever...

    6. Re:What ?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Better than TB Shot:

      Find out what GI's have been treated for the clap while away from their wives...

    7. Re:What ?!?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia the tetanus shoots you.

    8. Re:What ?!?!? by videodriverguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you read the article, it talks about a server installation - not very useful for playing online games (although some sys admins might correct me on that).

      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.

  10. National Strategy to secure.... by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 3, Insightful

    maybe the US governement should secure their equipment a little better before they try to secure the internet.....

    1. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by neocon · · Score: 2

      <sarcasm>Oh, clearly. Heaven forbid they try to secure both the hardware and the network!</sarcasm>

      Huh?

    2. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by BigBir3d · · Score: 1

      in a lot of facilities the hdd does not stay in the pc during the night time. locked in a safe somewhere.

    3. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quiet, karma whore.

    4. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't the US government's equipment.

    5. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by Martigan80 · · Score: 2

      maybe the US governement should secure their equipment a little better before they try to secure the internet.....

      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.

      --
      This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
    6. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by greenrd · · Score: 2
      So... failing to write the military a blank cheque causes security breaches. Hmmm.

      Wonderful logic there! You should be a politician!

      Can I suggest that in fact, poor attention to security might be the fundamental problem here, not the US military's supposed "underfunding".

    7. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I am going to be an AC here, as MY and my family's info could be among that stolen. Many years ago, a military member and his family could get med care on a military installation, only having to use civilian doctors for extreme or special cases.

      Fast forward to TRI-CARE (ot Try-to-get-Care)...a system created to "save" Uncle Sam money. We contracted out the health care of families. In many case, our families are FORCED to go to a civilian health provider (not always a bad thing..but when forced, you have no choice, even if there are no doctors locally accepting new patients!). Yet, we now find that the contrator has POOR physical security, yet I am supposed to trust that their computer security is better!!!

    8. Re:National Strategy to secure.... by Martigan80 · · Score: 2

      Can I suggest that in fact, poor attention to security might be the fundamental problem here, not the US military's supposed "underfunding".

      Sure you may suggest that, but what I was trying to point out was that the people are quick to blame the Military/Government for this when in fact the company Tri-Care was contracted by the military because they, the military, can not afford to give up the manpower and the resources to do all the tasks. They can't even dedicate the recourses to ensure that the job is being completed correctly and safely. The fact that they outsourced this work because they can't do it themselves should be evident that they can't supply a Quality Assurance team to make sure the contractors have the best security.

      --
      This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
  11. 500,000 credit cards no. with SSN? by jsse · · Score: 1

    That's a lot! Black market price of a valid credit card no. with associated information(or a real stolen credit card) is around $10, that's $5,000,000 in total!!

  12. HIPAA by spanky1 · · Score: 1

    Now if the government contractor was only following the government mandated HIPAA regulations....

    1. Re:HIPAA by etcshadow · · Score: 1

      Well, actually HIPAA security regulations are not in effect yet. In fact, the security regulations are not even WRITTEN yet. The first *real* application of HIPAA is with the privacy regulations coming in April of this year.

      However, the point is well made that when the final HIPAA security regulations do go into effect, they certainly should include provisions about minimal *physical* security measures, as well as the expected network and application security measures.

      --
      :Wq
      Not an editor command: Wq
    2. Re:HIPAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but because of my work I have to post this rant as an AC, or it might come back on me. My PHB is very PH, but he does know how to Google.

      I work for a healthcare provider who is a covered entity under HIPAA. I'm a coder, and I am our "technical" HIPAA expert. (I say "technical" as opposed to "legal" and "compliance", because those folks are not technical. Oh, boy, are they non-technical.)

      First, the HIPAA privacy regulation doesn't go into effect until April 2003. Even then, it's only the privacy sections; the security parts are still in a draft phase. Assuming they ever get finished (which is an assumption that I am not willing to make) it'll be at least a year after the Final Rule is published before implementation.

      Second, HIPAA probably doesn't do or say what you think it does. It's popular in the healthcare industry and the media these days to say "we have to do this or that because of HIPAA". The reality is much different. The HIPAA regulations are an incredibly complicated morass of conflicting and sometimes mutually exclusive rules. There are companies out there who do nothing but employ teams of high-priced lawyers to dissect the regulations line by line and provide advice (and loopholes!)

      You might think I'm kidding, but I'm not. Let me give you an example: the first part of HIPAA to be enacted was the Transaction Standards and Code Sets section 45CFR160 and 162.)

      This should have been the simplest thing. The idea is fairly simple... covered entities have to use several standardized code sets for all electronic transactions.

      These transaction standards and code sets are not even new-- they have been in use for years, and are based on ANSI standards. Easy, right? Not a chance. The regulations went into effect last October, and every single one of our hundreds of clients and providers asked for, and received, a one-year extension because they couldn't be ready on time. Every single one! And this is for simple EDI transactions! The easiest part of the whole damn thing!

      We, as providers, are stuck in the middle of this mess.

      The DHHS wants to be hardasses about it; they think this will save the taxpayers money. They've never been right yet, but they do keep trying.

      The doctors don't care-- doctors are god, don't you know-- and often won't help by even giving us a simple diagnosis code. Doctors are also probably the most technophobic group on this planet-- they don't know about computers, don't want to, and don't want to worry their little heads about any of that technical stuff.

      The insurance companies are staffed by drooling idiots whose best skill is chanting "no!" In the rare event someone rises above the drool, they are immediately hired away by a provider, or promoted to manglement, or transferred into some position where they will never again have any contact with the actual providers.

      And as I said, this is the simplest of the HIPAA regulations, and so far, the only one to have actually passed its implementation date.

  13. How? by reitoei1971 · · Score: 1

    Few security questions here.. How can someone just walk out of a building with a computer? Isnt the data encrypted on disk? Why does a contractor even need SSN's, etc? But we all know we have no privacy anyway, right?

    1. Re:How? by iiioxx · · Score: 2

      How can someone just walk out of a building with a computer?

      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.

    2. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty easy to walk out of a building with a desktop computer. Burgalaries like this happen all the time, particularlly at smaller companies and offices without full-time security staff.

      Hopefully it was encrypted, but then hopefully I will win $50 million in the lottery. The last company I worked for had an official policy that all data on laptops had to be encrypted -- of course they only paid it lipservice and didn't actually license any encryption software for the staff to use (and we all had laptops). Sadly, for the US, that's actually pretty progressive on privacy and security issues. :(

      Regardless of the data security techniques used (encryption, passwords, etc.), this type of data should not be stored on a machine that is easy to walk away with.

      People don't take information security serriously enough, and probably won't until a few high profile lawsuits for negligence rip into a few corporations.

    3. Re:How? by nege · · Score: 2

      Why does a contractor need SSNs?? Well for a primary key, goofus! They havent heard of the SERIAL thingy in PostgreSQL as of yet.

      nerd joke rimshot!!

    4. Re:How? by WetCat · · Score: 2

      When people say "the data on the computer should be encrypted" I usually reply "with what?"
      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,
      but technically it's not an encryption.

    5. Re:How? by JourneymanMereel · · Score: 2, Informative
      Why does a contractor even need SSN's, etc?

      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.

      --
      Life has many choices. Eternity has two. What's yours?
    6. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows 2000 does this easily.

    7. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Encrypt it with a symmetric cipher using a passphrase as the key. Remember the passphrase using that thing you call a brain.

      It's as simple as 'gpg -c'.

      If you want to make things a little harder, encrypt it with a larger key and then store that key, encrypted with a passphrase, on one of those little USB keychain thingies.

      These concepts are not really that challenging.

    8. Re:How? by WetCat · · Score: 1

      Cool. For desktop.
      And now lets assume that it's a DATABASE
      SERVER which has no human interaction at
      all. It's in server room.
      Who then will be wearing the keychain
      with a key and/or entering a password?

    9. Re:How? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 2

      Really? I walked out of a large dentist's office after a service call with four 4GB drives of patient data just by saying "Can I keep your _OLD_ drives? I'm an enthusiast and these have hobbyist value!" The doctor told me to have fun with them. I trashed them after they sat in my rooom untouched for months, but I'm quite sure I could walk into pretty much any office with a computer-service company shirt on and a Compaq box and say "I'm here from JackYouTech to do a minor update to the servers, Please lead me to the closet." And successfully rip off the data.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    10. Re:How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I tried to test drive a car once and the dealer wouldn't let me because I wouldn't give them my SSN."

      And of course you gave it to them. That's called stupidity, not overusage. It is different in the military. But there are laws preventing civilians from asking for your SSN without necessity.

    11. Re:How? by packeteer · · Score: 2

      In win2k the key is stored on the same computer. It is protected from the wrong user getting to it but NTFS can be broken. If you happen to lose your key on win2k sure your fucked and nobody can help you but if you keep the key around someone else can get it as easily as you.

      --
      unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
  14. What list is your name on? by vonkraken · · Score: 1

    If my name was on that list I would be very very worried about my family. If it was indeed for nefarious purposes that it was stolen, then there should be even more cause for alarm.

    I only hope that this allows the government to realize the enormous burden upon them to protect our information as a national security priority in a non-conspiracy theory kind of a way (is this even possible?).

    Cheers,

    VonKraken

    1. Re:What list is your name on? by wondafucka · · Score: 1
      There is no reason for the federal government to regulate or secure "the internet" for national security measures.

      The government is strictly responsible for its own security. The recent attempts to infer that the entire datasphere is necessary to be government regulated is frightening.

      If a government agency is compromised, that is their responsibility. If a private network that affects individuals is compromised (such as a utility), it is that private company's responsibility to provide their own security.

      In a very conspiracy theorist sort of way I am very afraid of the government stepping in and regulating. If you look at the way the FCC regulates the radio airwaves to the benefit of the moneyholders (radio station owners), you must argue with diligence to convince me that they won't act under similar paradigms when controlling internet security.

