Slashdot Mirror


HealthCare.gov Portal Suffers Data Breach Exposing 75,000 Customers (gizmodo.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo: Sensitive information belonging to roughly 75,000 individuals was exposed after a government healthcare sign-up system got hacked, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) said on Friday. The agency said that "anomalous system activity" was detected last week in the Direct Enrollment system, which Americans use to enroll in healthcare plans via the insurance exchange established under the Affordable Care Act -- also known as Obamacare. A breach was declared on Wednesday. It's unclear why the agency, which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, chose to not announce the incident sooner. Officials said the hacked portal is used by insurance agents and brokers to help Americans sign up for coverage and that no other systems were involved. The affected system has been disabled. CMS said it hoped to restore it before the end of next week. "I want to make clear to the public that HealthCare.gov and the Marketplace Call Center are still available, and open enrollment will not be negatively impacted," CMS Administrator Seema Verma said in a statement. "We are working to identify the individuals potentially impacted as quickly as possible so that we can notify them and provide resources such as credit protection."

70 comments

  1. Deja vu by OffTheLip · · Score: 3, Informative

    Seriously, I'd like to know who doesn't have my personal information at this point. Likely be a short list.

    1. Re:Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi, My name is Dave. If you could kindly give me your personal information I can check if you're in my database.

    2. Re:Deja vu by nospam007 · · Score: 1

      Sure, but in this case, it's " déja lu ".

    3. Re:Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, no explanation, and the stops are in place - after late notification.
      Hacked is unsuitable whereas 'hacked because security updates were not applied' is a lot clearer. As the spokewoman can't explain anything, she should be fired. Enumeration of the relevant CVE's should be mandatory. If it was slackness and security incompetency - someone needs to be fired,

    4. Re: Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously you think your data was not available to others BEFORE Trump? You must be new here.

      Regardless what you think of Trump, thanks to him, theres a light on and watch the crooked scram and infight. We have learned a lot about all the crooked stuff on both sides of the aisles as well as inside the various departments.

    5. Re:Deja vu by antdude · · Score: 1

      Or no list! :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    6. Re: Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, nobody cares about any of it, even Trump kissing up to a country willing to kill a journalist in a foreign country.

    7. Re:Deja vu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, I'd like to know who doesn't have my personal information at this point.

      Yourself? But don't worry, we have a backup copy and can remind you whenever you forget :D

  2. Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thanks, Obama!

    Wasn't Trump going to replace the ACA with "something terrific"? Whatever happened with that.

    1. Re:Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever happened with that.

      We have too many Democrats that were able to stop it.

    2. Re:Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We found out he just fucking says anything he thinks sounds good, so we quit listening. Instead we're going to replace Trump with a terrific new president!

    3. Re:Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I must have missed the part where 'something fantastic' was proposed by the Republicans. When was that? Can you provide a link to the fantastic healthcare plan they proposed?

      Also, seems like the GOP has a majority in both houses of Congress. Why did the support of the Democrats matter at all? Thx.

    4. Re:Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We have too many Democrats that were able to stop it.

      You mean too many Republicans that were able to stop it. It'd easier to do nothing and continue to blame the Democrats than to make any changes and in any way own the problem. Fixing the problem is something politicians either don't know how to do or more importantly are unwilling to go through because there'd be a lot of economic pain and confusion as those efforts were put into effect, almost assuring they'd lose their job and efforts would be made to revert the changes.

    5. Re:Goes without saying by BradMajors · · Score: 1

      The Republicans almost voted to return health care to the states which would have been a fantastic solution. The reason why it didn't happen was because every single Democrat voted against it and 60 votes are required to get things done in the Senate.

    6. Re:Goes without saying by BradMajors · · Score: 0

      Republicans: people being able to chose the type of health care that they want is good.
      Democrats: people having no choice and being force to use a government run health care is good.

    7. Re:Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, but of course that's a lie and you know it. When you have to lie in an attempt to "win", you lose. Tsk, tsk.

      Try to stick with honesty in the future. It's the honorable thing to do.

    8. Re: Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another clueless repubtard.

      The delusion in these folks.

    9. Re:Goes without saying by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      That is a silly comparison. The real issue is how much of an entitlement people have to healthcare, and how much other people should pay to provide it.

