Talk:Bread Financial/Archives/2014

Epsilon Data Breach

I'm no Wikipedia author -- but someone who is should cover the Epsilon data breach. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.175.51.220 (talk) 20:40, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I just added some big names to the list, and wikified it. The coverage is still grossly inadequate; see http://www.informationweek.com/news/security/attacks/229401372. Some quotes:

"Epsilon failed to heed a November 2010 security alert from the email intelligence group at Return Path, one of its business partners, that attackers had recently been targeting email service providers (ESPs) like Epsilon via spear phishing attacks."

"According to iTnews, spear phishing attacks resulting from a breach of Epsilon began appearing in early December, starting with Walgreens. But Epsilon apparently didn't discover that its systems had been breached until it installed software, in February 2011, designed to spot unusual--and potentially malicious--information access patterns. By then, stolen data included information relating to the customers of at least 50 companies"

However, I called Walgreens' hotline, 1-855-814-0010 , and they said there were two breaches, one of walgreens.com, and the other of Epsilon. So perhaps IW is misreporting what iTnews reported. Then again, how would Walgreens know that only email addresses were stolen if the information was stolen from a database containing much more customer information? If they had an IPS in place, it would most likely have blocked, rather than just logged, the information theft. --Elvey (talk) 18:00, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I've noticed you've included information about the Epsilon incident. As time has passed, the list pertaining to the companies affected by the incident has become less relevant and we wanted to get your thoughts on replacing this information with more recent news regarding the Secure and Fortify Electronic (SAFE) Data Act Rep. Mary Bono Mack (CA-45) recently introduced this legislation in the aftermath of several high-profile breaches at companies including Sony, Epsilon, and Citigroup, to ensure consumers are appropriately protected from data theft.

Here are links to article for reference: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303499204576389773023983518.html http://www.law.com/jsp/cc/PubArticleCC.jsp?id=1202499334281

Would you be willing to make this edit?

Thanks. ~~Annette — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annette Rogers (talk • contribs) 17:47, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

m==== Sanitising the massive breach at Epsilon ==== The aforementioned edit has simply sanitised and played down the severity of the incident, and was at the initiative of a user who appears to be a media contact for Alliance Data. The major companies whose customers' email addresses were compromised is relevant and notable information, so I have added a representative sample. The subsequent news about relevant legislation applies to the entire email industry and does not pertain specifically to Epsilon or Alliance Data (notwithstanding that the massive breach at Epsilon may have precipitated it) and belongs elsewhere in Wikipedia. Murtoa (talk) 05:21, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

There's an obvious COI and a few other WP:SPAs that seem to have edited the page in a way that's favorabel to the subject. I've marked the article with a COI tage until an independent editor can go through the article and comment on its neutrality.

If a connected editor returns, I'd be happy to discuss options with them. Otherwise, I'll take this to WP:COIN and run it up the flagpole as needed. OlYeller21^Talktome 03:00, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure if you are referring to me in the above post, as I have edited the page before but haven't done so recently. If so, I would be willing discuss what the options are for getting the COI label off of the company's page whenever you have time.Reallymeanbusiness (talk) 20:36, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm referring to the people (plural) from your company that are editing the article. I would immediately assume ignorance in this case if it weren't so painfully obvious. For instance, Annette Rogers, a PR rep has edited the article extensively.

You're obviously connected and you won't find many editors that are more accepting of that but I find it incredibly hard to believe that you wouldn't be aware that your Public Relations group is editing this article. I'm trying to assume that you're just ignorant because otherwise, you'd be insulting my intelligence.

We can focus on the COI editors, which I should remind you is a public conversation, or we can focus on making the article conform with WP's policies and guidelines. I'd much rather do the latter but it's up to you. OlYeller21^Talktome 22:04, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

What would you recommend to make the page conform? Reallymeanbusiness (talk) 21:59, 4 February 2014 (UTC)