Is it possible to connect a breach to specific harm?

The fallout from the Equifax case has already begun. Those of you who may be affected by this breach should read this article to guard against some of the scams that are already being thrown at data subjects:

Beware – the Equifax Scams Are Coming

For those not affected, the article is worth reading to get small sample of the variety of attacks that follow leaked data.

In other news, we find that a lawsuit against the U.S. government over a leak of some 22 million employees’ records has been dismissed (link) on the grounds that the aggrieved data subjects (here represented by their labor unions) have not proven that they were harmed by the breach.

In a normal case of injury or damage, proof of cause and effect is a normal requirement. But how could the plaintiffs possible prove that damaging effects are caused by this particular breach? After all, the government could point out that a given harm was possibly caused by the Equifax breach, or some other. In other words, the traditional rules of evidence and inference are of little use in the age of internet crime.

Stolen data is completely anonymous. When you are attacked, you have no idea where the attacker obtained his data; even the attacker himself may not know the seller’s identity. The data in question might even have been legally obtained; many businesses (such as Equifax) are in the business of collecting and selling data.

Unlike money, data does not need to be laundered; it’s already untraceable. Unlike money, it can be copied and distributed without limit. Exposing one’s personal data on the internet is like exposing one’s body to radiation: the effects are cumulative, and for life.

At the moment the technical, legal, political, and other capabilities are not in place to stop this trend, nor even to slow it down by very much. Our technology is running ahead of our ability to deal with its consequences.

 

 

Leave a Reply