      Democrats generally support broadening the entitlement, and perhaps making it universal, but are not clear who will pay, how generous the system will be, or how we can transition from the bloated and expensive system that we have now.

      Republicans generally support keeping Medicare (healthcare for old people), Medicaid (healthcare for poor people), and the VA (healthcare for veterans), but want to roll back the ACA, without any agreement on what will replace it.

    10. Re:Goes without saying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw, well, I thought about what I said earlier. What you said wasn't a lie and I apologize for calling you out on it. Tsk, on me indeed.

  3. Re:Nothing exciting or? by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    "Presumably this is just the world we live in. There doesn't seem much info in the article,..."

    (Gasp) You read the article?
    Vade retro Satanas!

  4. Which is why each state has separate car companies by raymorris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > Trading across state lines won't help, it becomes a race to the bottom

    Exactly. That's why each state has to have separate car companies, separate food companies, separate smartphone manufacturers - and separate insurance companies.

    If you let people in Oregon buy a phone made in California, or a truck made in Texas, or fruit grown in Florida, you know it'll be garbage.

    I say people should only be allowed to do business with companies in the same state, to avoid this race to the bottom. The fabulous success of this policy for health insurance demonstrates why we should do the same thing for all products and services.

  5. Seriously?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gizmodo slams HHS for a delay in disclosure of a week? I'm NOT a big government fan, but they should be commended for what I'd consider prompt disclosure Competence in government is the exception, so it ought to be praised not criticized.

    1. Re: Seriously?? by jd · · Score: 1

      The issue isn't a week. The issue is that there was a serious defect resulting in personally identifying information (PII) being exposed, showing inadequate testing, and that identification of the flaw took however many years the service has been online.

      This is mission-critical software in which failures could potentially cause tens of millions of dollars damage. There are certain Federal requirements for such software, including ISO 900x. It is also running via the Federal government, which imposes FIPS, the NSA secure server guidelines, Common Criteria, and those elements of the Rainbow Series dealing with data not obsoleted by later NIST standards.

      I know the sorts of contractors involved, I used to do contract work for the Federal government myself. I am not impressed. The maxim is that if builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, the first woodpecker th at came along would destroy civilization. In Federal circles, that's pretty accurate.

      Sure, they're doing better than Yahoo! or Sony. So did Genghis Khan. It's not a difficult standard to reach. Given the Federal government mandates better, should we not be using the mandated standard as the one to judge by?

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  6. Re: Nothing exciting or? by jd · · Score: 1

    There's no reason for it to be the world we live in. We make it cheaper for companies to be failures than successes, but that's a choice and not every country makes the same choices.

    All we need are the well-regulated markets advocated by Adam Smith, where regulations protect personal information, mandate minimum standards of operation and require a warranty for fitness of purpose in software.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  7. not a hack, just a favour by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe someone has asked his Russian friends for a favour to get rid of ObamaCare >:)

  8. Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by archer,+the · · Score: 2

    That name was dreamt up to play on the fears of Republican voters, including the suggestion that it would have "death panels". A survey early last year showed 35% of respondents still didn't realize "Obamacare" was the same thing as the ACA. We need to make decisions rationally, not out of fear.

    For instance, you're more likely to be killed by pollution (200,000 early deaths per year) than an undocumented immigrant (750 per year). However, our administration wants to spend money building a wall to protect you from the "dangerous" Mexicans, but doesn't mention anything about how many people die from pollution when announcing cuts to emissions standards.

    (The 750 number is 456 arrests per year, plus an estimated correction factor due to cases not being solved.)

    1. Re:Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For instance, you're more likely to be killed by pollution (200,000 early deaths per year) than an undocumented immigrant (750 per year). However, our administration wants to spend money building a wall to protect you from the "dangerous" Mexicans, but doesn't mention anything about how many people die from pollution when announcing cuts to emissions standards.

      Some people want a wall to protect the fiscal integrity of their state and/or country. Certainly "undocumented workers" (nee: illegal immigrants) pay some taxes and produce, and there are plenty of success stories. The problem is... illegal immigration is a net loss, and one method of slowing the losses is to better control immigration. Whether a wall will do it remains to be seen, but the only option I've heard is to try to make those countries a place in which nobody wants to leave... good luck with that considering those in charge south of the U.S. Border....

