4 ms·

At this point, can someone explain me why that company is not taken out of business or _at least_ put under state control to verify they actually fix their issu

At this point, can someone explain me why that company is not taken out of business or _at least_ put under state control to verify they actually fix their issues and stop posing a threat to their customers lives?

zeveb 9y ago
> At this point, can someone explain me why that company is not taken out of business or _at least_ put under state control … After the OPM breach, I have zero confidence that the United States have any more competence at this than Equifax. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management_data_breach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management...
yebyen 9y ago
I honestly don't know why they are allowed to handle the remediation and "damage control" at all, I've been saying that for over a week; it's been getting clearer and clearer that they do not have the operational capability to continue to exist, but nobody with any juice appears to be arguing this. When they notified law enforcement well after the legal requirement to notify law enforcement had come and gone, that would have been a good time for the government to step in and say "hands off the wheel, we're handling this now." Would we be any better off today? I don't know, but my gut says no. If I had to guess, the answer is that we don't just take companies and put them under state control here in the United States. It just does not happen that I am aware of. Can you name a time this happened? I certainly can't think of a time when it would have made more sense to do this, but I am struggling to think of even one example of a company that was taken over by the state without searching. It says here[1] the US government nationalized railroads and the Smith & Wesson company during WWI, and it also nationalized the railroad system and coal mines during WWII, and that Amtrak was the product of another time the government nationalized railroads in the 70's, but was re-privatized in the 80's... [1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-history-of-corporate-nationalization/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-history-of-corporate-national... If the law enforcement agencies had taken some kind of stand, we might still have video interviews with CISO Susan Mauldin from 2016, that have now been erased since September 10, but for some reason there does not seem to be much interest in that. Everyone understands the company is "saving face" by removing those interviews. Nobody is saying it, but it's pretty clear. There is probably no legal requirement to keep those interviews online, even if they might provide some insight into the mindset of the CISO and how she was influenced in the months leading up to the breach by the other executives and the board members of Equifax. The fact that this is not a bigger story probably owes mostly to the fact that this is already such a big story. 140MM Americans impacted, likely every last person in the country with a credit history's personal information exposed, quite possibly enough to shutter the credit system as we know it for good. What's a little cover-up compared to that?

zeveb 9y ago

> At this point, can someone explain me why that company is not taken out of business or _at least_ put under state control … After the OPM breach, I have zero confidence that the United States have any more competence at this than Equifax. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management_data_breach https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_of_Personnel_Management...

yebyen 9y ago

I honestly don't know why they are allowed to handle the remediation and "damage control" at all, I've been saying that for over a week; it's been getting clearer and clearer that they do not have the operational capability to continue to exist, but nobody with any juice appears to be arguing this. When they notified law enforcement well after the legal requirement to notify law enforcement had come and gone, that would have been a good time for the government to step in and say "hands off the wheel, we're handling this now." Would we be any better off today? I don't know, but my gut says no. If I had to guess, the answer is that we don't just take companies and put them under state control here in the United States. It just does not happen that I am aware of. Can you name a time this happened? I certainly can't think of a time when it would have made more sense to do this, but I am struggling to think of even one example of a company that was taken over by the state without searching. It says here[1] the US government nationalized railroads and the Smith & Wesson company during WWI, and it also nationalized the railroad system and coal mines during WWII, and that Amtrak was the product of another time the government nationalized railroads in the 70's, but was re-privatized in the 80's... [1]: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-history-of-corporate-nationalization/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/a-history-of-corporate-national... If the law enforcement agencies had taken some kind of stand, we might still have video interviews with CISO Susan Mauldin from 2016, that have now been erased since September 10, but for some reason there does not seem to be much interest in that. Everyone understands the company is "saving face" by removing those interviews. Nobody is saying it, but it's pretty clear. There is probably no legal requirement to keep those interviews online, even if they might provide some insight into the mindset of the CISO and how she was influenced in the months leading up to the breach by the other executives and the board members of Equifax. The fact that this is not a bigger story probably owes mostly to the fact that this is already such a big story. 140MM Americans impacted, likely every last person in the country with a credit history's personal information exposed, quite possibly enough to shutter the credit system as we know it for good. What's a little cover-up compared to that?