[SecurityRatty] tag: hipaa

New health-care privacy laws heighten need for HIPAA compliance in California

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0000

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has signed two HIPAA-like bills that set new security requirements, breach-disclosure rules and fines for health care organizations operating in that state.

California privacy laws heighten need for HIPAA compliance

Mon, 06 Oct 2008 20:00:00 +0000

Healthcare organizations that operate in California have two more good reasons to be sure that they comply with the data security and privacy requirements of the federal HIPAA law.

Feds finally put teeth into HIPAA enforcement

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 01:39:29 +0000

The federal government has signed a stringent settlement deal — the first of its kind — with a health care provider over 'possible violations' of HIPAA's data security rules.

A Few More Words on DLP and Compliance

Fri, 15 Aug 2008 10:51:00 +0000

Today I was thinking about DLP again :-) (yes, I know that "content monitoring and protection" - CMF - is a better description) Specifically, I was thinking about DLP and compliance. At first, it was truly amazing to me that DLP vendors "under-utilize" compliance in their messaging. In other words, they don't push the "C-word" as strongly as many other security companies. Compliance dog doesn't snarl at you from their front pages and it doesn't bite you in you ass when you read the whitepapers, etc. Sure, it is mentioned there, but, seemingly, as an after-thought.

For example, Reconnex that was recently absorbed by McAfee, touts "information protection" before compliance. Similarly, my friends from nexTier only mention "compliance" on a few pages. Even newly unveiled DLP resource (DLP In-Depth portal) only contains a little bit of information on how DLP solutions help with various compliance projects. People tout "data protection", " data security", "data governance" (aka "we know big words - bigger than you") or even "data risk management" (aka "we are confused about what we sell")

I decide to explore this curious phenomenon.

Initially, I thought that it was reverse compliance at work? People not wanting to know what content packs up and leaves their network. Then I thought that maybe DLP vendors just aren't "the bandwagon jumping kind" (yeah, right!) Then I thought that they are "beyond compliance" already :-)

But you know what? I actually think that it is something different, much more sinister. It is the ominous checklist mentality (here too)! You know, DLP is newer than most regulations (PCI DSS, HIPAA, FISMA, etc) and - what a shock! - the documentation for these mandates just doesn't mention DLP (or CMF) by name. Sure, they talk about data protection (e.g. PCI DSS Requirements 3 and 4), but mostly in terms of encryption, access control, logging (of course!).

Also, PCI DSS directly and explicitly says "get a firewall", "deploy log management", "get scanned", "install and update AV" - but where is DLP? Ain't there...

Yes, Virginia, folks who "go by the book" and just "do the minimum" are missing out on the chance to procure DLP while their compliance budgets are still flowing. To me that means that many still don't get the "compliance+" model - buy for compliance -> use for security, operations, having fun, etc. Think what a good DLP solution will do for you in discovering regulated data across the entire organization, blocking those pesky email with SSNs, PHI (hi, HIPAA) and CCs (hi, PCI) as well as solving plenty of other problems ...

One security implementer shares his single sign-on best practices

Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:00:00 +0000

At the recent SSO Summit I moderated a panel of single sign-on implementers. One of them, Christopher Paidhrin HIPAA & IT security officer for ACS Healthcare Solutions, was kind enough to let me share with you his "best practices" list which he calls: "To Do & Not To Do: SSO implementation lessons learned."

Yes Virginia there really are HIPAA police

Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:58:50 +0000

One of the things that I have always not understood about HIPAA is what teeth do these regulations have and who is going to enforce them. There are plenty of firms willing to take your money and rubber stamp you HIPAA compliant, but who is going to say your not HIPAA compliant and why should you care. Finally reading this article in Security Bytes it looks like the federal government has stepped up to enforce HIPAA and have put some bite behind the bark. Providence Health in Seattle was fined 100k by US Department of Heath and Human Services for losing data containing patients information.

I say good for the HHS! A few well publicized fines where people had to pay real money will go further in getting people to take HIPAA seriously than all of the other dog barking and warnings that have taken place to date. The same goes for other regulations and statues on compliance as well. Lets hear about some financial sanctions or penalties around PCI and you will see a drastic rise in compliance there as well. Rules and regulations without enforcement serve no purpose at all and hurt more than they help.

Yes Virginia there really are HIPAA police

Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:01:24 +0000

Employee fraud hits Baptist Health in Arkansas

Thu, 10 Jul 2008 20:00:20 +0000

Technorati Tag: Security Breach

Date Reported:
7/2/08

Organization:
Baptist Health*

*Baptist Health is the largest not-for-profit healthcare organization in Arkansas

Contractor/Consultant/Branch:
None

Victims:
Patients

Number Affected:
~1,800

Types of Data:
"name, address, date of birth, Social Security number, and reason for coming to Baptist Health"

Breach Description:
"LITTLE ROCK (AP) - A North Little Rock woman has been arrested for using financial information from patients at Baptist Health to illegally obtain Wal-Mart gift cards for her own use. The hospital has notified about 1,800 patrons of the ID theft."

Reference URL:
Associated Press via WXVT Channel 15 News
KARK Channel 4 News
Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Report Credit:
Toby Manthey, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette

Response:
From the online sources cited above:

Baptist Health has sent letters warning about 1,800 patients that the hospital system’s records may have been breached
[Evan] Uh, "may have been breached"?!

The notification came after the arrest of a Baptist Health employee at a Wal-Mart store on 25 counts of financial identity fraud.
[Evan] Wouldn't life be grand if we could trust our employees? Maybe, I suppose.