    2. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by jd · · Score: 1

      It wasn't even devised by Obama, it was devised by Mitt Romney. Obama notably refused to offer suggestions and asked Congress to devise their own proposals. Romney's, with Republican amendments, was the one accepted.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    3. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by jd · · Score: 2

      King John wanted a fiscal wall. Ruined his country trying. The barons stepped in and forced him to allow merchants, traders and other workers to cross the border freely except in times of war, and to never deprive a worker of the tools of their trade.

      Easy to improve countries to the south. Want a step by step guide?

      1) Don't finance or operate death squads there

      2) Hold businesses responsible for crimes overseas, as permitted by US law

      3) Don't overthrow elected governments

      4) Don't supply them with weapons

      5) Ensure the NRA is clear that gun running will not be tolerated

      6) Legalize all drugs but allow refusal of coverage or care (other than psych) for habitual users of anything addictive

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    4. Re:Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That name was dreamt up to play on the fears of Republican voters, including the suggestion that it would have "death panels". A survey early last year showed 35% of respondents still didn't realize "Obamacare" was the same thing as the ACA. We need to make decisions rationally, not out of fear.

      For instance, you're more likely to be killed by pollution (200,000 early deaths per year) than an undocumented immigrant (750 per year). However, our administration wants to spend money building a wall to protect you from the "dangerous" Mexicans, but doesn't mention anything about how many people die from pollution when announcing cuts to emissions standards.

      (The 750 number is 456 arrests per year, plus an estimated correction factor due to cases not being solved.)

      Seriously?

      And you just had the balls to lecture about misusing fear as a political factor?

      What about the massive and widespread identity theft perpetrated by illegal immigrants?

      IRS: 1.2 Million Illegal Aliens Committed Identity Theft in FY 2017

      Hell, you just tried to paper over a complex issue with a lot of aspects using a childish fear-based statistic.

      You played your NPC role well.

    5. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by jd · · Score: 0

      Unless you can produce 1.2 million court cases, it's reasonably certain that that never happened. I doubt the IRS really claims it, either. But don't let racism, xenophobia and an inability to learn foreign languages from deterring you.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    6. Re:Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      IRS: 1.2 Million Illegal Aliens Committed Identity Theft in FY 2017 [numbersusa.com]

      If you follow that link to its source at the right-wing CNS ("right news, right now"), you will find that the answers from the IRS about identity theft have nothing to do with immigrants or illegal aliens, and make no mention of them. You took a story about one thing and made it about something else to fit your purposes.

      You have to learn to use higher-quality fake news sites.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      To 6 - AFAIK, chemical addictions actually require medical treatments and medication. The kind of addiction where your body convulses vomits shits when you quit the drug. For other kinds of habitual addiction or whatever it’s called.. geez it’s still cheaper to treat anyone earlier than later.

    8. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But numberusa.com reported it. LUL.

    9. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

      I bet you do.

    10. Re:Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the wall is to keep out those who want to run amuck in the country illegally. There is nothing wrong with entering a country using legal means and that isn't being stopped but when groups of people want to rush the border without entering legally then there is an issue. My relatives came over in the 1890's from Europe and did so legally - they didn't sneak over the border.

      OTOH, the democrats support mass illegal entries so they can get them to appear on vote lists to vote for democrat politicians.

    11. Re: Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by jd · · Score: 1

      That sort of treatment really aught to be done in psych facilities, the person needs to be monitored by people who understand pharmacology in relation to the brain and which effects are good versus really bad. That's the province of the pdoc.

      That treatment, yes, should be early and covered. And strictly done by people who know what they're doing.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    12. Re:Wish we could stop calling it Obamacare by archer,+the · · Score: 1

      And yet you're the one that added a statistic to one side only. Why not provide statistics of other problems caused by pollution? Because you don't care about taking a look at all of our problems (environment, health, crime, immigration, etc) objectively and then prioritizing. Your identity theft statistic also covers 6 years according to this. I think people would prefer Identity theft to dying early.

