[³o½g¤å³¹³Ì«á¥Ñrainbow¦b 2005/04/17 08:47pm ²Ä 3 ¦¸½s¿è]Ev.
³o½g´£¤Î Tufts University ®դͤ]¨ü®`.kyI
©½t¥Í³N¼Æ¬ã¨sªÀ -- ³N¼Æ¬ã¨s¡@¡@ wMMQbm
LexisNexis Reveals Further Breaches of DatabaseW}_<H
By David Pringle and Rachel ZimmermanQqj
Wall Street Journal , April 13, 2005
LexisNexis said 310,000 Americans, nearly 10 times itsp
original estimate, have had their personal dataEI<"+
accessed by unauthorized individuals via its computer^%
systems, raising fresh concerns about theRR
data-collection industry's ability to guard against,Gc(n\
hackers amid a surge in identity-theft crimes.
Separately, Tufts University sent a "precautionary"J.G=
letter to alumni last week warning them that personal"
information may have been stolen from a computer"V#
database used for fund raising. The letter, sent toVg
about 106,000 graduates and other donors, says Tufts]~D
"detected abnormal activity" on a computer that]
included names, addresses, Social Security andzG
credit-card numbers.
The latest revelations are likely to give new urgencyi#A
to the clamor for laws to prevent data brokers fromxM
amassing sensitive personal information without9U<f3V
consent and for better safeguards of other databases.Nn!_
Recently, data broker ChoicePoint Inc. of Alpharetta,WOm"3
Ga., said identity thieves had obtained information on,59
about 145,000 people by posing as legitimate /io
customers. Sensitive data also have been compromised*Pl
at some banks, mutual funds and other universities.
LexisNexis, a legal- and business-information provider%{
owned by Reed Elsevier PLC of the United Kingdom, saidt(E,2S
it has identified 59 security breaches over two years5'+8I
-- a rate of about one every two weeks -- making thes
problem far more pervasive than it had previously&l
realized. The accessed information included Social+d
Security, driver's license numbers and other personal`"
information.
U.S. law-enforcement agencies are investigating the|
breach, and Reed said it is offering fraud insurance9OOX
and other services such as credit checks, free of=q
charge, to individuals whose data were accessed by/J
unauthorized people. Reed's latest announcement comes,A?
five weeks after its initial disclosure that breachescG
had affected about 30,000 people.
Once individual information has been purloined, it canV
be used by identity thieves to fraudulently obtainP
credit cards, mortgage loans and car loans, amongH7/7T`
other things. The Federal Trade Commission estimatesQB.9:m
27.3 million Americans were affected by identity thefty\
in the five years through 2003, with the pace of theft$"F=
quickening toward the end of that period.
Data brokers, which collect and sell personalnr:uYP
information, represent a new and still largelygD
unregulated industry -- but virtually every state is{<621R
considering some kind of privacy legislation. In aty"RZ
least 20 states, the law would require companies to[k
notify individuals when their personal information isj
compromised, according to the Electronic Privacy<`b}
Information Center, a public-interest research groupggM}
in Washington, D.C. Congress is also considering a)w1H
federal notification standard, based on a California|?r<
law that exposed the ChoicePoint breach.
The Senate Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing}7Bkx)
today on the recent wave of data breaches and on theJHJg
proposed legislation.
Laws governing the collection and movement of personal=gK`X
data are much stricter in Europe and the region hasn'te{=Qx
had the spate of security breaches experienced in thei&N{
U.S.
Data brokers such as LexisNexis promote their9^gD]
"risk-management" services to banks, insurance0
companies, law-enforcement agencies and other)0Elo
legitimate organizations that need to guard againstb0
financial fraud. Banks, for instance, buy the data so\qJ
they can run checks when deciding whether to approve aNZ4PT
mortgage application. Reed executives say the$f/jh
data-brokering business is an important tool inHX
preventing fraud.
LexisNexis said it began investigating thousands ofjZx
customers' accounts last month, after announcing thatBU\zA
information on 30,000 people held by its Seisint@zGYA
data-brokering division may have been accessed byOkTGg
criminals. Yesterday Reed said that it had uncoveredQD
dozens of Seisint security breaches that predated itsoj
acquisition of the company late last year, as well asV|-
a handful of incidents in other parts of LexisNexis.SL
Kurt Sanford, head of U.S. corporate and federal}5(
markets for LexisNexis, said the company didn't have3
any idea of the extent of the problem before the
investigation.
The security breaches typically took one of threeyrM(}w
forms, Mr. Sanford said, all related toP
misappropriation of passwords. In some cases, an)
unauthorized individual was able to access LexisNexisHo7
databases after figuring out a legitimate customer's*X\
too-obvious password. In others, a former employee ofK
a legitimate customer was able to continue accessing{=R
the LexisNexis databases because the customer didn'tmg(\
change the account details after the employee left. In[Ynadc
still others, criminals obtained an account/
administrator's identification details, allowing thempVv
to create unauthorized accounts.
LexisNexis executives say they are now monitoring6_}4]i
customers' usage patterns closely to spot any@
irregular activity. They say they are also trying to8y#Lz
force customers to beef up their security by reviewing&65U@
passwords monthly and requiring authorizations frompZKa^K
two managers for each new account.
LexisNexis said that so far none of the 30,000 peopleV9Y
notified of a breach in December and January have comeV
back to report instances of identity theft. Privacy3Q'Z19
advocates, however, say criminals don't always@
immediately use data they obtain, preferring sometimesk-f=X
to sell them on the Internet. Or, they say, a criminalV2
may open a credit card in an individual's name, butJmt
use a different address, so the individual doesn't seeF
the credit-card statements and isn't aware of theBjtg>
fraud.
Reed's LexisNexis unit pushed deeply into data>k7
brokering when it purchased Seisint Inc. of BocaeU
Raton, Fla., for $775 million late last year. Seisintvk(4
was known for having some of the top software forBc
searching databases. It also sold data searches for asW9
little as 25 cents apiece.
Reed said the financial cost of the breaches will bemV'
manageable and didn't change its earnings forecasts.
At Tufts, Betsey Jay, director of advancementT=
communications and donor relations, said there is "nohY5h~
evidence that any data is being misused." Still, the Zv
letter urged alumni to contact their banks and checkpI
credit reports for any signs of unauthorized activity.)5=
©½t¥Í³N¼Æ¬ã¨sªÀ -- ³N¼Æ¬ã¨s¡@¡@ *[aS
Ms. Jay said analysts detected "unusual activity,"0GN3x
during routine checks on a server used for telephone9r1O+
fund raising that is owned by Tufts but managed by an<
outside vendor. The suspicious activity --9
specifically, large amounts of data moving through thenvSVs,
machine -- occurred Oct. 31 and Dec. 19, she said. OneUY
theory was that someone was using the computer as all6!:
distribution point for movies and other entertainmentkXP.
media, Ms. Jay said. At the time, Tufts decided thereVa8
wasn't enough evidence to notify alumni about theWq)tqh
unusual activity. But, she said, after recent4e
revelations about security breaches at financial and0>[,^
educational institutions, Tufts decided to alert its)e-
donors. She said there is no evidence that theEk%)
break-in was carried out by students, faculty members7b}
or employees.
---
--David Pringle and Rachel Zimmerman
Christopher Conkey contributed to this article.
i<OoS