      In direct response to your post, it seems that you are interested in the goverment keeping government data secure. I think we both agree on this. I worry, however, about blanket calls for government intervention.

  15. stiff penalties for careless companies by g4dget · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Rather than spending money on tracking down and throwing a bunch of clueless hackers in jail, law enforcement should really focus on the criminals that are easy to identify and prosecute: companies that don't treat customer data with appropriate care. If a few high-profile cases resulted in hundreds of millions of dollars in fines, these cases would soon stop happening: companies would finally make the modest investments necessary to keep customer data secure.

    1. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't there a recent slashdot article on encrypting data for this sort of thing?

      It described a method of encryption, similar to password encryption, that the data would be safe even if the hardware was stolen.

      All data is stored encrypted with a password, and the password itself isn't stored on the machine. If you don't know the password, you can't read the data.

    2. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by sevensharpnine · · Score: 2

      I know this corporations are evil/hackers are good thing is popular on slashdot, but you don't make any sense. See, in the real world, we are governed by laws. There is no law that states: "You must treat customer data with appropriate care." Punishment is the result of a specific law being broken, not some romantic H4X0R ideal. Having third-rate security, while deplorable, isn't illegal anywhere as far as I know.

      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.

      --
      "God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." -Voltaire
    3. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by g4dget · · Score: 4, Interesting
      See, in the real world, we are governed by laws. There is no law that states: "You must treat customer data with appropriate care."

      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.

    4. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      >There is no law that states: "You must treat
      >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.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    5. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      There is a federal US law. It has already started to take effect. Do a little research next time. Hint one: hipaa. Hint two: medical records law.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    6. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by videodriverguy · · Score: 1

      There may not be in the USA, but such laws are common in Europe.

      In the UK, the Data Privacy Act requires you to keep the information in a secure manner, and the fines for not doing so can be pretty high.

      Of course, the EU in general makes it much harder for companies to share information in general on their customers. Hence the problems between the EU and US over online shopping etc. For some reason the EU treats it's citizens privacy as a higher priority than the US does.

    7. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by egjertse · · Score: 2

      While I agree with the sentiment, I think it would be a really bad idea to do this. Not sure how it is in the US, but around here the largest problem with computer crimes is that they are rarely reported. Companies just don't want to deal with all the bad press and extra attention that follows a report of a computer related break-in. Coupled with the fact that this type of crime is only very rarely solved, only fractions of the incidents get reported - it's not worth it. Enforcing something like this would most certainly have a negative impact on this trend, thus further reducing the number of reported computer crimes.

    8. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by g4dget · · Score: 2
      Existing liability law may well cover these cases already. The problem is enforcement: how many companies have been prosecuted under them? What large damage awards can you point to?

      From my own experience, I can tell you that when my bank exposed my financial records through lousy on-line security and exposed me to identity theft, exactly nothing happened to them.

    9. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by dogfart · · Score: 2
      There is no law that states: "You must treat customer data with appropriate care."

      Yes there is. As far as medical data is concerned it is called HIPAA.

      --

      "dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"

    10. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by gmhowell · · Score: 1

      HIPAA rules are just now taking effect. Even a single infraction is worth $10,000. Expect to see some large fines by the end of 2003. I'm not sure why this group was so stupid, as most companies in the healthcare industry I've seen are quite concerned about it.

      AFAIK, there are no laws for banks not to be morons, so comparing the two isn't really useful.

      --
      Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
    11. Re:stiff penalties for careless companies by g4dget · · Score: 2
      Even a single infraction is worth $10,000. Expect to see some large fines by the end of 2003.

      We'll see to what degree prosecutors will take advantage of this. In cases where there are existing laws (anything involving fiduciary duties), I have yet to see a high profile case prosecuted.

      AFAIK, there are no laws for banks not to be morons, so comparing the two isn't really useful.

      The concern in this case is not primarily about the health care information, it's about possible identity theft resulting from the availability of the information. Disclosure of health care information may be embarrassing and lead to discrimination, but identity theft can lead to instant ruin.

  16. Do they even know they have the data? by Tomah4wk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most computer hardware is stolen to be sold on as computer hardware. These could be your standard issue thief who is only likely to sell on the hardware itself, without ever knowing he even has the data. Of course it could be someone who has an interest in the data, or someone who just wants to say a big F**** YOU at the guys in charge of these things. If this hardware isnt UV marked or otherwise, so it can be detected later, i would be very dissapointed. At my college we UV mark EVERY piece of hardware, and things like optical mice (i.e not the cheap ones no one wants to steal) are locked to the workstations, so you couldnt steal them without breaking them.

    1. Re:Do they even know they have the data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...say a big F**** YOU..."

      Now what's a bad 5 letter word that starts with an F?

    2. Re:Do they even know they have the data? by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      Well, in an improbable world, the drives would show up on Ebay.

    3. Re:Do they even know they have the data? by MarcQuadra · · Score: 1

      I applaud concerned citizens doing whatever they can to expose major flaws in the security of their data. Insurance companies should offer prizes to hackers and theives who crack the systems they underwrite. Imagine how secure your data would be after a year if Joe Hacker was offered cash to get his hands on it! There would be a mad scramble to secure systems and it would re-ignite the tech industry like Y2K did.

      --
      "Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
    4. Re:Do they even know they have the data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is useless if the prize is less valuable than the data you are trying to protect. And theives are not looking for fame, they would rather discreetly get away with the goods than getting publicly awarded.

  17. talk about a HIPAA violation by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Insightful

    forget about virtually protecting patient data with VPNs and encrytption... how about some physical security? They state that there was "reasonable security" for a company; hmmmm... obviously that hinges on your definition of reasonable.

    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?

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  18. Who was the target? by phorm · · Score: 2

    My question would be, did the thieves know that the computers contained military data, or were they just hijacking computers?
    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.

    1. Re:Who was the target? by rmohr02 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm sure there's better people to steal a computer from than the military.

    2. Re:Who was the target? by /dev/trash · · Score: 2

      I bet we'll never find out who stole it. They'll just be a pile of dust.

    3. Re:Who was the target? by jdunlevy · · Score: 2

      Yeah, when an AP story says the "hard drives" were stolen, I'm definitely not picturing a scenario in which thieves open the case, take out the drives, and then run. I bet they just took the whole computer, which to the AP writer probably means "monitor and hard drive." Speculation, but I'm betting they had no idea what they were taking.

    4. Re:Who was the target? by phorm · · Score: 2

      That was my take on things too. I'm assuming they meant the information on the hard drives was lost, but the drive went with the PC. Unless of course the hard drives were rack-stored in a drive-bank - in which case individual drives could have been stolen (indicating that the thieves were after the data, not the hardware). Still, after dealing with tons of clients for computers who refer to the system (chassis/box, drives, etc) as a "hard drive", I'm guessing that you're right on that guess.

      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...

    5. Re:Who was the target? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if they didn't know that they'll probably gonna find out in the news papers :-)

      I just imagine all this AOL cdz send over to millitary ppl. Kind of fun :P
      cheers

  19. Bad, very bad... by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Yes, Lieutenant. I've already heard your name, rank, and serial number, over and over again. Now, I'd like to show you this photo... Steady! (Hold him, please.) Our sources looked up your next of kin in your medical records... This is a recent photo of your mother and father, hm? Our operatives are quite good at photography, we train them well.

    "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."

    1. Re:Bad, very bad... by Hex4def6 · · Score: 1

      This seems a very unlikely scenario.
      First of all, you wouldn't need a medical database to look up someone's next of kin - it's trivially easy to find it on the net.
      Secondly, it would normally be hard to carry out that threat - they'd have to infiltrate an army base to get at the family - might as well snatch some "top secret" papers instead; lot less touble, more reliable info, etc etc.

    2. Re:Bad, very bad... by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To a prisoner of war, sitting chained to a chair in some interrogation chamber after just being repeatedly subjected to beatings, whippings, and electric shock torture and probably doped up on sodium pentothal, even the threat of action against their family by someone who has even a sliver of information about them would seem very real indeed.

      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.

      --
      In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    3. Re:Bad, very bad... by MrLint · · Score: 1

      i am afraid not only is this bad but its quite possibily worse than you can imagine. This is not the only high profile cause of SSN theft, and it wont be the last. However the future is dark, this is what I'm predicting, Beacuse of the highnumbers of SSNs stolen there will be a 'groundswell' of support for a more effective replacement. This will be a segway for national ID card, this will make it nice and easy for the US dept of spying on americans to get you properly registered. A dark day is on the horizon. you heard ithere first.

    4. Re:Bad, very bad... by Hex4def6 · · Score: 1

      Fair enough, but
      <I>"Company spokesman Jim Kassebaum said the computer equipment contained Social Security numbers, names, addresses, phone numbers and medical claim histories for beneficiaries in its 16-state central region, which includes Arizona. The company also acknowledged that a "few credit-card numbers were contained in the potentially compromised files.""</I>
      No mention of family, next of kin, etc. Sure you could use the address to threaten them, find out who lives there, who their family is, etc, but one could obtain that infomation easily without that database. I think the real problem is going to be fraud - having a CC, SSN, address, and phone number would be enough to fool a store into giving ya stuff online, creating a fake identity, and all that other nafarious stuff that script kiddies do.

    5. Re:Bad, very bad... by swillden · · 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.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:Bad, very bad... by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

      "medical claim histories for beneficiaries"

      "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.

    7. Re:Bad, very bad... by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 2

      The next generation ID could be the biochip...someday most folks may be "chipped" for life...of course learning from the music industry, the government would promote the biochip ID as "Secure ID"...and if so, sadly most Americans would likely fall for the propaganda and accept being "chipped" :-(

    8. Re:Bad, very bad... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe then someone from the Homeland Security Dept stole the hard drives. Then they can claim more need for security and a required national ID card to be carried at all times even when at home or in a coma. Also a biochip to be installed as soon as it can be developed. The biochip will transmit your current location at anytime to local neighborhood transmitters and then back to the govt.

