Home > Identity Theft and Scams > Was 2014 Really the Worst Year Ever for Privacy?

Comments 0 Comments
Advertiser Disclosure


Target. Home Depot. Michaels. And now, this Sony mess. The year 2014 will certainly be known as the year of the mega-hack, the year personal privacy took its first really big hit, right?

Not so fast. We’ve been down this road before. A trip down memory lane will offer some perspective.

Sure, 2014 began with Target news (the hack was revealed in December 2013, but the story swelled in January and beyond). And 2014 will end with the continuing Sony saga, a plot no screenwriter would dare consider. Hackers have actually managed to derail the release of a major Hollywood movie and embarrass executives by publishing their emails.

In between, the hits kept coming. Albertson’s and SuperValu. Home Depot. Even Dairy Queen. So many breach disclosure notifications. So may Brian Krebs blog entries. So many offers of free credit monitoring. You’d be tempted to add them all up, but that’s an exercise in compounding rounding errors. Suffice to say well more than 100 million U.S. adults were hit by these hacks this year, even when you consider double-counting.

Somewhere in the back of your mind, however, you must be thinking: Haven’t we been here before?

You’d be right. Many times.

In 2007, when TJ Maxx revealed 46 million consumers’ data was stolen. Later, we learned the real number was closer to 100 million. And the criminal in that case, Albert Gonzalez, now serving a 20-year prison sentence, is said to have stolen 170 million account numbers in all.

In 2008, when credit card payment processor Heartland Payment Systems revealed criminals had stolen payment information on an estimated 130 million people.

In 2011, when Sony announced criminals had stolen sensitive information on 77 million customers, primarily through its PlayStation network. Also that year, email giant Epsilon — which powered communications for firms like Citigroup — revealed millions of consumers’ information had been stolen.

So yes, we have been here before.

For those trying to keep score, the folks at the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, who painstakingly document data hacks, worked with Bloomberg to create a nifty graphic representing big hacks since 2009. By their accounting, thanks in large part to the large but relatively unknown Court Ventures leak, 2003 edges out 2009 as the worst data leak year ever. (NOTE: 2014 isn’t over yet).

But again, perspective. All data leaks are not created equal. Theft of a million email addresses is probably a lot less serious than theft of 10,000 credit reports. So simple tallies aren’t all that useful. Moreover, if 100 million consumers’ credit card numbers were really stolen and used effectively by criminals, either you or your significant other would almost certainly be victims of fraud this year. That’s not true because only a tiny fraction of compromised numbers are ultimately used successfully to steal something. Bank fraud controls, and the simple power of large numbers, dictates that.

So, was 2014 really the worst year ever for personal privacy? Probably not. It’s probably on par with 2009…2011…and for that matter, 2005, when theft of information from data broker ChoicePoint became the first high-profile personal information database hack to really alarm Americans.

The problems dates long before 2005, of course. That’s a significant year for privacy harm news only because it was the first year that California state law required companies that lost consumer data to disclose it publicly. So, like many health issues, observers are left with this question: Are privacy leaks really getting worse, or is the reporting better?

One thing is certain: There will be plenty more to report on in 2015.

More on Identity Theft:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team