[³o½g¤å³¹³Ì«á¥Ñrainbow¦b 2005/04/17 08:47pm ²Ä 3 ¦¸½s¿è]Q!Xr3
³o½g´£¤Î Tufts University ®դͤ]¨ü®`.-
©½t¥Í³N¼Æ¬ã¨sªÀ -- ³N¼Æ¬ã¨s¡@¡@ $^mMt9
LexisNexis Reveals Further Breaches of Databasen
By David Pringle and Rachel Zimmerman7-T)#N
Wall Street Journal , April 13, 2005
LexisNexis said 310,000 Americans, nearly 10 times itsq1'
original estimate, have had their personal dataC"Tl^
accessed by unauthorized individuals via its computer=XQrGo
systems, raising fresh concerns about the5yi3
data-collection industry's ability to guard againstM@jD
hackers amid a surge in identity-theft crimes.
Separately, Tufts University sent a "precautionary"vSm(
letter to alumni last week warning them that personalg
information may have been stolen from a computer=j}m
database used for fund raising. The letter, sent tovJr(W
about 106,000 graduates and other donors, says Tufts =>
"detected abnormal activity" on a computer thatDf
included names, addresses, Social Security andp%Ww
credit-card numbers.
The latest revelations are likely to give new urgencyMU8
to the clamor for laws to prevent data brokers fromh9j
amassing sensitive personal information without\u&
consent and for better safeguards of other databases..m#
Recently, data broker ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta,K
Ga., said identity thieves had obtained information on%,)4aX
about 145,000 people by posing as legitimate=w:+=
customers. Sensitive data also have been compromisedN
at some banks, mutual funds and other universities.
LexisNexis, a legal- and business-information provider=
owned by Reed Elsevier PLC of the United Kingdom, saidOCPL%2
it has identified 59 security breaches over two years}&) U
-- a rate of about one every two weeks -- making theHz2
problem far more pervasive than it had previouslyR2.
realized. The accessed information included SocialgP=;8
Security, driver's license numbers and other personalN>1f
information.
U.S. law-enforcement agencies are investigating theMvb[L
breach, and Reed said it is offering fraud insuranceW\\AK
and other services such as credit checks, free of"^W
charge, to individuals whose data were accessed byO"_f"{
unauthorized people. Reed's latest announcement comes_B
five weeks after its initial disclosure that breaches2z
had affected about 30,000 people.
Once individual information has been purloined, it canC/a^
be used by identity thieves to fraudulently obtainX
credit cards, mortgage loans and car loans, amongBbI{I
other things. The Federal Trade Commission estimates"0
27.3 million Americans were affected by identity theft5D<_U
in the five years through 2003, with the pace of theft6YGp?+
quickening toward the end of that period.
Data brokers, which collect and sell personalH@h`5Y
information, represent a new and still largely<+8
unregulated industry -- but virtually every state is3)tl
considering some kind of privacy legislation. In at(
least 20 states, the law would require companies to
notify individuals when their personal information isi#_d
compromised, according to the Electronic PrivacyP.:!
Information Center, a public-interest research group6"1
in Washington, D.C. Congress is also considering anh|)
federal notification standard, based on a California<vut":
law that exposed the ChoicePoint breach.
The Senate Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearingI
today on the recent wave of data breaches and on theq?2*
proposed legislation.
Laws governing the collection and movement of personalMn
data are much stricter in Europe and the region hasn't+E'
had the spate of security breaches experienced in the0
U.S.
Data brokers such as LexisNexis promote their~8JWG$
"risk-management" services to banks, insuranceh$4=
companies, law-enforcement agencies and otherwJT
legitimate organizations that need to guard againstTx
financial fraud. Banks, for instance, buy the data so[
they can run checks when deciding whether to approve ag.|J%E
mortgage application. Reed executives say the3n[`^
data-brokering business is an important tool inJH='
preventing fraud.
LexisNexis said it began investigating thousands of_l.
customers' accounts last month, after announcing thats8#P
information on 30,000 people held by its Seisint4
data-brokering division may have been accessed by5
criminals. Yesterday Reed said that it had uncoveredlH"
dozens of Seisint security breaches that predated itspn
acquisition of the company late last year, as well as/Zm
a handful of incidents in other parts of LexisNexis.aBi
Kurt Sanford, head of U.S. corporate and federal^:s3xi
markets for LexisNexis, said the company didn't have_r
any idea of the extent of the problem before theL.FDy
investigation.
The security breaches typically took one of threeOw
forms, Mr. Sanford said, all related to__x
misappropriation of passwords. In some cases, an0B+G~^
unauthorized individual was able to access LexisNexisUMg2\Y
databases after figuring out a legitimate customer's8_
too-obvious password. In others, a former employee ofu
a legitimate customer was able to continue accessingaBg/y
the LexisNexis databases because the customer didn't\B;giO
change the account details after the employee left. InXswX
still others, criminals obtained an accountxC"^c
administrator's identification details, allowing themlT
to create unauthorized accounts.
LexisNexis executives say they are now monitoringFTL
customers' usage patterns closely to spot any1avi"
irregular activity. They say they are also trying to+
force customers to beef up their security by reviewingP
passwords monthly and requiring authorizations from=
two managers for each new account.
LexisNexis said that so far none of the 30,000 peopleZ16r6Q
notified of a breach in December and January have comebJ
back to report instances of identity theft. PrivacyozGUR
advocates, however, say criminals don't always!E
immediately use data they obtain, preferring sometimes&
to sell them on the Internet. Or, they say, a criminal,NfA0
may open a credit card in an individual's name, but?mAR
use a different address, so the individual doesn't seer4"
the credit-card statements and isn't aware of theFAc&O_
fraud.
Reed's LexisNexis unit pushed deeply into dataO2
brokering when it purchased Seisint Inc. of BocaK
Raton, Fla., for $775 million late last year. Seisint}R
was known for having some of the top software for8:&
searching databases. It also sold data searches for asX{BQH
little as 25 cents apiece.
Reed said the financial cost of the breaches will beL@M
manageable and didn't change its earnings forecasts.
At Tufts, Betsey Jay, director of advancement}"f]=
communications and donor relations, said there is "nou9
evidence that any data is being misused." Still, the[M
letter urged alumni to contact their banks and checketG
credit reports for any signs of unauthorized activity.a
©½t¥Í³N¼Æ¬ã¨sªÀ -- ³N¼Æ¬ã¨s¡@¡@ nLD^tH
Ms. Jay said analysts detected "unusual activity,"MV6}>
during routine checks on a server used for telephoneaeg]mf
fund raising that is owned by Tufts but managed by ani5Yl|
outside vendor. The suspicious activity --gYqK4
specifically, large amounts of data moving through the2;kKr
machine -- occurred Oct. 31 and Dec. 19, she said. Onew(4
theory was that someone was using the computer as aSSUWNa
distribution point for movies and other entertainmentWh"IF
media, Ms. Jay said. At the time, Tufts decided there;
wasn't enough evidence to notify alumni about the[W?S
unusual activity. But, she said, after recento\I$d
revelations about security breaches at financial and5
educational institutions, Tufts decided to alert its|
donors. She said there is no evidence that theEcuL
break-in was carried out by students, faculty members[W`9C
or employees.
---
--David Pringle and Rachel Zimmerman
Christopher Conkey contributed to this article.
kwsc3