The Data Breach At The Office Of Personnel Management
Press reports today (New York Times,
Press reports today (New York Times, Washington Post) indicate that personnel databases at the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) were breached in April 2015, resulting in the possible compromise of 4 million records containing sensitive personal information. OPM is apparently treating this data breach in much the same way that a private company would treat it – offering credit monitoring and identity theft insurance to affected personnel and urging such people to look for suspicious activity in their financial accounts. It’s a good thing to offer credit monitoring and the like. But a breach of this type—involving millions of current and former employees across many federal agencies—has ramifications far beyond the financial risks to individuals affected. With sensitive personal information in hand, hackers will have a much easier time in conducting social engineering attacks against these individuals. Some of the individuals affected by this breach undoubtedly have access to sensitive *government* information, and now that information is at greater risk of compromise. So treating this matter merely as a financial risk for affected employees misses the boat. What, if anything, will the U.S. government do to sensitize the affected employees about following basic cybersecurity and cyber hygiene measures in the wake of this incident? I will feel much better once I know the answer to that question.
More Articles
-
Lawfare Daily: Grokipedia’s Deafening Silence with Renée DiResta
Renée DiResta discusses her recent article on the halt in Grokipedia’s edit pipeline. -
Pig-Butchering Scams and the Limits and Promise of Civil Forfeiture
The United States has increasingly used civil forfeiture to recover cryptocurrency stolen by transnational scam networks. The strategy has produced important seizures—but it remains structurally fragile ... -
Courts for AI Constitutions
AI labs already write constitutions for their models. What they lack is a court to interpret them.