The letters, mailed last week, follow the firing of the woman in early June

North Little Rock police say Tamara Hill, 30, of that city worked at Baptist Health Medical Center-North Little Rock in the emergency department.

Hill, an admissions clerk, was arrested May 30 at the Wal-Mart

Ebony Flowers, 25, also of North Little Rock, was arrested at the store the same day on three counts of identity fraud

Flowers was listed in a police report as a janitor for the North Little Rock School District
[Evan] Key word is "was".

Baptist Health recorded more than 950,000 patient visits systemwide in 2007, a number that includes repeat visits.

Mark Lowman, spokesman for the Little Rock-based Baptist Health system, confirmed that the system fired the employee after notification of the arrest.

Police reports say the women used a victim’s personal information to obtain temporary Wal-Mart "account authorization numbers" - credit cards, essentially - used to buy Wal-Mart gift cards.

The victim reported to police that he had not authorized the transactions

the same victim confirmed he was a Baptist Health patient

He expressed appreciation of the handling of the case by the system and by the North Little Rock police.

Among the items found during a search connected with the arrest of Hill was personal information for 24 other people, including "screen shots" - printouts showing the exact appearance of the images on a computer screen - that showed victims’ personal information.
[Evan] This seems like confirmation that "may have been breached" is not all that accurate.

Also found were four Wal-Mart gift cards and $ 1,490 in cash

Police found a small bag of marijuana on Flowers, according to the reports. In a search connected with her arrest, they also discovered a. 25-caliber magazine with six bullets, as well as a receipt for four of the gift cards and information on three-identity theft victims.
[Evan] A thug.

The U. S. Secret Service is helping with the investigation.

"Due to a breach of our information systems security policies, there is a possibility that some personal information, such as your name, address, date of birth, Social Security number, and reason for coming to Baptist Health, was accessed by an unauthorized person."
[Evan] This is from the letter to the victims.

No information in the patient’s "medical records" and no information about the patient’s diagnosis or prognosis was accessed

while no "medical record" information was accessed, the letter mentioned the patient’s "reason for coming" to the system possibly was accessed

Lowman said a reason stated by a patient using the system isn’t considered medical information because the reason is a layman’s explanation, not one from a medical professional.
[Evan] This is Mark Lowman, spokesman for the Little Rock-based Baptist Health system

He said the breach wouldn’t violate the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA.

But Pam Dixon, executive director of the San Diego-based World Privacy Forum, a privacy advocacy group, thinks all the information mentioned in the letter falls under HIPAA.

"It doesn’t matter that [it’s not ] a prognosis or diagnosis," she said.
[Evan] Splitting hairs. The bottom line is that confidential personal information was stolen and there are victims. Whether or not it is a HIPAA violation seems somewhat irrelevant.

Dixon found the system’s letter lacking in several respects, such as clarifying the exact meaning of a "reason for coming to Baptist Health." The letter also should have mentioned when and for how long the breach occurred, she said.

"Almost all breach letters have that," Dixon added.
[Evan] Almost all breach letters have what? A mention about for how long the breach occurred? I must be reading some of the wrong breach letters because it seems to me that this information is 50/50 at best. Also missing is the "we have no reason to believe that the information will be misused", but this one doesn't fit does it?

Dixon said Baptist Health should have offered in the letter to set up free credit monitoring for victims.
[Evan] Why? One year (or two) of credit monitoring is almost useless. Credit monitoring alerts a victim after fraud has already occurred and one year (or two) of monitoring is too limited for information that has a much longer lifespan. I guess credit monitoring would be better than nothing, but not by much.

Lowman said the health system continually conducts audits to know which staff members are accessing what information, and whether or not the access is appropriate.
[Evan] Good!

"We’re always looking to provide better audits and better oversight of private, confidential and protected information," Lowman said.
[Evan] And Good!

Commentary:
Preventing and detecting employee fraud has always been a challenge. This doesn't mean we give up though. We have some tools at our disposal such as employee background checks, role-based access control, segregation of duties, and job rotation to name a few.

I don't think that these two crooks are anything more than common criminals. The fact of the matter is that identity theft and fraud are very easy crimes to commit and require very little skill.

Past Breaches:
Unknown

You Are "A Security Idiot" If ...

Thu, 26 Jun 2008 06:26:00 +0000

... you:

Misspell both HIPAA and SOX (how the f does one misspell SOX?)
Confuse "risks" and "threats"
Think that "Trojan is a vulnerability" AND "DoS is a vulnerability"
Quote "Insiders are 80%" without thinking for one darn second
Think that a loss of "$20 million is catastrophic to any company"
Talk about "NIST compliance"

Please add your faves to the list and we can create an official list to be used to expose fake experts. If you think that nobody in our industry is that stupid ... think again. F*ck!

To be explained later :-)

Defining "Compliance"

Tue, 24 Jun 2008 20:00:00 +0000

As part of the RSA Compliance Solutions team I meet with companies all over the world to discuss their security challenges and priorities. Inevitably I spend much of my time discussing ... you guessed it ... compliance.

It is eye-opening to see how differently our customers and partners, as well as folks within RSA, define compliance. From what I've seen, most will immediately gravitate towards the notion of meeting the stated or implied security requirements within governmental mandates, such as Sarbanes-Oxley and HIPAA. In addition, "compliance" certainly conjures up images of the PCI Data Security Standard, which isn't surprising considering how many organizations these requirements impact. What we don't tend to see initially is a broader view of compliance...