Here’s a story that might tickle your fancy, or raise an eyebrow. There’s this fellow over in Columbus, Ohio, David L. Ross, who was recently put under a great big hush order by none other than a city judge. Now, what was all the fuss about, you might ask? Just the small matter of a colossal data breach that the city authorities were a touch reluctant to acknowledge with the necessary candor.
Last year, on July 18 to be exact, Columbus suffered a rather nasty cyberattack. In short: an unidentified foreign hacker managed to infiltrate the city’s information technology infrastructure. Then, doing what hackers do, the intruder went on the prowl, having an absolute field day, unearthing and exposing just about anything and everything – including a whopping 500,000 citizens’ most sensitive personal information.
The nature of the stolen data was quite the mixed bag. Names, dates of birth, addresses, banking details, and all manner of other juicy, insightful tidbits were thrown into the spotlight. Each piece of data potentially a golden ticket for any opportunistic fraudster.
Strangely enough, the powers-that-be in Columbus have, as of yet, claimed no hard evidence of the stolen information being utilized in a fraudulent manner. Comforting? Depends on your perspective, I suppose.
Within this epic tale of digital espionage and investigative journalism, a subplot arose which is nearly as intriguing as the main event. Our friend David Ross, quite the dogged investigator if ever there was one, took an active role in reporting on the breach. However, his truths and revelations were inconsistent with the narrative the city was propagating.
In response to Ross’s public announcements, the city decided to place a gag order on him, restricting his ability to shout the truth from the rooftops, or, more accurately, publish his findings in the media.
The city’s official standpoint, courtesy of their Technology Director Sam Orth, was muddled at best. Sam firmly claimed that no ransom demands were made before the data leak occurred. Orth also argued, rather optimistically, that the exposed data would be “unusable” as they were “corrupted or encrypted”. Both these claims have been challenged by our very own champion of truth, Ross.
By creating such a tangle of misleading information, the city has effectively dropped a plethora of smoke screens. These have led to public confusion and left the poor folks affected by the breach unsure of who to trust or how to protect themselves.
Lawyer up, seems to be one answer. The city is now facing legal action from several angry residents whose data was involved in the breach. It’s quite the kerfuffle indeed.
All in all, one thing is blindingly clear: Trying to stifle the truth by silencing those who seek to expose it doesn’t do much good. Transparency, honesty, and spirited discussion are key players on the battleground of data security and cybercrime. Anything less is… well, not cricket, in my book.
by Parker Bytes