      That being said, I should have framed this slightly differently: cost to resolve the issues. If the US could spend $100 per death prevented by building the "wall", compared to say $150 per death prevented by reducing pollution, it would be better to build the wall first. However, making these determinations still requires objective analysis.

  9. Re: Which is why each state has separate car compa by jd · · Score: 1

    You do understand that whilst different cars have different performance characteristics making them suitable for different conditions, there's really only one treatment for a broken leg, one treatment for any given bacterial infection, one sort of x-ray, one design of ambulance.

    Not really a situation that applies to cars, toothbrushes or music.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  10. Obamacare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good thing I said "fuck Obamacare"and ignored all the warnings that it's mandatory I sign up.

  11. Same in Dr's offices by rojash · · Score: 1

    The bastards expose all your info in open files in paper documents. How unsafe is that ? Imagine being a jan who knows to make use of this !!

    1. Re: Same in Dr's offices by jd · · Score: 1

      Ever tried to read a doctor's handwriting? There's no better cryptography. Nobody is allowed to stand near taking notes, anyway, and even if they did they'd be on CCTV.

      Thing with computers and data, a billion copies can be made as easily as one, by a million different people, all in different parts of the world, with absolutely nothing to stop them or identify them.

      Slight difference in accountability, access control and scale.

      So, aside from being utterly wrong in every respect... you're wrong. Nice to know computer literacy is so high. It's almost measurable.

      --
      It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
    2. Re:Same in Dr's offices by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      The bastards expose all your info in open files in paper documents. How unsafe is that ? Imagine being a jan who knows to make use of this !!

      You must not do much work in doctor's offices. A doctor's office still using paper records, a fax machine, and a locked filing cabinet is probably keeping your records safer than at least half of the doctor's offices which use computers. On my to-do list before the end of the year is to try and get a doctor to upgrade his computer systems from Windows XP and an ISP-distributed router. Yes, in 2018, I'm still doing that because everything has 'just worked' for years and years; to a certain degree I can't fault them. However, now, they basically have to start from scratch: new server, new release of their recordkeeping software, new workstations, new router...the whole project is probably going to cost some $10,000 by time they're done, it's not like they've been saving up the past five years to do it, and they basically have to do everything in one shot, meaning there will likely be a small business loan involved to do it.

      A dentist's office I work with has fairly modern stuff, but their passwords are trivial to guess and no screen timeouts, and they patently refuse to address either. Their firewall is a decade-old Linksys router and their guest Wi-Fi network isn't isolated in any meaningful sense. I literally yelled at the owner of the firm that no, I was not going to remove the passwords entirely and open up his workstation to use Remote Desktop over the public internet.

      Another doctor's office I worked with has been exploring a merger for some time, so they patently refused to spend a dime on anything that still even-a-little-bit worked. To be fair, the logic was sound: if the merger went through, the parent company would be replacing basically-everything anyway. If it didn't, they had one of those agreements where the company acquiring them would pay them a hefty sum, which they did earmark explicitly to revamp their IT. The buyer just kept dragging their feet, so their domain controller was still Server 2008 (the Vista one). They're using some sort of terminal emulator to log data into an out of something that looks AS/400-like, but I can't identify it beyond its IP address. Let's not talk about file and folder permissions......

      Trust me, if your doctor's office has fewer than three locations, they're probably very-not-HIPAA-compliant, to the point where I basically have more trust in the safety of doctor's offices still using paper files.

    3. Re:Same in Dr's offices by rojash · · Score: 1

      Sorry, so tl;dr; for this is ??

    4. Re: Same in Dr's offices by rojash · · Score: 1

      your effing Dr's prescription is not the same as their admin taking all your info and keeping it in paper files...where in the world are you from ?? Your Dr. takes your private info ?? Apples to Oranges Dude.

    5. Re:Same in Dr's offices by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      For many doctor's offices with EMR systems, paper files in locked cabinets would probably be an improvement for security.

  12. Well.... by modmans2ndcoming · · Score: 0

    Trump, McConnell, and Ryan: "If we can't repeal the ACA, lets destroy the legitimacy of the system by running it like idiots and allowing hackers to break in"

  13. Re: Nothing exciting or? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I take it you don't work in security.

    Rule #1: The attacker always wins.