      You know what, the govt is only what its citizens make of it. If you don't like it it, then get involved and bitch at everyone else for not getting involved.

    9. Re:Bad, very bad... by dogfart · · Score: 2
      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. ... Information is the most valuable tool an enemy can have.

      Hmm... Sounds a lot like Total Information Awareness at work

      --

      "dope will get you through times of no money better than money will get you through times of no dope"

    10. Re:Bad, very bad... by MrLint · · Score: 1

      To my knowledge i do no have a national ID card. Where do you live?

  20. Just proves the hackers axiom by The+Tyro · · Score: 5, Insightful


    if you haven't got physical security, you haven't got ANY security.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:Just proves the hackers axiom by joshuac · · Score: 2

      Although if the data had been encrypted, and the key kept elsewhere, the customers of the thieves (assuming industrial espionage or military spying was the motivation) would be _quite_ displeased once they plugged them in to see what they had...

      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.

    2. Re:Just proves the hackers axiom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "if you haven't got physical security, you haven't got ANY security.

      That's the reason why I wear diapers. You never know in advance when you have to go.

  21. Someone's been watching ben stiller movies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At least one too many.

  22. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless you are trying to be funny, and mean "unlocked windows", you are an idiot.

    What the heck does the OS have to do with the fact that the hardware was stolen?

  23. Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by AirmanTux · · Score: 2, Informative

    I happen to be in the military, though just an Airman First Class, and due to the nature of my assignment I have to deal with contractors pretty often. Because of how the system works it seems like most of the time the military is getting hired by the contractors. More often than not we have to meet thier standards and I have yet to see an off base contractor that would meet DoD 'standards' for security. Furthermore, since all of our individual records are tracked by our social security numbers we don't really have much in the way of private information (there's "Privacy Act of 1974" stickers everywhere but that's pretty much a joke to begin with). I'm not sure why there'd be credit card information there and I've never heard of TriWest (Tricare is our health provider, typo maybe?) and judging on past experience I'd be surprised if the affected military are notified. Heck, I'd be surprised if they know which individuals it was. As for whether it was the hardware or software the theives were after, all I'm going to say is a lot happens right here in the Midwest that the general public is never aware of. There are active terrorist cells on US soil but for one reason or another there's not a lot we can do about them.

    1. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Good luck, A1C Tux. It's a hell of a military you've found yourself in -- yeah, yeah, I know, old soldiers bitch all the time (and I'm not that old; I was in from 1989 to 1997) but it really does seem like some things were going to hell right about the time I got out, and the whole Tricare thing is one of them. (My guess is that TriWest is a company formed specifically to handle Tricare contracts.) As a medic, I had to deal with all the harebrained ideas for patient administration that came down the pike, and I don't envy you. Sounds like it's just getting worse.

      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 ...

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Informative

      Tricare is administered by regions. When you enroll in tricare, you are assigned to a region.

      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.

      --
      Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    3. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, this is just great. My father, who is in the army, my mother, and ourself all have our insurance managed by these people. We are currently in the midwest. I sure hope that this doesn't mess things up. My dad's security officer notified him recently, and letters are being mailed. There is also some information on http://www.triwest.com, that is supposed to be updated as new information arises.

    4. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by AirmanTux · · Score: 1

      It certainly has its moments from time to time. It's ironic what you said though. I'm currently assigned to the 72nd Communications Squadron Help Desk which provides network support, central data collection point, and apparently thousands of other services we weren't even aware of on a daily base to the tens of thousands of people who work on this base. Just a few weeks ago we got replaced by civilians. First thing to go: the help desk being a 24/7/365 shop. Other services are of course being dropped and cut and reallocated on a regular basis. I'm not even going to get into the other already-contracted-out organizations on base that don't even hold up to thier responsibilities but as you said, "that's a whole 'nother argument..." No offense to anyone but civilians don't really belong in a military enviroment. The two just don't mesh right and I'm sure the opposite is probably true too.

    5. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by nurightshu · · 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).

      --
      They that would sacrifice their .sig space for that cliched Franklin quote deserve neither.
    6. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by AirmanTux · · Score: 1

      I'm surprised to see A-76 mentioned on here. Tinker is infested with it. 30,000 civilians work on the base which has 3,000 military, most of which are the AWACs and Combat Comm. The only military ABW units left are Security Forces and the MPF. Not to mention most of the civilians I have to deal with are just plain door-knob dumb. Has anyone else had to physically teach someone the bare basics of how to use a keyboard? If I remember correctly, the contract was won the first time (pretty unusual) for 18.5 million. We're left wondering where that came from since all the funding for our section got cut off two years ago when they decided to A-76 us. I could go on and on and on and on and on and on about all this but it'd probably be wiser not too over a public forum. As for Lackland, I got to BMT 13Mar01 and as far as I can tell, Lackland hasn't changed much at all in the last decade or two when it comes to the dorms. As for Keesler, I got there (30Apr01) four months after they completed the new dorms in the Triangle. They were pretty nice but TSgt Hines makes it his mission in life to turn tech school into a nightmare. Still, the best part of tech school was seeing "Cheif Mac" getting busted in the middle of the Triangle for driving his big red truck on a troopwalk by an Airman Basic Security Forces.

    7. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by gruhnj · · Score: 1

      More often than not we have to meet thier standards and I have yet to see an off base contractor that would meet DoD 'standards' for security.

      While you argue against contractors off base, I would argue that on post contractors and those in uniform would do no better and may even be worse. I am an admin (MOS 74B) in an AG unit on post and if I wanted to get away with taking most of the comuters here on post, I could EASY! Most of the military on post do have locks on their doors but most of them dont use it either. It may be locked up at the end of the day, but if a formation is called in the middle of the day or lunchtime is called, dont bet on the doors being closed much less locked and properly secured. Except for my office (the server room), there are no cameras set up to pull security for those offices.

      For me to do my job 95% of the time I require no human intervention as the problem is dscribeed to me in my work order. Despite being a virtual unknown to most of the staff onsite, I am rarely challenged while I work and in some cases dismantle a computer. Taking the computer out to my car is not a far step from that. Given that I am supporting an entire brigade, I frequently go into a commanding officer /Command Seargent Major/1SG office to do work. As an AG unit, they control most if not all of the orders on post. Think about it for a second.

      The Army needs to think alot more about IT security, not just about attacks from the outside, but how easy they make it from the inside.

      NOTE: I have not abused any of the above, I am simply trying to point out the flaw in common DoD awareness on physical IT security.

      PFC Gruhn
      Fort Lewis, Washington
      I Corps -- Americas Corps!

    8. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by nurightshu · · 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?

      --
      They that would sacrifice their .sig space for that cliched Franklin quote deserve neither.
    9. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by AirmanTux · · Score: 1

      There's also a gigantic difference between branches when it comes to security. Frankly, AF and Navy have traditionally been better about information security while the Marines are Army tend to be better at physical security. And I won't deny that the military just about everywhere happens to have some insecurities, some more than others. Since this base is the only one I've been at (so far) though it's the only one I can speak about.

    10. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cool

      a family member of mine is ending his tour and coming in to lewis in a few months.

      i'll be sure to let him know =P

    11. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Sporluck · · Score: 1

      So you have to deal with those damn arrogant Tech Controllers...

    12. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "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. "

      When does it cross the line from "not the way" into "pissing off enough of the standing troops badly enough that they point the guns at their (former) command?"

    13. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by fishbowl · · Score: 2

      "run government like a business"

      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.

      --
      -fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
    14. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm pretty sure it makes a difference that if *You* were to do B&E and theft from a military site, being a soldier, the consequences would be quite severe, I'd expect both for you and for whoever was responsible for not losing the material. Somewhat more severe than anything faced by the civ's involved here. And if it turned out that your motives were treasonous? You could face the death penalty.

    15. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TRI-WEST is the contractor hired to manage TRICARE in this region (the US is split into several regions, and I have been stationed in each of them....and dealt with each of the TriCare contractors!)

    16. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... by AirmanTux · · Score: 1

      Well, if it's treason anyone can face the death penalty, civilian or military, but there's no question that civilians get off easier. The most common example: using government networks to view porn. A civilian gets caught doing this he gets a tiny slap on the wrist and a light verbal counceling. Some Master Sargent who's been in for nineteen years gets caught and he gets booted out, if he's lucky. On this particular issue, people have been sent to Levinworth (military prison). Just a slight difference in standards huh?

  24. Re:is it possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I've done it.. but only in an apple article, where the total number of posts before it got archived was like 11.

  25. RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It was 500,000 records including ssn's, and SOME credit card information. That doesn't mean that EVERY ONE of those people even HAVE credit cards, much less that each stolen record includes credit card numbers.

    1. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even still, out of 500,000 'some' can add up to quite a lot of credit cards. Even those that lack credit card data can be used for some form of identity fraud. I would think that military-related data such as this would be more closely safeguarded, but as someone else mentioned already those healthcare workers are usually very badly paid.

      Makes you wonder if the government should even bother pursuing their Big Brother-esque TIA program. As soon as it's created, it's only a matter of time until it is compromised.

    2. Re:RTFA by FTL · · Score: 5, Informative
      > Only the harddrives were taken from the machines

      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.

      --
      Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
    3. Re:RTFA by danamania · · Score: 3, Informative

      This is exactly what happened recently when a computer theft racket was exposed where young kids were sent to steal machines from schools here.

      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

    4. Re:RTFA by Ridge · · Score: 3, Funny

      Uh no... Your non-geek translator must be malfunctioning. The case would be known as the "CPU". Thusly a non-geek "harddrive" would in fact be a 3.5" floppy, or alternatively, if they are a more advanced non-geek, it would be a ZIP disk. Of course the bulky monitors of which you speak could be translated to "the desktop" or, perhaps, "the window". Of course it's all moot, since they're going to fuck up their machine irregardless and you'll be getting a phone call at 2am after they try to insert their coffee into the "cup holder".

    5. Re:RTFA by NeoMoose · · Score: 2, Funny

      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.



