Hi Andypro,
I kinda thought you may have been a Vet, and I have a lot of respect for that.
And I’ve since found out that you’re right, the Vet info was stolen by means of Laptop theft, which a headline summary on the subject did not at first reveal. Instead, words like ‘breached’ & ‘compromised’ had been used. Confusion came about because this news had been discussed along with other issues which were definitely of an internet nature. I subsequently found further info about this here: <A href='http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1009_22-6075212.html' Target=_Blank>External Web Link</a>
The issue with the 300+ banks was definitely an Internet exposure, and was covered at this site by George Ou, (a Ziff Davis staffer): <A href='http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=238' Target=_Blank>External Web Link</a>
And some further comments by Ziff Davis senior staffer David Berlind were made here: <A href='http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3128&tag=nl.e539' Target=_Blank>External Web Link</a> It's also interesting to read members comments on this subject at the Ziff Davis Forum. (These are included near the bottom of the page for each of the above web links).
But in the end, I guess it doesn’t matter which way customer information is stolen –if the end result is that personal information can be gained in sufficient quantity to make identity theft possible.
It sure does seem like things do need to be improved to guard against these sorts of problems!
PS: I take an interest in this because (amongst other things), I have responibilities for computer security.
Regards to all
Edited by - whizzer on 13/06/2006 11:12:05