    The most regulated security projects are too busy working to be OSI compliant rather than trying to figure out how to actually design their systems to be secure given their unique environment. Every environment is different and requires it's own analysis and judgement, not a cookie cutter generic set of requirements that might not apply or help in your given situation. Trying to reach an arbitrary set of compliance rules can remove you from the task of actually securing your system.

    Also, the only secure machine is a machine that's not connected to the internet or is off. That is, assuming it has encrypted drives and someone walking in with a machine gun isn't an issue.

  14. Re: Which is why each state has separate car compa by raymorris · · Score: 1

    So what you're saying is that a vehicle that is optimum to drive up a snowy mountain in Colorado is different than one optimized for cruising Miami Beach, right? So to some extent, it kinda makes sense to have different cars for different states?

    On the other hand, the treatment for a broken leg in Colorado is exactly the same as the treatment for a broken leg in Florida, so prohibiting people in Colorado from choosing health insurance from a company in Florida is utterly ridiculous on its face?

  15. Anyone who has followed the history of this site by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 2

    should only be surprised that it took this long for this sort of steaming pile to be breached. Or in a way that left enough breadcrumbs for someone to notice, anyway.

  16. Hahahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait. Why am I laughing? This is almost as sad as the fact that nobody gives a flying fuck about data breaches anymore.

  17. Don't Hesitate! by Cmdln+Daco · · Score: 1

    "I want to make clear to the public that HealthCare.gov and the Marketplace Call Center are still available, and open enrollment will not be negatively impacted,"

    Translation: "Please continue to put your personal information in our shitwagon."

  18. Re:Which is why each state has separate car compan by dasunt · · Score: 2

    We already have health insurance companies selling across state lines. I can start a health insurance company in Alaska, and sell health insurance in Florida.

    The only caveat is that I have to comply to Florida law for the insurance policies I sell in that state.

    What Republicans want to do is make it so I can set up shop in Alaska and sell insurance policies to Florida that comply with Alaskan law. And this is where we have already seen a race to the bottom in another field: Credit cards.

    Until a few decades ago, most states capped interest rates. Along came the Supreme Court and said that for credit cards, the state law where the company is based applies, not the state law where the credit card holder is. This turned Sioux Falls into a major base of operation for credit card companies, since South Dakota, unlike most states at the time, did not have a limit on interest rates.

    I see no reason why health insurance shouldn't expect to see a similar race to the bottom if they no longer have to follow the state law where the policy holders are based.

  19. Its about time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At some point, the computing world is going to have to admit it... We need to put security before performance for servers.
    If bugs can be security holes, there will always be security breaches... So for critical systems we need the computer to fix our mistakes.

  20. 1.7 billion dollars to implement healthcare.gov by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is your government at work. A shitty website that gets hacked doesn't work and cost the taxpayers 1.7 billion dollars to implement. Might as well have paid the uninsured directly with all that money.

  21. Conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now they have reason to shut it down

  22. So, approximately all of them ...

  23. Re: Which is why each state has separate car compa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are you sure that all medical treatments are the same at high altitude? Also, aren't broken legs more common in Colorado, due to skiing accidents?

  24. Re: Nothing exciting or? by jd · · Score: 1

    I... think several of my past jobs qualify as working in security. And nobody works to be OSI compliant, at least not in any of the projects I've worked on. I doubt most people know any relevant OSI standards.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  25. Re: Which is why each state has separate car compa by jd · · Score: 1

    I would agree with you, as far as you've gone, yes. There's nothing intrinsic about a Florida insurance company that means it can't handle a Colorado claim.

    This whole in-State/out-of-State thing is, as you rightly point out, a red herring, a most scarlet fish of our times. That's not where the issues lie and there should be no constraints there.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  26. Suspicious! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who did Dump/Republicans hire to carry out this attack meant to sabotage "Obamacare" and make people distrust it?