      Well shit, let's call up the RIAA and let them track the f***ers down.

    6. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my god! You will go in hell because you forgot to censor the word shit. It defeats the purpose of hiding the word fuckers don't you think? Now you look like an ass!

    7. Re:RTFA by mrfiddlehead · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Dunno about that ... I used to work in a University and the thieves often would steal only the harddisks, or ethernet nics (at the time the cards were a bit more costly). I suspect this is because a single person can walk out of a computer lab with upwards of 50 harddrives, but only one computer. Oh yeah, DIMMS were another popular option.

      --
      :wq
    8. Re:RTFA by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      It doesn't say that the harddrives were taken from computers. Could have been a RAID tower, a SAN or even a box full of those pull-out HDs.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    9. Re:RTFA by jasonditz · · Score: 1

      no, no...

      The monitor is "The screen", all removeable media are "tapes", and the case is "the drive" where refers to whatever external drive is most prominent on the front.

      Interestingly, The case can be "the CD drive", but the CD itself is still a "tape" or a "CD tape" if the user is particularly advanced.

    10. Re:RTFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Complete Bullshit. You give reporters too little credit. A reporter once talked to me to condense what I'd said for an article. The finished article was an amazingly accurate explanation of the subject matter. I was pretty impressed that a guy who knew nothing about the field was able to understand the gist of something HIGHLY technical.

      Non-geeks also have brains, you know.

    11. Re:RTFA by balloonpup · · Score: 1

      I do some tech support by way of cable modems. The most common structure I get is this:

      Monitor = Computer
      Computer = CPU or Hard Drive
      Cable Modem = That little blinky light thing you gave us

      --
      I sing the doggie electric!
  26. Lowest Bidder by core+plexus · · Score: 2

    Is it any wonder? These contracts always go to the lowest bidder. I'd not be surprised to learn it was an "inside job", and that something nastier than identity theft or credit card fraud shall transpire. I hope I am wrong. I also remember how sloppy the military was (and still is I would presume) with my records.

    1. Re:Lowest Bidder by ogre2112 · · Score: 1

      Or maybe it was just some scrub that had no idea what he was stealing.

      "Hey LOOK! 9 GIG SCSI Drives! Mine!"

  27. MODERATORS ON CRACK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Troll? What a waste of a modpoint.

  28. Bring on the TIA! by Isao · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So this suggests that the U.S. Government's Total Information Awareness program would be a nice, juicy target. After all, everything's in one place...

    1. Re:Bring on the TIA! by Martigan80 · · Score: 2

      You are right. Specially since the military wants everybody to have a "smart card" ID with a cheap chip inside that hold all of their information, medical, financial, work history, and you will need this ID to Log into a computer, granted you have a seven digit pin, ONLY NUMBERS! And again the military has outsourced this project. Look for more exciting time of information theft.

      --
      This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)
  29. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey, mod this up as a 2, funny! It's a good groaner of an attempt at humor, not a swipe at MS.

  30. What obviously happened by jaymzter · · Score: 2

    Some new sysadmin decided to show how forward thinking (can I say that on /.?) he was and decided to sneak linux in through the back door. Hmmmm, now where could he get a server that doesn't seem to be doing anything?? The server wasn't stolen, it's by his desk running samba!

    --
    If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
  31. Shit, mod this up. by Unknown+Poltroon · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    i never even thought of that application.

    --
    All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
  32. Pfft. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know who would really want that data?

    Insurance companies.

    Yes, that's right. What if insurance companies could get the records of servicemen?

    You do know that the Veterans Affairs charges back to private insurance companies for some procedures, yes? And that insurance companies would love to get more information about medical procedures and treatment so they could refer said patients back to the VA?

  33. HIPAA? by phr2 · · Score: 2

    I don't see how a system with such crappy security could have been in compliance with HIPAA. Anyone understand that stuff well enough to say? It sounds like that company may be facing some penalties.

    1. Re:HIPAA? by SplendidIsolatn · · Score: 2

      speaking as someone who works for a business associate, not a covered entity...On a given day, i may have on my computer, or a department server, sensitive patient information. for my company, a business associate--NOT a covered entity, the physical security is no more and no less than for any other PC.

      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 =)

      --
      sig--we don't need no goddamn sig
  34. Terrorists by psyconaut · · Score: 2

    Imagine how much fear a terrorist group could install in US military personnel with that sort of date. Makes you think.

    -psy

    1. Re:Terrorists by nurightshu · · 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.
      --
      They that would sacrifice their .sig space for that cliched Franklin quote deserve neither.
  35. NO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Filesystem encryption is not well-supported in ANY of the free operating systems. Linux has some very cludgy loopback system support, which you would not want to use in a production system. Reiser 4 should have some very solid, thoughtfully-integrated crypto abilities, but other than that, nothing. Even the security-oriented OpenBSD scoffs at having encrypted FS. They think that anyone who wants that is "paranoid". Huh?

  36. one is too many by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  37. For sale... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1 Unreal Tournament server. Previous careful owner.

    Made from high grade components! As seen on TV.

  38. Re:In other news... by Spellbinder · · Score: 0

    maybe he thinks:
    "if it was a linux / unix machine the thiefs would not know how to use it."
    but i can assure you this way it is much better.
    cause it's windows it will crash every time they try to access the data and finally the govs can trace 'em with help of the m$ spyware =))))))

    --


    stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
  39. identity theft already rampant by Longing · · Score: 2

    I'm currently serving in the military. Our SSNs are tied to all of our records - financial, medical, everything.

    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. :-(

    1. Re:identity theft already rampant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Besides credit card info, most of us have pretty good credit and are paid by the gov't. We are perfect targets for identity theft. Additionally, I don't think the DSS would be to keen if your identity was stolen; bye-bye clearance. :-(

  40. Encrypted Files? by gizmo_mathboy · · Score: 2

    Did the DOD think to have these sensitive files encrypted? Don't most online stores encrypt their credit card databases now?

    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.

    1. Re:Encrypted Files? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My guess is that less than 99% of databases including those that store CC information store it encrypted. The routines and overhead aren't really worth it since there needs to be a master key. Encryption of data like that isn't going to work until we have a VERY LARGE pki system like MSN/Liberty Identity management tied to a national key system. Not to mention you still need master keys. These types of things just don't scale in the real world, that and hipaa nor the fda nor the government requires that the database information be encrypted.

      It's just not worth it, nor is the application base ready. None of the above things you mentioned will work. Why because the system is not fail proof in that case. If you filesystem is encrypted then the application still needs free access, if the database is encrypted then the app still needs free access which means nothing for security. Most people don't understand that in cases of databases or collections of information like this were it is used regularly encryption of the data store just doesn't help all that much, and in fact hinders business more than it helps it.

    2. Re:Encrypted Files? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh please.....the military STILL uses DOS for some of its most critical fuctions! And you think they encrypt THA data? Ummmm...no, they DON'T.
      I know. I am an Information Assurance Technician (contractor) working in Bosnia.
      My job is to try to make everything more secure, but with the recent contractor bungles in PKI, we are finding it to be impossible. Our customers (the soldiers) are also very very very LAZY and don't want to have too much security.

    3. Re:Encrypted Files? by gl4ss · · Score: 2

      if there was some password that was needed to be typed everytime the computer was turned on, that password would have been on a post-it note underneath the keyboard, or the password would have been the name of the building..

      granted, some system that fetched the key from the network could have worked well and saved the day(the hd would be useless unless connected to the isolated network.. but, if you were running windows and the data was really critical that could have easily ended up in a situtation where even you can't access the data.)

      slightly offtopic..
      there's really ridiculous amounts of documents considered secret in militaries. for example, some adverts/offers from military suppliers are stamped with 'secret' and filed away, same adverts you would get by phoning the company and asking them for brochures.. so the important stuff gets shuffled in not so important secret stuff..

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    4. Re:Encrypted Files? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a time when soldiers would do whatever they were told, in the precise manner that they were told to do it.

      There was also a time that LAZY soldiers would be given duties whose tolerability was inversely proportional to their laziness.

      If they were ordered to use a specific security measure and failed to do so, take the appropriate action. If they were not ordered, well, your story represents a breakdown in the military chain of command.

  41. OHH NO! by grasshoppers · · Score: 0, Interesting

    If we let people steal military data, then the terrorists have already won.

    I never thought I would use that phrase in a case where it actually makes sense.

  42. It isn't. by StupidKatz · · Score: 2

    Trust me. Unless it's actually classified... it's not encrypted.

    Healthcare data isn't classified.

  43. tricare is a POS by tf23 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If you have ever had to deal with Tricare, I feel your pain.

    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.

    1. Re:tricare is a POS by madcow_ucsb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No shit. I'm a dependent (dad's retired AF). Bastards make me drive over 1.5 hours to go to a CLINIC at Vandenberg AFB even though I can think of 3 or 4 full-service hospitals and countless (better) clinics witin 10-15 miles from me (in Santa Barbara, CA). I should call them again, maybe this time they'll actually let me have a local doctor.

      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...

  44. Or... by VistaBoy · · Score: 2, Funny

    One of the doctors needed to back up his hard drive for a reformatting at home and thought "Oh, if i swipe it for the weekend, nobody'll notice."

  45. RTFA by dackroyd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's in the first line.

    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.

    --
    "Free software as in beer, copy protection as in racket" - Telsa Gwynne
  46. Bear with me a moment... by StupidKatz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mugging victim: ... gah! Police officer! That man over there just punched me in the face and stole my wallet! Help!
    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.

    1. Re:Bear with me a moment... by pVoid · · Score: 2
      Although I agree with you, this is a more accurate version:

      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".

    2. Re:Bear with me a moment... by GLX · · Score: 2

      Except that only affected you. Your money. Your wallet. Your identity, by chance. And chances are there's a lot more information in these files than what's in your wallet.

