Should Auditors Be Liable For Certifications?

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday June 3, 2009 @08:59PM from the pass-the-buck dept.

dasButcher writes "Enterprises and mid-size business rely on auditors and service providers to certify their systems as compliant with such security regs and standards as PCI-DSS or SOX. But, as Larry Walsh speculates, a lawsuit filed by a bank against an auditor/managed service provider could change that. The bank wants to hold the auditor liable for a breach at its credit card processor because the auditor certified the processor as PCI compliant. If the bank wins, it could change the standards and liabilities of auditors and service providers in the delivery of security services."

2 of 209 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

What about the Dufus? by siloko · 2009-06-03 21:07 · Score: 4, Funny

Well much as I like people to be held responsible for the quality of their work I think it is a bit much to expect technology certification experts to be held responsible for the dufus who puts his username and password on a PostIt stuck to his monitor . . .
Re:Oh, this sounds like a good idea... by JumpDrive · 2009-06-04 02:22 · Score: 3, Funny

Are developers held responsible for the quality of their products? Yes, Microsoft developers are held responsible for the quality of their products, can't you tell.