Topic: Healthcare.gov ‘may already have been compromised,’ security expert says

[oldcoastie6468]

Healthcare.gov ‘may already have been compromised,’ security expert says
Published November 19, 2013

Not only is healthcare.gov at risk, it may already have been compromised, a security expert testified before the Senate.

“Hackers are definitely after it,” said David Kennedy, CEO of information security firm TrustedSEC before a House Science, Space, and Technology committee hearing on security concerns surrounding the problematic Healthcare.gov website.

“And if I had to guess, based on what I can see … I would say the website is either hacked already or will be soon.”

Kennedy told FoxNews.com he based this on an analysis revealing a large number of SQL injection attacks against the healthcare.gov website, which are indicative of "a large amount" of hacking attempts.

"Based on the exposures that I identified, and many that I haven’t published due to the criticality of exposures – if a hacker wanted access to the site or sensitive information – they could get it," he told FoxNews.com.

A spokesman for the Department of Health and Human Services, which runs the nation's new healthcare website, did not immediately respond to a request to for more information.

One key problem facing Healthcare.gov is that security wasn’t built into the site from the very beginning, he said -- an opinion shared by both Kennedy and Fred Chang, the distinguished chair in cyber security at Southern Methodist University.

“There’s not a lot of security built into the site, at least that’s what we can see from a 10,000 foot view,” Kennedy told the committee. And although the site doesn’t house medical records, it integrates deeply with other sites, includes ecommerce information, and houses a vast array of data that presents a very salient target.

“It’s not only social security numbers … it’s one of the largest collections of personal data, social security and everything else, that we’ve ever seen,” Kennedy said.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/11/19/healthcaregov-already-compromised-security-expert-says/

[Pandora]

Yeah, saw that.  Schadenfreude's a btch, mookie.

[oldcoastie6468]

There's a history on the site that I don't know about. Maybe not. 

What's with the "Schadenfreude" comments? I ask because a member of the site from which I came used that name.

[trapeze]

There's a history on the site that I don't know about. Maybe not. 

What's with the "Schadenfreude" comments? I ask because a member of the site from which I came used that name.

From wikipedia...

Schadenfruede is pleasure derived from the misfortunes of others. This word is a loanword from German. The literal English translation is 'Harm-Joy'. It is the feeling of joy or pleasure when one sees another fail or suffer misfortune.

...and it's about the only fun that we conservatives can have these days since we seem pretty much powerless to do anything else except bitch about the state of the country and tell everyone who will listen, "I told you this was going to happen if you elect and then re-elect a SCOAMF."

Remember that there is a whole other thread running where you can document any schadenfruede you encounter...

[Pandora]

Yep.  Schadenfreude is German for told ya so, bitchez!!.

[oldcoastie6468]

I did know that! Like I said, however, there was a posted with the same handle on another site to which I used to belong. I thought that perhaps she was once a member here, too.

[ChrstnHsbndFthr]

Pandorapedia is much more entertaining than Wikipedia!

Yep.  Schadenfreude is German for told ya so, bitchez!!.

[Libertas]

Pandorapedia is much more entertaining than Wikipedia!

Yep.  Schadenfreude is German for told ya so, bitchez!!.

That's because unlike Wikipedia, Pandorapedia doesn't tolerate watering down or hiding facts.  As John Adams said "Facts are stubborn things!", John Adams would endorse Pandorapedia and condemn Wikipedia as Royalist twaddle!

 

[AlanS]

Pandorapedia is much more entertaining than Wikipedia!

Yep.  Schadenfreude is German for told ya so, bitchez!!.

That's because unlike Wikipedia, Pandorapedia doesn't tolerate watering down or hiding facts.  As John Adams said "Facts are stubborn things!", John Adams would endorse Pandorapedia and condemn Wikipedia as Royalist twaddle!

 

Word.

[Pandora]

I did know that! Like I said, however, there was a posted with the same handle on another site to which I used to belong. I thought that perhaps she was once a member here, too.

I have seen a commenter (elsewhere, can't remember) with that handle, and a Leftist too, iirc.