      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.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  47. Again Proving my Point... by sickboy_macosX · · Score: 1

    That the US Government is Stupid. as a Dependednt of 2 Us Navy Officers, I know that tricare sucks. it was who took care of me when I was sick. They are bass ackward, and one hand doesnt know what the other hand is doing. You would think the government would do more than just set off a probe (i.e. change Social Security Numbers, etc etc.) The shit is going to hit the fan, and I feel sorry for the guys when and if they get cought because they will be labeld "Terrorists" and then have to go through that shit. Remember Kids- People who do things the government doesnt like are now just terrorists.

    --
    --- /* In Soviet Russia, the Mac OS X kernel panics you! */
    1. Re:Again Proving my Point... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I know that tricare sucks. it was who took care of me when I was sick. "

      Just a point of information: You survived.
      They might not suck as bad as the average county hospital...

  48. Re:Lord Satan by RabidOverYou · · Score: 1

    I think Salon is 'tard.

  49. who would be interested?... by NevermindPhreak · · Score: 1

    "Social security numbers, credit card numbers, and healthcare information about 500,000 US military personnel and their families is contained on the stolen hardware..."

    "...who would be interested in the data..."

    who would be interested in a bunch of people credit card numbers? gee, thats a though one. :P

  50. Hmmm... by MagFox · · Score: 1

    "Mitnick free!"
    "Military Healthcare Data Stolen!"
    Connection? ;)

  51. Identity Theft heaven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    One of my co-worker's husband recently
    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:
    • *All* vital stats (in original form?) including
      for dependents?
    • Individuals that will be unable to detect
      the theft for an extended period
    • A SNAFU the size of Iraq to keep the
      authorities busy
    My solution:
    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.
  52. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are a stupid, stupid little boy trapped in a world of Linux zealotry and a blind anti-Microsoft rage. I hope you die of a painful, slow cancer and help us rid the world of another worthless fool.

  53. Re:Orange Mocha Frappachino! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Derek: You think you're too cool for school but I got a newsflash for you, Walter Cronkite. You aren't.
    Hansel: Who you trying to get crazy with, ese? Don't you know I'm loco?
    Derek: Hey I got a wacky idea. What say we settle this on the runway, Han Solo?
    Derek (whispers): Stop it. Hansel: Are you challenging me to a walk off, BOO Lander?
    Billy Zane: Don't do this, Derek.
    Hansel: Listen to your friend Billy Zane, he's a cool dude. He's trying to help you out.
    Derek: Oh yeah, that's a walk off challenge my friend.
    Hansel: Ten minutes, old Member's Only warehouse. You ought to remember that, you're a dinosaur. Come on, let's go. Open up.
    Zane: I've heard some bad stories about this guy, man, he's limber. Too Limber.
    Derek: Put a cork in it, Zane.

  54. Piece of shit dipshit moderator. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How the fuck is this off topic, you worthless cum stain on yur mothers leg. Asswipe.

  55. Just after the SSN? by CamMac · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a member of the military, I am ~really~ curious to know what they could do with that info.

    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 /alot/ more info. Alot.

    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

    --
    All jocks think about is sports. All nerds think about is sex.
    1. Re:Just after the SSN? by videodriverguy · · Score: 1

      Really wish I had kept some mod points from yesterday - someone, please, mod this right up to the limit.

    2. Re:Just after the SSN? by _iris · · Score: 1

      You had the right idea in the beginning. Terrorist organizations don't care about soldiers' immunizations or SSNs. They are interested in civilian information. Who cares if you kill a hundred soldiers, everyone knows that is a possibility from the start. If it was a terrorist organization they would steal medical records from small towns (population less then 5000) where most people go to the same doctor, and kill half the population. Much easier to steal the information and much more effective at causing terror.

  56. *sound of smacking forehead* by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    If they have the freaking media in their hands, no amount of software tricks can secure it. Unless forensics can catch up with them, they have all the time in the world to apply as many monkeys and typewriters as they wish. They're not going to say "Oh, gee, it's going to take days to break this encryption. We better return the computers instead."

    1. Re:*sound of smacking forehead* by dusanv · · Score: 1

      Yes there is a trick that can secure it and it's called an encrypted file system. And you are missing the point. Nobody cares about the value of the drives just the data on them. If they have the drive but can't read it they can't do any real harm.

    2. Re:*sound of smacking forehead* by paganizer · · Score: 1

      There is no level of usable encryption that is completely secure.
      It would just take a while.

      --
      Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
    3. Re:*sound of smacking forehead* by rodgerd · · Score: 2

      Yes, but for a strong enough encryption of the FS, "a while" will equal years. If the information is obsolete before it can be accessed, it's worse than useless.

  57. Simple solution by Tuffnut · · Score: 2, Funny

    Attach GPS compatible tracking devices inside the computers.

  58. Pedantic, but... by dissonant7 · · Score: 1

    The Defence Department's then learned that they were neither British nor Canadian and configured their Regional Settings accordingly..

  59. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are so stupid I really can't believe it. You must be trolling. That is one of the funniest jokes I have seen on Slashdot for a while.

  60. Which is more disturbing? by Guppy06 · · Score: 2

    The scenario, or the fact that someone thought this was "funny?"

  61. Re:In other news... by Spellbinder · · Score: 0

    yeah it's true i don't like microsoft products..
    mainly because i used them for some time
    i know linux is not everything.. but for me it's better than m$
    if you are happy about windows, stay with it, but there are lots of people who aren't happy and don't know there is something else/better
    then my last post was suposed to be funny and ironically if you don't get it, your problem
    btw where can i get this cancer you are talking about???? i called everywhere ... not even walmart has it and they 've got everything, even lindowsOS

    --


    stop supporting microsoft with pirating their software!!!!!
  62. How data should be treated in gov't contracting by pjt48108 · · Score: 1

    With guard towers and barbed wire.

    You see, during WW2, there was a tank plant nearly plunk in the middle of Ann Arbor, the home of the University of Michigan. It had guard towers and razor wire, etc. Mind you, this was as far into the heartland, almost, as you could get at the time. There was no jet transportation at the time, and lots of well-armed continental US between either sea and Michigan. Still, it was a matter of national security, so this quaint little college town had an armed presence of some significance. Not so much due to an obvious threat of clear and present danger, but because in theory, the threat of compromise to such activity had fundamental national security implications. We're talking, national life and death issues.

    Data should be treated similarly, certainly when entrusted by the government to an outside contractor. If it can't be shown to be absolutely safe in a contractor's hands, then it should not be contracted out. If that means armed security of an armed forces kind, then so be it.

    Government bean counters and others with less practical, more dangerous political schemes and secret purposes would probably contract out national security, if you let them.

    At this rate, I wouldn't be surprised. Probably to MS Armed Forces XP. Just remember to patch early and often.

    --
    Mmmmmm... Bold, yet refreshing!
    1. Re:How data should be treated in gov't contracting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ann Arbor is also 25 miles from an international border. Hell, the Detroit tank plant was in a *border city*!

      That it was the Canadian border was helpful.

  63. Hot lead in the case... by SethJohnson · · Score: 2


    Has anyone thought to check Kevin Mitnick's house for the stolen computer?
  64. your analogy is wrong by g4dget · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Your analogy is wrong. Among other things, your analogy doesn't take into account that there are three parties involved: the victim, the thief, and the party to which the valuable property was entrusted. A better analogy would be...

    Traveler to airline: Where is my luggage?

    Airline: We don't know. We left it on the sidewalk last night, and today it's gone. Sorry, it's not our problem. File a complaint with the police, maybe they can find it.

    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.

  65. Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? by bubblegoose · · Score: 4, Interesting

    About 8 years ago when I was in the Navy, we were REQUIRED to submit a blood sample and cotton swab of the inside of my mouth. We weren't given a choice, we were told refusal would be grounds for discharge.

    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?

    --
    I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
    1. Re:Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes, I remember this as well. There was even someone at my base who was court-martialed and separated from the service because he refused.

    2. Re:Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? by nolife · · Score: 1

      All I remember is I gave various bodily fluids so often I forget what each was for. I figure I got enough back from so many medical shots that it evened itself out in the end..

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    3. Re:Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? by Quixote · · Score: 2

      DNA samples are used to ID the remains, in case identification with any other means (such as dogtags, etc.) is impossible. Check DFDIL for more information.

    4. Re:Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? by bubblegoose · · Score: 2

      Thanks for the link. I'm filling out the the destruction form and photocopying my DD214 now.

      --
      I hope that someday we will be able to put away our fears and prejudices and just laugh at people. - Jack Handey
    5. Re:Military REQUIRES DNA samples, security on it? by Alphtoo · · Score: 1

      bubblegoose said, in part: "...we were told refusal would be grounds for discharge." Man! When I was in the Navy (1970) I'd have refused in a heartbeat, done the Captain's Mast, and got my young ass outta there! I didn't want to be there, didn't want to go where the bastards wanted to send me, didn't want anything to do with the whole rotten mess of 'Nam, or the Navy. Fortunately, I received an honorable medical discharge... happiest damn day of my life! I don't think they knew what DNA was at that time, but if they did, they've probably still got my samples. I don't really care. As we used to say back then, "What they gon' do, take my f***in' birthday?"

  66. And Kroeger wants my fingerprints? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gotta love this - a *MILITARY* Contractor can't even protect a database, and I'm supposed to give a copy of my fingerprint to Kroeger in order to buy milk^H^H^H^Hbeer?

    It's going to be hellish enough for these people to try and fix and watch things... Wonder what else is in the DB... DNA? Fingerprints? hmmm...

    1. Re:And Kroeger wants my fingerprints? by WetCat · · Score: 1

      Guess what? You already gives
      a lot of fingerprints
      to Kroger just by touching the check signing
      pad or touching a shopping cart.
      They just should use a little amount of
      black powder to get them. :)

  67. IN SOVIET RUSSIA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Military healthcare data steals YOU!

  68. Oh, I feel safer now -- NOT! by NewtonsLaw · · Score: 2

    So, now that there are moves to significantly increase the amount of information gathered, analyzed and stored on every citizen in the name of a war against terror, how are we supposed to feel confident that this information is not going to be stolen by some terrorist group or spammer and used against us?

