[³o½g¤å³¹³Ì«á¥Ñrainbow¦b 2005/04/17 08:47pm ²Ä 3 ¦¸½s¿è]od~
³o½g´£¤Î Tufts University ®դͤ]¨ü®`.z
©½t¥Í³N¼Æ¬ã¨sªÀ -- ³N¼Æ¬ã¨s¡@¡@ R+7 X4
LexisNexis Reveals Further Breaches of DatabaseaY
By David Pringle and Rachel Zimmerman1
Wall Street Journal , April 13, 2005
LexisNexis said 310,000 Americans, nearly 10 times itsS
original estimate, have had their personal data?8
accessed by unauthorized individuals via its computerBF8tx
systems, raising fresh concerns about the">
data-collection industry's ability to guard against[}~8c
hackers amid a surge in identity-theft crimes.
Separately, Tufts University sent a "precautionary"0B9
letter to alumni last week warning them that personalph>)"
information may have been stolen from a computer(d>
database used for fund raising. The letter, sent tobfc]g
about 106,000 graduates and other donors, says Tuftsz5
"detected abnormal activity" on a computer thatW>O_I
included names, addresses, Social Security and?(-
credit-card numbers.
The latest revelations are likely to give new urgency=
to the clamor for laws to prevent data brokers fromhpk[gt
amassing sensitive personal information withoutJ3z1
consent and for better safeguards of other databases.|5B\
Recently, data broker ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta,WU>r
Ga., said identity thieves had obtained information onG
about 145,000 people by posing as legitimatev&{$'y
customers. Sensitive data also have been compromisedwg0
at some banks, mutual funds and other universities.
LexisNexis, a legal- and business-information provider7+
owned by Reed Elsevier PLC of the United Kingdom, saidDX^b
it has identified 59 security breaches over two yearsMF\
-- a rate of about one every two weeks -- making the6
problem far more pervasive than it had previouslyt<Ew
realized. The accessed information included SocialP;C9
Security, driver's license numbers and other personal'~z
information.
U.S. law-enforcement agencies are investigating them
breach, and Reed said it is offering fraud insurance]
and other services such as credit checks, free of~SI
charge, to individuals whose data were accessed by$Di3B'
unauthorized people. Reed's latest announcement comesMoP
five weeks after its initial disclosure that breaches+Ef$
had affected about 30,000 people.
Once individual information has been purloined, it canK6V
be used by identity thieves to fraudulently obtainl).p]z
credit cards, mortgage loans and car loans, amongx
other things. The Federal Trade Commission estimatestvNN
27.3 million Americans were affected by identity theft=s8;h+
in the five years through 2003, with the pace of theftS-9zH
quickening toward the end of that period.
Data brokers, which collect and sell personalz
information, represent a new and still largelyMF{
unregulated industry -- but virtually every state is^yHJ
considering some kind of privacy legislation. In at$f
least 20 states, the law would require companies to%Y
notify individuals when their personal information isz$l:D*
compromised, according to the Electronic PrivacyO
Information Center, a public-interest research groupa
in Washington, D.C. Congress is also considering aPH
federal notification standard, based on a Californiai(%{/B
law that exposed the ChoicePoint breach.
The Senate Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing~!
today on the recent wave of data breaches and on theu
proposed legislation.
Laws governing the collection and movement of personal8NryK|
data are much stricter in Europe and the region hasn't;
had the spate of security breaches experienced in the n}2h
U.S.
Data brokers such as LexisNexis promote theirCA
"risk-management" services to banks, insurance4"<
companies, law-enforcement agencies and otherI
legitimate organizations that need to guard against(ohNA
financial fraud. Banks, for instance, buy the data soe6%?l
they can run checks when deciding whether to approve aV
mortgage application. Reed executives say the}#
data-brokering business is an important tool in+#$4mb
preventing fraud.
LexisNexis said it began investigating thousands ofcB
customers' accounts last month, after announcing thatOd9
information on 30,000 people held by its Seisintf
data-brokering division may have been accessed by-
criminals. Yesterday Reed said that it had uncoveredEw\
dozens of Seisint security breaches that predated its7RSmB
acquisition of the company late last year, as well as&{fakO
a handful of incidents in other parts of LexisNexis.C^
Kurt Sanford, head of U.S. corporate and federal-ZFS
markets for LexisNexis, said the company didn't haveFc-
any idea of the extent of the problem before theT>%r'
investigation.
The security breaches typically took one of threeEJ:P?
forms, Mr. Sanford said, all related topC>Dm
misappropriation of passwords. In some cases, an$"5V
unauthorized individual was able to access LexisNexisIt &
databases after figuring out a legitimate customer's8s:
too-obvious password. In others, a former employee of%U:t3
a legitimate customer was able to continue accessing2f"$
the LexisNexis databases because the customer didn'txx
change the account details after the employee left. In)!6D
still others, criminals obtained an account cU
administrator's identification details, allowing themr\TO
to create unauthorized accounts.
LexisNexis executives say they are now monitoring_")O&C
customers' usage patterns closely to spot anyF0^
irregular activity. They say they are also trying to=
force customers to beef up their security by reviewing`BJ+
passwords monthly and requiring authorizations fromp
two managers for each new account.
LexisNexis said that so far none of the 30,000 peopleR
notified of a breach in December and January have comev?/e"
back to report instances of identity theft. PrivacyS 4_X[
advocates, however, say criminals don't always!RP
immediately use data they obtain, preferring sometimesD"`l-W
to sell them on the Internet. Or, they say, a criminal3"
may open a credit card in an individual's name, but.A
use a different address, so the individual doesn't seey
the credit-card statements and isn't aware of the?xpu9!
fraud.
Reed's LexisNexis unit pushed deeply into data/!
brokering when it purchased Seisint Inc. of BocaDZ7
Raton, Fla., for $775 million late last year. SeisintZ2E#R#
was known for having some of the top software for[fU1
searching databases. It also sold data searches for as"x|f
little as 25 cents apiece.
Reed said the financial cost of the breaches will beV)GW(@
manageable and didn't change its earnings forecasts.
At Tufts, Betsey Jay, director of advancementU)6p
communications and donor relations, said there is "no(z>3
evidence that any data is being misused." Still, theF
letter urged alumni to contact their banks and checkyoQoe)
credit reports for any signs of unauthorized activity.={
©½t¥Í³N¼Æ¬ã¨sªÀ -- ³N¼Æ¬ã¨s¡@¡@ $N
Ms. Jay said analysts detected "unusual activity,"0V#oC
during routine checks on a server used for telephone~*2;@f
fund raising that is owned by Tufts but managed by an _WUaO
outside vendor. The suspicious activity --:\pU
specifically, large amounts of data moving through theq
machine -- occurred Oct. 31 and Dec. 19, she said. Oned3ky<G
theory was that someone was using the computer as a+sO1
distribution point for movies and other entertainmentMFhr
media, Ms. Jay said. At the time, Tufts decided there-r&uZ6
wasn't enough evidence to notify alumni about theg1FeiV
unusual activity. But, she said, after recentgP8B9
revelations about security breaches at financial and=#
educational institutions, Tufts decided to alert itsQt,n
donors. She said there is no evidence that the&yM"Q
break-in was carried out by students, faculty membersNf:h
or employees.
---
--David Pringle and Rachel Zimmerman
Christopher Conkey contributed to this article.
<