Slashdot Mirror
Massachusetts Attorney General, Victim of iTunes Fraud
chicksdaddy writes "Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley said on Tuesday that her office would be inquiring into long-standing complaints about fraudulent purchases that leverage Apple's popular online music store. Coakley was herself a victim of identity theft in recent months, telling the audience that her stolen credit card information was used to make fraudulent iTunes purchases. When asked (by a Threatpost reporter) about whether such fraud constitutes a reportable event under the Bay State's strict data breach notification law, 201 CMR 17, Coakley said that her office would be looking into that question and demanding answers from Cupertino, which has steadfastly refused to respond to media requests regarding user reports about fraudulent iTunes purchases, and which has not reported the breaches to Massachusetts regulators."
Only now that she was affected does she look into it. It didn't matter that everyone else was.
Attack the Attornies General so they realise how the real world works and kick up enough stink to get the laws we need.
Is 1563649 a prime number?
Apple is security! By the way, my daughter's Mac Book Pro stopped working yesterday after four months. Not bad for a $1700 computer.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
She should post the password she used so we can tell if it was likely to be a brute force type attack.
Some day she is going to find herself wishing that she just admitted to her IT guy that she likes the Jonas Brothers and downloaded those tracks herself rather than letting this fraud story spiral out of control.
. . .she will use her uncommon influence to resolve her own problem and thus conclude that the legal system works "as-is".
Typical Democrat party shill, Coakley is advocating greater government interference.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
I could see, if her identity was stolen from the records that apple has, how the new laws would apply to Apple. But her identity was stolen from elsewhere and then her credit card used to purchase stuff from Apple. I can't really see how Apple has anything to do with it. Would you go after Shell if someone used a stolen card to buy some gas?
Sure, dell stopped the purchase of a multi hundred dollar computer, but should Apple have to check ever 99 cent transaction? I don't even have to sign receipts most places if the total is under 20 bucks. If she canceled the card, isn't that her banks fault?
The data breach laws seem like a good thing, its important that Apple and others protect information about their customers against theft, but her identity was stolen during a ski trip to New Hampshire. That doesn't seem like it has anything to do at all with Apple or iTunes.
"In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson
Apple maintain the position that it is end users that are being compromised, and not their servers - so why should they need to report anything if there is no evidence to the contrary?
...her stolen credit card information was used to make fraudulent iTunes purchases. When asked (by Threatpost) about whether such fraud constitutes a reportable event under the Bay State's strict data breach notification law, Coakley said that her office would be looking into that question and demanding answers from Cupertino,...
Huh? How is this a 'breach' by Apple? Her credit card was stolen by somebody, and then used to buy something from iTunes. Apple wasn't hacked into; they processed what looked to be a valid credit card transaction.
All there is to do in Heaven is write hymns. Angels are pretty good, believe it or not. Retards don't know why Greeks said "muse".
The problem for apple is that because it has become such a popular provider of these services, at some point some powerful people get the same problems as everyone else, and then it's a problem. But no matter how politically incorrect that may be, it's is plain stupid of Apple to be totally ignorant on Murphy's law. That lawyer might just know how to peel an Apple... And if he doesn't then someone else might. So let's all wait for the inevitable. I think this whole Itunes problem is clearly something Apple finds hard to fix, otherwise it would be fixed already.
So the A.G. herself is credited for "telling the audience that her stolen credit card information was used to make fraudulent iTunes purchases. So that seems completely different than if she had an iTunes account that had been hacked, as is the commonly reported problem that Apple avoids talking about. In her case it seems like she had here credit card info stolen and the thieves happened to use the stolen cards to create an iTunes account (and likely other things). and her problem needs to be resolved by dealing with her credit card provider, not Apple.
As I understand it, state attorneys general have no influence over U.S. copyright, which is exclusively a federal issue.
The reporter posed a non-sequitur question, to which the AG provided a boilerplate "uh, we'll probably be looking in to that" response.
and apologists are out early.
"Informed of the well documented pattern of fraud through iTunes, in which stolen credit cards or bogus iTunes gift cards are matched with compromised iTunes accounts and used to purchase merchandise, Coakley said she wasn't aware of the larger pattern, but that it could be a reportable offense under the State's data privacy law. She promised her office would be contacting Apple for more information that very afternoon - a statement that received hearty applause from the audience."
Apple is being compromised, Apple hasn't reported as required.
Apple seems to be in the wrong here in that the have violated MA privacy laws.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
And even I think this is stupid sensationalism. She got her credit card stolen during a ski trip, how the hell is that Apple's fault? She should have canceled it and issued a chargeback. Apple doesn't even come into play.
There are plenty of things Apple does wrong, but this is not one of them.
The issue really isn't about Apple (from what I can tell) Really the issue is how bad this law is.
From TFA:
"the unauthorized acquisition or unauthorized use of unencrypted data or, encrypted electronic data" that creates a "substantial risk of identity theft or fraud against a resident of the commonwealth"
So it sounds like, if someone steals a credit card. Then uses it to purchase an item from a store. The store is supposed to report this "unauthorized use." How is the store supposed to know the transaction is not authorized?
Seems like a pretty dumb law to me.
In the actual complaint, the details were retrieved from a compromised iTunes account, not a ski trip.
You may be considering a different person.
Why would anyone steal credit card details, and then use them to buy mp3s? It boggles the mind, given that mp3s are so much easier to steal and harder to trace. It would lead me to a conspiracy theory if it weren't for the fact that I really don't care enough about the issue to waste my time thinking one up.
This story lets me in on some idea...It would be cool if a big official judge or senator were to have some illegal copyright music on their machine and get nabbed by the RIAA, and wanting to make an example of them just like they did that grandmother, and let that judge or senator be the victim of the RIAA's witch hunt, and bring about change to their practices....the latest I saw was a guy being charged 600k for songs....until it happens to an official, they do what they want...guaranteed that a judge or senator would put them in their place, and set a precedent.
Same as this story, I am sure it is getting all this attention only because of who was victimized, but put some grandmother who gets her account hacked and identity stolen, bah...who cares... I hope this case leads to setting better laws to protect the people over all, instead of just the big time officials.
In other news, a stolen credit card was used to buy a new car today. The car dealer is under investigation for allowing it to happen...
If I used a sig over again, would anyone notice?