  69. Rather than? by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

    Rather than spending money on tracking down and throwing a bunch of clueless hackers in jail

    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.

    1. Re:Rather than? by Zalgon+26+McGee · · Score: 2

      Before DoD will discolose information to contractors, they must meet certain security standards. If a few punks off the street can waltz off with the medical records of 500k+ service personnel and their families, TriWest has failed to maintain the security accreditation they were granted.

      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!)

      --

      ---

      Book(n): Utensil used to pass time while waiting for the TV repairman

    2. Re:Rather than? by MacAndrew · · Score: 2
      If a few punks off the street can waltz off with the medical records of 500k+ service personnel

      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, 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?:
      The break-in occurred Dec. 14, when a thief or thieves stole every hard drive out of TriWest ``servers'' used to store enrollment and claims storage. TriWest for the past year has housed its servers in industrial park offices in northwest Phoenix. The thief apparently gained access to a property manager's office, stole a master electronic key and entered TriWest spaces with ease. The office was not protected by surveillance cameras. Electronic door records show the thief was confident enough about not getting caught to make two trips, in and out, of the secured area.
  70. Kevin's out, and this gets stolen... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the two are way too close together to be anything but conincidence. :)

    Seriously, given him, he'll be breaking laws in six months.

  71. What the thieves are thinking... by dirgotronix · · Score: 1

    "Hey Bob... you know those drives we picked up from the military deal? You haven't formatted them yet... right? Well, I know we need more space for porn, but I was just reading the news..."

    --
    America - Home of the scapegoat, land of the Corporation
  72. Do you like movies about gladiators? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You ever seen a grown man naked?

  73. Heimatsicherheitshauptamt by Alien54 · · Score: 2
    So much for the efficiency of the Heimatsicherheitshauptamt, roughly, the "Homeland Security Main Office"

    I recommend German for all government titles of such offices.

    ;-)

    It has a certain satiric edge

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  74. In Soviet Russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Healthcare Data steals YOU

  75. Nope by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    Most secure (TEMPEST) locations require the drive be removed and locked in a safe every night. Of course two guys and a cart could just wheel the safe out.

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  76. wow. someone just got more room for their mp3s by mcguyver · · Score: 1

    Health records? I hope the gov't is not taking this too seriously. It was probably stolen because someone needs more room for their mp3's. I would love to think this is some kind of x-file al-queda conspiracy but health records are not going to turn the tide of any war.

  77. Why the hardware was stolen ... by dougmc · · Score: 2
    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.
    Of course, there's another option --

    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 ...

  78. Data on all media should be encrypted by Skapare · · 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.

    --
    now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
  79. Weirdo's by kg6kma · · Score: 1

    The kind of people that would steal this stuff are lowlife weirdo's who need serious mental help and once caught should be immediatly sent in for a psyciatric evaluation!!!!

  80. Security?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A guy with a gun usually helps things, and if you are going that route hire an off-duty cop so the gun is a real threat.

    It's only a matter of time before companies realize data is priceless and thieves will do anything to get it.

  81. Problem of Putting All Keys in One Place... by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 2

    This recent incident again illustrates the dangers of putting all one's keys so to speak (ie. social security number, name, address, etc) all in one place.

    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.

    1. Re:Problem of Putting All Keys in One Place... by kg6kma · · Score: 1

      I agree this is not the smartest way to go about this they should implement an encrytion system and also have 2 or more comuters with this info so you must go to at least 2 Different systems to gain information.

    2. Re:Problem of Putting All Keys in One Place... by Ron+Bennett · · Score: 2

      Encryption is far from full-proof as others here have explained. Also, where would the key be stored? And no known encryption system other one-time pads (I doubt they're going to use that...nor realistically could they since one-time pads have extreme limitations in how they can be used to remain secure) is unbreakable.

      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.

  82. Fallacies by NeoMoose · · Score: 1

    Wouldn't you think that this sort of data would be held in a government owned data center/server farm that had ARMED guards? And shouldn't these ARMED guards be searching people for crap like this this. Did we not learn anything from the Los Alamos incident a few years ago when that Chinese spy sent off a hard drive full of our technology goodness to his brethren before stashing it behind a copy machine and acting like he was all innocent? I think whoever was in charge of security at the time of this robbery should be shot to set an example. Sure, the data wasn't as critical as weapons research, but it could be next time.

    Dumbshit Military

    Whoever has the drive oughta look up the medical information on whoever was in charge of security at the time of the robbery and see if he has a known condition of cranial rectalis (aka. head up his ass)

    1. Re:Fallacies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The military services don't provide the contractor with the data. They provide the DoD bureaucrats (civilians) with the data (required), who in turn, provide the data to the contractors. The military services have no control or voice in what is done with the personal data of their members once it's given to DoD.

    2. Re:Fallacies by NeoMoose · · Score: 1

      But the DoD standards require (supposedly) even more security than many military organizations. The DoD has to store and track data on all branches of the military and all of their functions.

    3. Re:Fallacies by Digital+Soldier · · Score: 1

      What you said in your original post:

      "Dumbshit Military"

      The response to your post said:

      "The military services don't provide the contractor with the data. They provide the DoD bureaucrats (civilians) with the data (required), who in turn, provide the data to the contractors. The military services have no control or voice in what is done with the personal data of their members once it's given to DoD."

      I think the point of the response to your post was that the military services have NOTHING to do with maintaining the security of the data passed to the contractors in TRICARE, as you implied by calling the military services "dumbshits".

  83. you are a fag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that movie was about the dumbest fucking thing i've ever seen

    1. Re:you are a fag by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it was meant to be! What's your point?

  84. Thoughts on what to do with the drives... by AeternitasXIII · · Score: 1
    If I had just stolen 500,000 military idents with health records, what would I do?

    I could...
    a) Insert false records and allow the the drives to be "recovered", thus introducing false data to the system and allowing for easier social engineering in the future
    b) Search records for personal with preexisting conditions that might make them vulnerable to blackmail (STDs, etc.)
    c) Use family information to achieve effects similar to (b)
    c) Sell raw SSN in bulk to the highest bidder d) Deliver the names and addresses of ranking officers in the database to interested parties (so Lt. Jefferson, we here you have a little problem
    e) Use credit card # as one shot spending accounts, or just run up some debts to drive the owners batty (assuming cards weren't canceled already)

    Can't really think of anything else. Anyone else have ideas?

    1. Re:Thoughts on what to do with the drives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sell SSN # to illegal aliens. Nothing gets people through a checkpoint at the airport faster than having a military I.D. Dress the intruder in a uniform and give them a forged I.D. and whose going to stop them?

  85. Solitaire and Porn.... by telstar · · Score: 2

    My bet is the machine was stolen so somebody could play Solitaire and download porn at home...

    Probably nothing sinister....

  86. Physical Security Idea by SirCrashALot · · Score: 1

    A firewall. Gas is pumped through a pipe under the door, and released in large jets. Thus a physical "firewall" is created preventing access to the server room. Its effective and you can be the envy of geeks/sysadmins everywhere.

    1. Re:Physical Security Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      /me places a piece of sheet metal over the "fire wall" and walks safely in to the server room, supressing a cocky smirk.

  87. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (now for the scary part) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I had to go to Kosovo in the beginning (1999), I found a computer on our network with an open network share that has ONE MS Access database in it that contained the name, rank, unit, SSN, and MAILING ADDRESS (!) of every single soldier in the United States Army.
    Needless to say, I brought it up in a meeting there and they hammered the bonehead who set it up. She was another soldier.
    First the military needs to save themselves from.....themselves.

  88. I know who did it! by bruthasj · · Score: 3, Funny

    It was one of the IT dudes' son playing UT 2003 and said, "Man this GForce card rocks! Lemme take it home and swap it with my Trident."

  89. Gulf War Syndrome by macmurph · · Score: 1

    I propose that the military stole their own hardware to cover up patterns of data. Patterns that would reveal the true causes of the 'gulf war syndrome' and evidence that it is a legitamate ailment.

  90. Why consider the obvious ? by _Spirit · · Score: 2

    Believe it or not, people actually steal computers because they are worth money.

    Isn't it more probable these computers were just stolen by some lowlife to sell them to make some money. The fact that it took a cpl of days to even realise that computers were missing makes it reasonable to assume that the hardware wasn't very well protected.

    It seems like everything these days has to be about terrorism and national security to give the likes of Bush etc. more ammunition to do stupid things. Why is Slashdot participating ?

    --

    beauty is only a light switch away

  91. Some questions by greenrd · · Score: 2
    I don't need to say how well you can screw someone over with thier SSN

    Why is the US system so ridiculously vulnerable to identity theft? What would it take to secure the system? Can any Europeans opine on whether European smartcard identity systems are more or less secure than SSNs?

    1. Re:Some questions by jasonditz · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a more secure system be one where your identity is based on who you actually are rather than who the government says you are?

  92. Easy to do on Linux by greenrd · · Score: 2
    This is now easy to do on Linux without patching the kernel - thanks to the loop-aes project. The installation instructions are very detailed and comprehensive.

    Personally, I only encrypt some of my partitions, for efficiency reasons, but in principle it's possible to encrypt all of your partitions (except a tiny /boot partitition).

    1. Re:Easy to do on Linux by Skapare · · Score: 2

      Personally, I still hate having encryption being done by "loop" device mechanisms. Moving too much out of the kernel might mean better kernel stability in the absence of more work to keep it stable, but it also ruins the uniform and secure abstractions. Ultimately there needs to be a new layer between kernel and processes, but that's getting way beyond the topic at hand. Instead, it should be integrated into the virtual device layer and virtual filesystem layer. And maybe someone could add decryption to grub and lilo so that we can even encrypt /boot. But for the most part, it's the patient health data (for which there is a huge black market by insurance companies, who also buy data from your grocer about your eating habits), the credit card data (especially stored at porn sites), and your personal porn, music, and movie collections, that really need the encryption ... not the kernel or even the /usr files.

