I’ve worked in places where the policy was that you’re not allowed to bring a camera in; that was before cell phones, I admit, but I imagine there are places where such is enforced today. My current cell phone doesn’t have the resolution of a spy-era Minox, but there are better available, and a phone has a lot more storage and fair bit of image processing power.
We can all see what went wrong here.
1. He should have gone by car and not the train.
2. He should have had the documents on his laptop
3. The laptop should have been tethered in the trunk of the said car.
4. The documents should have been clearly labelled
“*Not* about the F-35”
5. His laptop should have had its patches and AV up to date.
Just one question.
What’s with this “hit by”?
That headline is trying to make out that the documents were the guilty – and actively so – party.
Well, perhaps that not the fault of the journalist, perhaps that’s the stance the politician is taking 🙂
Related articles by Zemanta
- 4 In 10 People Would Exchange Their Laptop For A Tablet (lockergnome.com)
- Bigotgate: the day the PM joined The Thick of It (guardian.co.uk)
The government agency charged with fighting identity theft said Thursday it had lost two government laptops containing sensitive personal data, the latest in a series of breaches encompassing millions of people.
Can you spell “Irony”?
This goes a bit beyond the bare-faced incompetence that we’ve grown used to
and come to treat as the new security baseline at the government.
And here’s another chunk of Irony:
Many of the people whose data were compromised were being investigated for possible fraud and
identity theft, said Joel Winston, associate director of the FTC’s Division of Privacy and Identity Theft Protection.
But what caught my attention in this article was the following:
On Thursday, a House panel was cautioned that credit monitoring alone may not be enough to protect Americans whose names, birth dates and Social Security numbers were compromised at the hands of the government.
During the House hearing Thursday, Mike Cook, a co-founder of a company specializing in data breaches, said identity-theft victims typically don’t become aware they’ve been hurt until six months after their data was stolen, when creditors come calling for money owed.
At that point, it’s likely the thieves will have moved on having made just a few purchases so they don’t attract notice and started using another victim’s information.
As a result, a credit monitoring service would raise a red flag after it was too late, Cook said.
So what’s the real use of this credit monitoring that the companies are handing out in the aftermath of privacy failures if its not going to protect you? “Oh, you’ve had your bank account emptied, your house sold, and your wife has received a divorce notice. And by the way, your credit is non existent but that may be due compute hackers….”
- Why Was Capital One Fined for Deceptive Credit Card Practices? (nationaldebtrelief.com)
- SC lawmakers to discuss extended credit monitoring (thestate.com)
- What To Do if You’re a Victim of Identity Theft Tax Fraud (community.ally.com)
- Identity Theft: Keeping Safe in an Online World Infographic (veracode.com)
- Ways to Prevent Identity Theft [Infographic] (blogs.lawyers.com)
- Identity theft (themaurergroup.wordpress.com)
- How Important Identity Theft Prevention (howprotectmyid.wordpress.com)
- Tips to avoid becoming an identity theft victim (technology.inquirer.net)