SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Fnord666_
In a continued effort to pass on any responsibility for the largest data breach in American history, Equifax's recently departed CEO is blaming it all on a single person who failed to deploy a patch.
Hackers exposed the Social Security numbers, drivers licenses and other sensitive info of 143 million Americans earlier this summer by exploiting a vulnerability in Apache's Struts software, according to testimony heard today from former CEO Richard Smith. However, a patch for that vulnerability had been available for months before the breach occurred.
Now several top Equifax execs are being taken to task for failing to protect the information of millions of U.S. citizens. In a live stream before the Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce committee, Smith testified the Struts vulnerability had been discussed when it was first announced by CERT on March 8th.
Smith said when he started with Equifax 12 years ago there was no one in cybersecurity. The company has poured a quarter of a billion dollars into cybersecurity in the last three years and today boasts a 225 person team.
However, Smith had an interesting explainer for how this easy fix slipped by 225 people's notice — one person didn't do their job.
"The human error was that the individual who's responsible for communicating in the organization to apply the patch, did not," Smith, who did not name this individual, told the committee.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 09 2017, @05:02PM
How dare you throw a cisgendered woman, a superior being, under the bus! This is why there are no cisfemale programmers! See how horrible you misogynerds are!
Haha.... It sounds like Ms. Mauldin ran her department exactly the same way the women here do. It's always just one person at fault. That one person gets fired. Then after a year or so, shit hits the fan all over again, and yet again, it's this one person who fucked up! All their fault! Fire them! Then after a year... well, you get the picture.
Process? Procedure? QA? A second set of eyes, at least, for the important stuff? What the fuck is that? That just stupid crap that assigned males do, and we know how awful those inferior, incomplete beings are.
Next stop: now if only the IT department had been 100% womyn-born-womyn, then, obviously, it wouldn't have happened, because, as superior and complete beings, womyn-born-womyn are infallible!