      --
      now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
    2. Re:Easy to do on Linux by jmcnamera · · Score: 1

      So what?

      Its also easy to do on Windows XP and 2000, also without kernel patches.

      Yes they should have used encryption (hopefully they actually did, but I doubt it). They also should have had physical security.

      If it isn't physically secured, its not secure.

      --
      this is not a sig
  93. Easier than that by The+Tyro · · Score: 2

    Digital pix can be Emailed to some poor soldier's torturer overseas in mere minutes... personally, just the thought of that chills me to the bone.

    All they need is one person who can get on base... contractor, volunteer, or reservist. Heck, even somebody's dependent teenager might fancy himself a political dissident and "do his part against the war." (I'm not ripping on principled objectors... we're talking traitors here) That's a huge number of people, and enough that you could probably find a "fifth column" among them, particularly if you're fighting an unpopular conflict. Enemy Intelligence agencies will exploit all kinds of things to coopt people... ethnic loyalties, family ties, sex, money, drugs, the foolishness of youth... the number of ways you can compromise a person and turn them into a spy is endless.

    It's even easier if what they are asked to do is seemingly innocuous... "snap some pictures of house #X on Patton Street. Just some pictures, nothing else."

    Also, people do live off-base. What about those bases where there is not enough on-base housing, or on-base housing has a waiting list of a year or more? The latter scenario is common in some states where the extreme cost of living/housing drives everyone to try to live on-base. Don't think that those military budget cuts haven't affected the housing availability. The housing military can afford off-base is typically in a seedier area, often apartments (particularly for junior officers and enlisted). Those areas are easy to surveil... lots of traffic, people hanging around... you can even rent an apartment in the same complex if you want to watch a "high-interest" target for a longer time frame.

    This type of thing is nothing new... terrorists like the Red Army Faction, Black September, November 17, et al have done meticulous surveilance and research on their targets. There is a reason the military trains its personnel to be on the lookout for surveilance, tails, and the like (obviously, the more sensitive your position, the higher your suspicion). More than anything else, it pays to make yourself a harder target, and to act on your suspicions. If joe Al-Queda sees some security types sniffing around, they'll likely abort for an easier target.

    The loss of this data is a huge screw-up on the part of the healthcare contractor. There is little more a terrorist organization or enemy power would need than those files. Those CID investigators better be feeling the heat.

    It boggles the mind.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
  94. Credit cards? by nolife · · Score: 2

    Credit card numbers? I do not see the connection between your medical records and credit card numbers. When you are active duty you and your dependents DON'T pay for healthcare, there is no "billing", your military ID card was your payment. No one accepts money or cards at the hospitals or healthcare facilities, you could not pay someone if you wanted to. The only time I'd ever get bills is when one of my dependants went somewhere other then a military facility. I'd get a bill from the specific facility (not the military or their insurance company) of a small % of what was not covered. Maybe things have changed or this story is lacking information. Another question for this contractor.. Why would billing and medical information be in the same area anyway?

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  95. They weren't after the data, they're after YOU by ohio+zaza · · Score: 1

    This is just the latest in a series of faux-attacks from 'outside' that are just excuses to further erode our freedoms. This was an inside job. The military personnel don't need to worry about stolen SSNs, we ALL need to worry now that the feds have an excuse to finally shutdown that pesky internet! Unstoppable peer to peer communications beyond our control? No longer, it's a threat to National Security, and we have the list of crimes (that WE committed) to prove it! So long, all, it was fun while it lasted.

  96. Physical security... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    physical security is *everything*.

    Its a simple task, even under windoze NT/2000/XP, to boot off another CD/Floppy and access the hard drive, change passwords, etc.

    Encryption of data is the only *secure* way to enforce this.

    Brings to mind the database we had (have?) at work, which we entered an agreement with our former company (defense contractor) to use. Its an oracle database. I mentioned in a meeting with the responsible person that it would be easy enough to boot off a Solaris CD, and backup the database, and the next thing I heard from my boss was that when I was up in that building I was "not allowed to touch the database system".

    I didn't, of course, but it would have been easy enough. Now, I happen to be a sysadmin (with a DOD Secret security clearance, so I wouldn't do it anyways), but *anyone* with physical access to the machine could do it. And people are in and out of that room all the time.

    Sigh. Physical security is *everything* in most cases.

  97. TIA by ufoo · · Score: 0

    Since the Total Information Awareness project will make finding this kind of information easy, I don't see what all the fuss is about. The government should be able to find this data in a couple of seconds, right?

    --

    --
    Annotateit at Annotateit.com
  98. in the real world, we don't find criminals by g4dget · · 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.

    Have you ever been the victim of a property crime? I have, multiple times. There isn't any real effort at finding the perpetrators or recovery. It's the same with identity theft. I've been a victim of that, too.

    If any of those 500000 innocent people have their identity stolen and their life savings taken away, most likely, it will ruin their credit ratings for years to come. They'll get their money back, eventually, because the credit card company eats the loss. But nobody will make an effort to find the criminals, and nobody will compensate the victims for the time and money they'll spend recovering their money and restoring their credit rating, not to mention the anguish and other problems.

    The sad fact is that we already don't try very hard to find the perpetrators in a lot of property crimes--because it's too expensive.

    The other sad fact is that we don't go after companies that treat data negligently. But while we can't easily stop muggings on the street, it is easy to stop mass theft of personal data from computer servers. The technology is there. It isn't very costly even. Companies just need to deploy it. And the only incentive for deploying it is if they face big risks and penalties when something goes wrong. Instead, banks keep deploying ASP on NT servers, don't use encryption to protect data, and don't bother keeping their systems up to date.

    Absent some sort of immunity, the contractor is civilly liable for consequential losses to both the government and the individuals.

    Yeah, and they'll pay up to individuals when hell freezes over. At best, they may play nice with the government because they want another contract.

    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.

    I cannot construct a scenario in which the company could be a "mere victim". Anybody who has 500000 personal records stolen, in any shape or form, is almost by definition, negligent. At a minimum, the data should have been encrypted on disk with a key in volatile memory, so that if anybody walks off with the hardware, the data is useless. This is in addition to reasonable physical security--even for our rather non-secure data center, we have 24h guards and various alarms.

    The only way I see in which the company could have been a "mere victim" is if they had been blackmailed into giving up the data and its cryptographic keys, under threat of death to hostages. That clearly didn't happen.

    1. Re:in the real world, we don't find criminals by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      I sympathize with your multiple victimizations, and happen to fear identity theft a great deal. It's terrible that they don't run these things down, but the governement, especially federal, focuses on high-dollar loss cases first, and underestimates these misery crimes.

      Frankly IMHO the liability for identity theft should be squarely on the creditors who extend credit or perhaps gov't agencies that issue ID on insufficient proof of identity. As it is now, credit card companies do not "eat the loss," they pass it on as higher interest rates. Now, if the credit cards companies really sustained the losses, we'd see major pressure on the gov't to do something. Look what their efforts for bankruptcy reform -- because it would increase profits for minimal effort. Being stingier about extending credit to everyone and the family dog would hurt profits.

      But I still don't understand "rather than" instead of "also." Mitnick was largely tracked down by a private party, anyway. Prosecuting him was inevitable -- he'd already done time twice before and fled supervised release. It is impossible to say what further damage he might have inflicted, as he appears to have the morals of a small child. And while it is true "we can't easily stop muggings on the street," we definitely can't stop them by declining to prosecute the offenders. Quite the opposite. I'm sure Mitnick's fate, just or unjust, has others very worried about crossing the line and getting caught.

      I suspect your definition of negligence is over the top, perhaps not. As I noted, the srticles don't say whether the data was encrypted, though one might infer not. But no amount of a victim's stupidity exonerates the crook. If both are guilty, punish both.

    2. Re:in the real world, we don't find criminals by g4dget · · Score: 2
      But I still don't understand "rather than" instead of "also."

      You need to read more carefully: the "rather than" was qualified by "clueless hackers". I think some cyber criminals should still be tracked down and prosecuted: organized crime, people who deliberately injure or kill by hacking, etc. But people like Mitnick aren't worth it. We have limited resources for law enforcement and the legal system, and we need to allocate them carefully to protect the most vulnerable in our society, not companies too cheap or clueless to protect their computer systems.

      I'm sure Mitnick's fate, just or unjust, has others very worried about crossing the line and getting caught.

      And Mitnick's fate will give companies further excuse to avoid their responsibility to run their systems securely.

      Instilling fear in a huge hacker population isn't going to be very effective because there are enough self-destructive people around to do this sort of thing anyway. On the other hand, instilling fear in corporate CIOs about liability is going to work much better: they have enough to lose (civil and possibly criminal liability), and they can, in fact, secure their systems with a small investment.

      That's why going after negligent companies and not going after people like Mitnick is important if we are ever going to get any kind of information security.

      Mitnick was largely tracked down by a private party, anyway.

      Fine. Let the private party sue him in civil court, at the private party's expense. There is no need to burden the tax payer or legal system with this.

      But no amount of a victim's stupidity exonerates the crook. If both are guilty, punish both.

      I never said it "exonerated" the crook. But we make decisions on who we track down and prosecute every day. And the sad fact in America is that the police and legal system, right now, does not seem to try very hard to protect and enforce the rights of individuals.

    3. Re:in the real world, we don't find criminals by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

      Interesting arguments.

      But for two details -- Mitnick was harassing individuals, who deserve protection whatever you think of companies; and he was a repeat felon who fled supervised release, which can't be tolerated.

      Regardless, Mitnick aside, I don't for a second believe the break-in described here had anything to do with clueless hackers. These were burglars who would just be going after other prizes if these were unavailable. I suspect an inside job, which is particularly hard to defend against.