  27. Re: Nothing exciting or? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We make it cheaper for companies to be failures than successes,

    That was a deliberate decision going back to the founding of the United States. You can see it in our bankruptcy laws. We Americans have decided that freedom to pursue happiness and by extension economic growth are more important than holding the feet of debtors to the fire, figuratively speaking, until every last cent is repaid. We have periodic booms and busts as a result, but most of us agree that the benefits have outweighed the downsides over the centuries. After all, the United States didn't become the wealthiest and most powerful nation on Earth by accident and this policy of debt forgiveness and promotion of risk taking played a crucial role in our economic ascent.

    but that's a choice and not every country makes the same choices.

    And not every country enjoys the economic success of the United States either. Take Saudi Arabia for example, a society with limited credit and strong laws enforcing repayment of debts. Nobody is running out to base their economy on the Saudi model.

    All we need are the well-regulated markets advocated by Adam Smith

    Adam Smith didn't have all of the answers and 242 years on we're still figuring it out. There is a tendency, especially among those on the left, to be Utopian in their policy prescriptions. However, we must be careful not to allow the perfect, which is probably impossible, to become the enemy of the good enough.

    where regulations protect personal information,

    Information by its very nature tends to spread. Protection is difficult to achieve and quickly becomes impractical as the amount of information needing protection grows. Moreover, the desire to protect personal information stems largely from our failure as a society to implement proper authentication. Our current identity theft problems are rooted in this failure of authentication. Finally, no matter how many laws or regulations are passed you cannot control how people or businesses think about or use that information and it tends to backfire when the government gets involved. The anti-discrimination laws and so-called "ban the box" laws are a classic example of this. When you ban a company or individual from using a piece of information in a decision, they're either going to infer the answer or use other pieces of information as a proxy for that answer. If legislating how people thought was effective then communism would have been a stunning success.

    mandate minimum standards of operation and require a warranty for fitness of purpose in software.

    Do you like free and open source software? Do you like the fact that you can generally obtain it without charge? If lawyers can sue developers for bugs or failure to satisfy "fitness of purpose", how much do you suppose your software will cost? The alternative may not be better software but no software at all. Be careful what you wish for because it just might come true. As a consumer you should be very suspicious of anything that gives lawyers more power to sue. It's almost certainly not in your best interest to side with the lawyers when politicians propose laws and policies.

  28. um, Obama embraced the name "Obamacare" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He, like many lefties, was convinced the masses would love it once they got hooked on it. The entire freebies ideology of Democrats is based on the belief that if you offer people free stuff, they will happily take it, become addicted to it, and then become Democrat slaves; they're so wedded to this idea that they cannot comprehend anybody who rejects the freebies, or who wants these things to go away.

    The problem is that, unlike most places on Earth that went to socialized healthcare, Americans had good healthcare before the Marxists got their chance. Americans were mostly just concerned about the COST of their otherwise excellent care - which is why Obama ran around the country lying hundreds of times to all of the American people that families would save $2500 USD per year, and telling them they could keep their doctors and keep their plans. Over 10 million Americans lost their coverage in the first months as Obamacare kicked in, and most middle class people are paying far more now. My personal insurance under Obamacare skyrocketed every year and is now over triplle the cost it was before the potsmoking, cocaine snorting bastard jackass became president. [READ Obama's own auto biography where he admits the drug use and parentage that makes my comment true]

    Tip: If you want to convince anybody outside the progressive group think bubble, do not use NPR, Snopes, Daily Kos, HuffPo, or NBC as evidence of anything - it's about as legit as using David Duke as a character reference at an NAACP meeting.

  29. probably still run by an Obamabot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer has used every senatorial trick in the rulebook to block Trump nominees; over a hundred have still not been confirmed two years into his presidency.

    Smart people never signed up for insurance through the exchanges anyway - that Billion-dollar-plus website scam was never going to be trustworthy. Government never excels at such things since it has no competitors and thus has no competative pressures and no accountability. People with massive amounts of power and no accountability is never a recipe for success.

  30. What has gone undetected? by booboo · · Score: 1

    On initial release this system had an alarming number of security issues, but anyone publicly pointing them out (e.g. David Kennedy from TrustedSec) was generally marked as a conservative troll and not genuinely interested in the security of the system. I generated a shitload of 'anomalous activity' back in the day doing a little personal research and there was zero evidence of detection or responsive action. I'm sure security has improved over the years but I doubt this is the first incident.