{"id":737,"date":"2006-02-25T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-02-25T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/02\/25\/another-security-breach-reported\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:38:05","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:38:05","slug":"another-security-breach-reported","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/?p=737","title":{"rendered":"Another security breach reported"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Following on the heels of an embarrassing security lapse by McAfee and its accounting firm Deloitte &#038; Touche, financial giant Ernst &#038; Young acknowledged Friday that it, too, had lost sensitive data that could be exploited by identity thieves.   In a letter dated Feb. 13, Ernst &#038; Young warned clients that their Social Security numbers were on a laptop that was stolen from an employee&#8217;s locked car.  Santa Clara antivirus softwaremaker McAfee warned 9,000 current and former employees in a letter dated Feb. 17 that a compact disc containing their names and Social Security numbers was lost.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Consumer advocate Beth Givens ruefully chuckled at the idea that companies that specialize in security and keeping track of important information would commit such gaffes.  &#8220;It just points out how pervasive these security breaches are,&#8221; said Givens, director of the San Diego nonprofit Privacy Rights Clearinghouse.<\/p>\n<p>Deloitte made the CD in order to back up a McAfee database of employee stock holdings, according to the letter.  MacDermott said McAfee did not have a policy requiring its auditor to encrypt the data.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.sfgate.com\/cgi-bin\/article.cgi?f=\/c\/a\/2006\/02\/25\/BUG2IHEGCC1.DTL&#038;hw=security+breach&#038;sn=001&#038;sc=1000<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[29],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-737","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/737","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=737"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/737\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3224,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/737\/revisions\/3224"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=737"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=737"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=737"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}