    4. Re:in the real world, we don't find criminals by g4dget · · Score: 2
      Regardless, Mitnick aside, I don't for a second believe the break-in described here had anything to do with clueless hackers. These were burglars who would just be going after other prizes if these were unavailable. I suspect an inside job, which is particularly hard to defend against.

      I agree that these people probably were after the hardware and that it probably was an inside job. However, they may well re-sell the data now and find it more valuable than the hardware.

      How the hardware was stolen shouldn't matter, however, for the security of the data: it is easy to ensure that data becomes inaccessible when hardware is physically removed. Not putting such mechanisms in place is where I think the company was negligent. (Similar comments apply to when criminals manage to steal credit card and customer databases from web sites--with a minimally security conscious design, that's trivial to prevent.)

      Sadly, the same is true for many other companies. I think most companies probably don't even realize that they can protect the data in such cases; their "technologists" are lost somewhere in a haze of ASP/.NET/J2EE and can't be bothered with pesky details like disk encryption.

      But if this became a high-profile prosecution of both the company and the CIO for mishandling of private data, resulting in stiff fines or worse, you can bet that other companies would (1) realize that they can do something to prevent this and (2) invest the modest amount of money necessary to deal with it.

    5. Re:in the real world, we don't find criminals by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

      Just save a cell for the perps. :)

  99. US Citizen Medical Info is Currently Sent Overseas by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I work for a hospital IT department, and I can tell you that as IT venders move their operations to Canada and overseas that's where patient info is going. For example, one of our patient databases for a lab system was corrupted and the vender needed that database FTP'd to them for analysis and repair. This vender no longer operated in the US, but supposedly was cleared for this kind of transfer through a business partner agreement.

  100. Why encrypted filesystems not used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful



    Why wasn't an encrypted filesystem used on such sensitive data. Use password beginning of day, shut server when lights go out, use password next morning.

    Hope the jury can understand something trivial as this if they get sued.

    A de minimus level of security has to be taken by the company, including on the servers themselves, since the tools are so readily available, and even free.

    NO EXCUSE

  101. Wrong Point by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Businesses have failure as a terminal option.

    For government, failure is just another level of performance.

  102. Provide Some Context by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    {Posting in AC because I am not sure if I should be sharing the information below.}

    Here are some things that might help reduce the FUD level in some of these commments.

    - I do not work there.
    - This information came from someone that works within the same system, but not the same contractor.

    - Security in the building was likely to be that of a standard call center;
    -- swipe cards to get in the building
    -- receptionist at the desk watching those enter/leaving, maybe even a rent-a-cop there
    -- swipe cards to get on the floors (if any)
    -- swipe cards to get to the server room (where the theft probably occurred)
    -- cleaning staff in at night, but probably not in the server room.
    -- cameras in high-traffic areas
    -- off-hours alarms, but shifts on saturdays and early evenings (when fewer people might be around)

    - Windows Boxes (NT or 2000) for the call center staff
    - Unix based database (using a dos-type shell to access), or possibly a windows front end for users.
    - The usual under-educated, second income/ low income people working there. (Standard call center people, but those capable of learning the complex rules and procedures for medical insurance.) Not many of them would know what to do with a spare hard drive.
    - Degrees among the staff members will be rare, even in management.

    - The data involved contains at the very least; SSN, name, rank, address, medical history (sometimes 50 years of it), beneficiaries, local doctors, details of procedures, families names and addresses, copies of letters to and from the insurnace companies, copies of letters to and from the insured or their familes, call logs, internal process actions.

    Obviously, it would be pretty easy to walk in behind someone to get to the building, but getting into the server room might be more of a challenge as there are fewer people with access to it. (IT staff only)

    Also note, the company Triwest is up for contract renewal very soon. A theft of this type may tank their bid totally, so it is possible that the theft was designed to make them loose the contract for benefit of the other competing companies or by someone that has a gripe against the company.

    In my opinion, how dangerous this is depends on if "hard drive" means the whole computer case, or if it means "SCSI 60 meg"; and if they were in a server at the time or not. Loose drives can get swiped for lots of reasons, though probably not related to the data on them. Whole server cases could get swiped for the hardware alone, where the the thief does not know how to get the data or care about what it is.

    Though, if someone went to 4 servers out of 16, or took drives from opererating servers (wouldnt they notice right away if someone did that?) it is likely that the data itself was the target and one would expect all sorts of damaging stuff to happen by the release of this data.

    Of course, now that there is publicity, the drives might get destroyed if the person just wanted the drives, or if they are a true criminal (not just an amature) they'll know the drives contain this data and the risk of it getting used goes up.

  103. Re:Yeeeeaaaaahhhhh.... (now for the scary part) by AirmanTux · · Score: 1

    That sounds more like an isolated incident, and probably related to training. Training is certainly our biggest issue. For instance, I'm the Communications-Computer Systems Operations career feild. I'm supposed to work with networks basically. According to my training material: the dot matrix is the most popular type of printer, CDs are a developing technology, 3.5 floppies are recent technology, every image and diagraph shows the old 5.25 floppies, contain a paragraph to tell me what a SHIFT key does and how to turn on a computer respectively, and personally, out of all the training material I've ever been exposed to its the worst written. In most cases, at least in my career feild, it seems like instead of actually writing the manual up themselves they use clippets out of old magazines. I'm not even going to get started on tech school. I can't speak too much for other career feilds but it Comm-Ops, saying we have an issue with training is more of an understatement than anything else.

  104. identy theft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... subsequent local news stories have it that a local FBI agent had warned that there has been a rash of data thefts here in Phoenix lately from mortgage brokers and other offices that collect personal information. The only items taken are hard drives. So what business keeps "everything" on the desk tops.

  105. Re:hmm...He chose opt out instead of opt in by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    What he passed was a disaster. It was allowed to be watered down to the point of absurdity after all those "coffees" contributions came roaring in.

    He allowed Torricelli to destroy our intelligence agencies through the Torricelli Principle.

    He destroyed the military.

    Thanks to Ronnie, by Yeltsin, Gorbachev, the Russian people, and the analysts own admissions, the USSR fell apart thanks to Ronnie, and no thanks to those French Fucks, the hard left factions of the dutch, german and other counties, and all those protests against "star wars" and the missile deployments that Ronnie and Margie shoved down their throats. The Soviet military puked, and we had a peace dividend.

    Bush Sr. made reasonable cuts to the military, and the dems in congress for the 12 years starting in 1980 had a spending orgy on their pet projects. Even though the mini-recession that wasn't ended and growth started more than a year prior to the '91 election, the dems and news cartels played it well enough to get him out of office.

    Then comes liar. He cut the military so deeply so he could spend on his pet projects that the military was complaining of not enough helmets, rifles and other small arms, and other training equipment and other readiness equipment. This was a constant but suppressed complaint.

    After 9/11/01, we find out that liar had cut the military so deeply that we were short close to a thousand cruise missiles, and that although efforts were already under way to fix this prior to 9/11, it would take over a year to fix this. This is what, 10 years after the gulf war? 10 years later and we're still short a thousand cruise missiles?

    We have a shortage of spooks in deep cover where they're needed. We have a readiness problem that is being repaired. North Korea. We were offered Osama on a platter. TWA-800 was shot down by Stephanopoulas' own admission on the Sunday talk show which he quickly retracted when he realized that he included it in a terrorist list of events, and tripped over his own words in his panic.

    Yeah, if you destroy the military budget, and spend less for the first time in history the following year than the previous year thanks to a republican standoff on spending, and shutdown of the federal government, you'll run a surplus. Or the tech bubble that happened on the liar's watch while his friends got rich on cattle futures, global crossing, enron (yeah, check it. enron enriched quite a few dems as well as republicans), and others, then "loaned" the liar money to buy a house.

    If a gutted medical information law disguised to look like a privacy law is something you use to be proud of the liar, I hope its enough.

    Because the rest of the damage he has done to our government is a disaster.

  106. best result - frozen out of more government work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Freeze them out. No more government work. This would fix this type of bull overnight.

    Other firms have been frozen out of government work in the past because of fines/givebacks for overcharges. Normally, the problem stems from huge paperwork requirements, quadruplicate forms, and complex rules for getting paid and keeping records. Something missing, it is played in the press and from the antis (usually happens with military contractors, but I know a lot of fields where this happens) as an example of overcharging/theft, etc.

    The end result of the overcharging/theft scandals (that aren't) is that someone in congress puts on the pressure to exclude them from future contracts. The effect of this in the industries that I am in close touch with (non-military) is that this gets discussed to death about what NOT to do, and how to avoid this problem. I heard of issues with companies frozen out going back more than a decade, and they are still being talked about by people who weren't even in the industry at the time of occurance.

    Freeze them out. Then sit back and watch what the other companies do. Your head will spin when you realize what a profound effect a freeze out would have.

    btw, if the info in some of the other posts are true, this was an inside job.

  107. We would have prevented this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    My wife and I are IT security consultants in the DC area, and we are both jobless and struggling. We continually see agencies like Tricare who can't or won't or don't hire people like us. Why? Because they have to hire minority quota-companies like the SBA 8(a) scam operations. The IT security of most Federal agencies is so bad it's scary. And they won't change.

  108. Why a contractor needs SSNs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My wife points out that her employer passes off employee data of that nature to a contractor that handles their employee medical insurance.

  109. Expect more of these -- and a few clarifications by SynCrypt · · Score: 3, Insightful
    We're likely to see many more of these types of scenarios as long as the government continues allowing (even encouraging) large-scale data gathering -- and as long as companies aren't held responsible for there mistakes.

    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 . 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) web site. They have a FAQ 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". Again, designed for good reasons, but could be applied in very heavy-handed ways. The Health Powers Act specifically shields companies from liability.

  110. Last Post! by alpg · · Score: 1

    You or I must yield up his life to Ahrimanes. I would rather it were you.
    I should have no hesitation in sacrificing my own life to spare yours, but
    we take stock next week, and it would not be fair on the company.
    -- J. Wellington Wells

    - this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...