Jump to content

Talk:Equifax/Archives/2017

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


2017 incident and arbitration clause

Hi,

I don't really have time right now to go through it, but I'm not sure how we should phrase the comments on the short-lived arbitration clause (which should be mentioned). There's a POV that the arbitration clause never applied to the security breach (and that the subsequent disclaimer was merely a clarification of this), so maybe we should rephrase the language in terms of media coverage or reports that agreeing to the arbitration clause waived a consumer's right to sue for damages based on the security breach. (Incidentally, this would also keep us out of the original legal research hornet's nest.)

Thanks, RJaguar3 | u | t 19:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Equifax Lobbied To Kill Rule Protecting Victims Of Data Breaches

Hi

I think this article may have useful information for the article, I don't know enough about the subject to integrate it well.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 15:15, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

@John Cummings: This is just another iteration of a proposal I mentioned above. I don't think the source is particularly useful when we have much better quality sources covering arbitration and Equifax. RJaguar3 | u | t 22:58, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Equifax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:51, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Equifax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:17, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Equifax. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Does the 2017 hack warrant its own article?

I'm not sure what the threshold is, but is the theft of PII on 143 million people is a robbery worthy of its own article? Definitely one of the biggest breaches in history, and there are quite a few elements that need to be addressed (allegations of insider trading, possible state involvement, lawsuits, Equifax's questionable response, etc.). Thoughts/consensus? PvOberstein (talk) 04:35, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

If the section dedicated to the hack on this article becomes too long, then yes it could possibly warrant a split into a new article. -- numbermaniac (talk) 07:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I'd say it does with utmost certainty. For one, it effected at least 143 million Americans who are a majority English speaking country. For another, this event, subsequent events, pre-events, etc have already gotten enough coverage that it's noteworthy enough to require one. And I definitely am not a fortune teller, but can tell you that this story isn't dead yet; with the coming U.S. Congressional hearings and lawsuits this story will be guaranteed to occupy a substantial enough proportion of the consumer financial news reel for at least a few years. I'm relatively astonished such an article has yet to be opened for editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.10.98.131 (talk) 13:09, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Equifax hired a music major as chief security officer and she has just retired

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/equifax-ceo-hired-a-music-major-as-the-companys-chief-security-officer-2017-09-15

71.182.239.23 (talk) 22:55, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't think her degree is relevant to this article. Clearly some people are grasping for stories here by trying to imply that if you studied X at university then you will never be good at Y. If she had her own article, by all means mention what she studied. But the fact that Equifax hired somebody who studied music at university seems totally unimportant and trivial. --ChiveFungi (talk) 15:09, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
I must respectfully disagree. If my hospital told me that they had chosen an art major to do my surgery, I would want to know why and whether s/he had further training, as in medicine, before proceeding with my operation. Several news articles have mentioned the degree that Equifax's security chief holds. They obviously consider it relevant. I do not think it is inappropriate for Wikipedia to include that fact in the article as long as it is done neutrally and not derisively. Joalkap (talk) 14:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
If you go to medical school and you study to become a surgeon, you're highly likely to be good at surgery if you complete your studies. (And conversely, if you haven't studied surgery you'd probably be pretty bad at it). If you study a computer science degree or major in computer science, you possibly haven't heard security mentioned once.
I wouldn't object to mentioning the upset about her degree, but it would be necessary to point out that the degree is actually irrelevant as attested to by reliable sources (here: [1] [2]). --ChiveFungi (talk) 17:23, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
We agree, I think. If her music degree is mentioned, it would be appropriate to follow that up with a phrase on the order of "though she had 14 years of experience as a security professional prior to..." or some such. The very fact that her music degree has been widely noted elsewhere, often derisively, makes it all the more important to include it in the Wikipedia article along with qualifications cited in the articles you referenced (and thank you for those citations.)Joalkap (talk) 18:17, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

IRS Awards $7.25M Fraud-Prevention Contract To Equifax Despite Failure To Secure Consumers’ Data

https://consumerist.com/2017/10/04/irs-awards-7-25m-fraud-prevention-contract-to-equifax-despite-failure-to-secure-consumers-data/

--John Cummings (talk) 19:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Equifax/Archives/2017&oldid=983672550"