RE: CRIME Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breaches

From: Ryan E. Kirch (ryan@private)
Date: Fri Mar 19 2004 - 11:51:44 PST

  • Next message: Sasha Romanosky: "CRIME Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breaches"

    The way I read this article, Verizon is only saying that it is not
    responsible for attacks that are occurring OVER its networks or someone
    else's networks. In effect, it is not responsible for maintaining security
    other than for its own, internal systems. The fact is that California State
    Bill 1386, what I believe to be the start of the slippery slope, requires
    companies to inform their customers with 48 hours if a breach has occurred.
    Corbin - you are correct. this is more of the same New York Times /
    Washington Post corporation attack-machine.
    
     
    
     - Ryan
    
      _____  
    
    From: owner-crime@private [mailto:owner-crime@private] On Behalf Of
    Nash, Corbin
    Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 12:57 PM
    To: crime@private
    Subject: RE: CRIME Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security
    Breaches 
    
     
    
    This is sensationalistic journalism on the part of this writer.  It attempts
    to wrap up the entire legality of this into a binary, black and white
    picture.  You would expect companies to clarify and limit their liability to
    circumstances that are out of their complete control (a nod to the concept
    of the unfeasibility of "complete security").  Granted I am not a lawyer but
    from previous interactions I have had there is the understanding that a
    company can never excuse themselves from the liability stemming from their
    own negligence no matter what they get you to sign.  It seems like more
    journalistic doom-and-gloom fear tactics instead of responsible reporting on
    the complete picture.  But then again, trying to paint a layperson's clear
    picture in a legal situation is a Sisyphusian task.
    
     
    
    -Corbin
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: owner-crime@private [mailto:owner-crime@private] On Behalf Of
    Sasha Romanosky
    Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 9:33 AM
    To: crime@private
    Subject: CRIME Firms Look to Limit Liability for Online Security Breaches 
    
     
    
     
    
    Ohhh, news like this really burns me up. 
    
     
    
     
    
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31874-2004Mar4.html
    
     By Jonathan Krim
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Friday, March 5, 2004; Page E01 
    
    In the face of ongoing attacks by computer hackers, some companies that
    store their customers' personal data are adopting a new defensive tactic: If
    your information is stolen, they're not legally responsible. 
    
    Across the Internet, retailers and other service providers that handle
    consumer transactions are requiring customers to agree to waive any right to
    sue the companies if the businesses are hacked, regardless of how secure
    their systems are. 
    
    The waivers are contained in lengthy terms-of-use agreements that consumers
    often click to accept without reading closely. 
    
    "You agree to assume all risk and liability arising from your use of Verizon
    Wireless's online services, including the risk of breach in the security" of
    its system, according to the mobile-phone giant's use agreement, if you
    choose to use its online billing system. 
    
    American Airlines' Web site sports similar language, warning that it is not
    liable for break-ins by outsiders "regardless of whether American Airlines
    was given . . . notice that damages were possible."  
    
    ... 
    
     
    
     
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Mar 19 2004 - 12:42:46 PST