Consumer Agency IT Pro Admits To Stealing 8.4 Million Records
A senior database administrator for Fidelity National Information Services, a widely used banking technology and data providor, has admitted that he stole 8.4 million customer records from the company and sold the data to a broker, who in turn sold them to marketers. He could face up to 10 years in prison but will probably get less because he confessed. We think he should have to open, read, and shred every piece of junk mail that his victims receive for the next, oh, say 10 years instead.
According to the register, for once this doesn't appear to be a fraud-based crime:
The company [Fidelity] is unaware of any identity theft or fraudulent financial activity resulting from the theft. Rather, it believes the stolen records were used for marketing purposes.Really, are mailing lists that expensive to buy?
"IT pro admits stealing 8.4M consumer records" [Channel Register]
(Photo: Getty)
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nam malesuada commodo erat et molestie. Duis pellentesque aliquam bibendum. Suspendisse venenatis lobortis eleifend. Mauris id est sed lectus convallis aliquam.
Post a comment
Comments:
That sucks. Wheres justice?
I must be really jaded. My first reaction was, "Oh thank God, he didn't sell the financial data to some crime ring."
I still do it because it does not cost me a penny and I keep hoping someday these companies will receive so many "empty envelopes" they might start putting their advertising dollars to better use than cramming my mailbox full of junk I never asked for.
I've always suspected that a lot of people with access to their companies customer data bases have sold data at some point. I don't think this case is unique.
This always reminds me of my great-grandfather's saying: "To whomever that claims to be honest and above all bribes; offer him a bribe equivalent to 10 years' earnings and then see how honest he really is!"
@iamme99: Especially true if they are desperate for money. It seems like an easy solution, but the problem comes when, as in this case, someone correlates the data with another set of data that could only be available from the original source. It was a bonehead play, made even more so by incorporating his own business to sell the list to someone else. He should have held out for cash.
@iamme99: It is actually a very small percentage of people who do it. I'm not sure if that is because a lot of people are just honest, or because a huge majority of people wouldn't know who to approach or how to approach a group willing to buy the information. All I know is, people like this lower the credibility of the rest of us in the field.
I read once that you should send the return envelopes enclosed in junk mail back to the sender empty to stick it to them. They have to pay the postage and deal with the extra mail they receive. I did this for quite a while until I could no longer be bothered. If someone were to inform me that it was worth the effort I would be inclined to continue. Anyone?