TJX security breach aftermath: a case study in what to do wrong
Retailer needs to disclose more information before it is forced to
'Net Insider
By
Scott Bradner
,
Network World
, 01/29/2007
- Share/Email
- Tweet This
- Print
Late week I wrote about what retailer TJX had done wrong leading up to its recent widely reported security lapse.This week's column is about what TJX has done wrong since the lapse was discovered.
In spite of full-page ads in the Boston Globe and Boston Herald in the last two days, the extent of the security lapse is
still not known because TJX has steadfastly refused to provide any concrete information. The lack of information provides
fertile ground for speculation -- for example, published reports last week that as many as 30% of all New Englanders may have been impacted. On Jan. 26, TJX announced it had hired John Gilbert, formerly
with Dunkin' Donuts, as chief marketing officer. Maybe he is smart enough to understand that stonewalling is the worst possible
reaction to a problem. Everything will come out in the end, and in this case it may come out with the president of TJX testifying
on national TV in front of Congress. It is far better to provide more information than is being requested so it does not look
like you are covering up.
Maybe TJX feels it cannot do this because it is covering up. Originally TJX maintained that it delayed making a public announcement
at the request of law enforcement only to later admit the delay was in part a "business decision" and now, in the ads, the
company says it was "in the best interest of our customers." Yeah -- the best interest of customers was to keep them in the
dark until they finished their Christmas shopping. In the end, TJX only admitted to a problem after the first Wall Street Journal report.
TJX has still not said how many cards were exposed, yet some information must exist because banks are quite busy contacting
their customers and replacing cards (including my wife's). At the very least, TJX could tell its customers -- the folks whose
trust it has to retain in order to stay in business -- what TJX told the banks. Delaying will increase rather than decrease
the pain when the numbers do come out.
Unlike most organizations that have had similar, although far smaller, breaches, TJX has not said it would protect customers
by buying credit watch services for them. I expect the company will have to do so at some point but because it is delaying
so long, it's clear that protecting customers has not been a concern for TJX and it will only do so when forced.
Comment