Re: WSJ Article - A Contrarian View on Data Breaches

[Peter Lundstedt <peter.lundstedt () DRAKE EDU>]

I agree that reputational damage is much harder to measure than financial damage.  It seems like it takes an extreme 
event with a large scope to have a noticeable impact.  I would say the Target breach had a reputational impact, as did 
the one impacting UMD earlier this year.  These are attacks you still see in the news months after the original 
notification.

Peter Lundstedt|  Information Security Analyst
Drake Technology Services (DTS) | Drake University

From: Harry Hoffman [mailto:hhoffman () ip-solutions net]
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2014 8:28 AM
To: Peter Lundstedt
Cc: security () listserv educause edu
Subject: Re: WSJ Article - A Contrarian View on Data Breaches

I'd love to see some hard evidence of reputational damage. Folks always point to it as a major concern but I've yet to 
see one organization show anything tangible in regard to damaged reputation.

Cheers,
Harry


On Aug 5, 2014, at 9:06 AM, Peter Lundstedt <peter.lundstedt () drake edu<mailto:peter.lundstedt () drake edu>> wrote:


Curious if anyone read the article in today's Wall Street Journal titled A Contrarian View on Data Breaches.

The interviewees seem to have a viewpoint around what's best for their bottom line and for their shareholders, rather 
than what may be best for the cardholder.  We've never suffered a breach (that we know of) but I can't imagine trying 
to keep it under wraps in hope that our reputation would not suffer.

Interested in others opinions.

Article Link<http://online.wsj.com/articles/a-contrarian-view-on-data-breaches-1407194237?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories>

Peter Lundstedt|  Information Security Analyst
Drake Technology Services (DTS) | Drake University