Victoria's Secret Fined for Security Leak

An anonymous reader submits: "The state of New York has fined Victoria's Secret for failing tomaintain secure access to customer purchase records. Last year, a customer noticed that it was possible to look up online purchase records by manipulating their website. However, this was not consistent with the company's posted privacy policy. After getting brushed by VS's Customer Service, the guy contacted the media. NY State AG Eliot Spitzer took action under 1930s laws regarding deceptive business practices. VS settled to pay a $50 000 fine, notification of affected customers, fixing the site, and all without admitting violation of law."

funny

[falsification]

Victoria's Secret not so secret anymore.

The Peephole

[AtariAmarok]

I had a friend who worked in a Victoria's Secret. He made great use of the peepholes behind the dressing rooms. Talk about a security problem.

Re:The Peephole

[linzeal]

I've heard of these at "X"mart where my friend works on and off he is a graduate student/asst manager. About 2x a year he finds out about something like this.

Re:The Peephole

[Tackhead]

> I had a friend who worked in a Victoria's Secret. He made great use of the peepholes behind the dressing rooms. Talk about a security problem.

"That's not a bug, it's a feature!"

Re:Welcome !

[Nasarius]

Or John Ashcroft...I'm very sorry for that image.

Since most people here probably don't know

[Anonymous Coward]

Here's the link to Victoria's Secret [victoriassecret.com] Web site. I mean, come on, you post a link to a newspaper article withouth actually linking through to this fine site?

Re: Since most people here probably don't know

[Black Parrot]

> Here's the link to Victoria's Secret Web site.

Does all that sticky stuff mean it's slashdotted?

Re:Since most people here probably don't know

[ForestGrump]

And now for...
<a href="http://www.manties.net/">Victor's Secret</a>

Re:Since most people here probably don't know

[ForestGrump]

Victor's Secret [manties.net] sorry, was posting in POT

VS might just recoup the $50K in a countersuit

[RalphBNumbers]

This guy publicized a security flaw, why hasn't he been sued yet?

Re:VS might just recoup the $50K in a countersuit

[jargonCCNA]

Because that angle's already been played once and, as I recall, was eventually shot down by the courts. A precedent's been set.

Re:VS might just recoup the $50K in a countersuit

[NanoGator]

"This guy publicized a security flaw, why hasn't he been sued yet?"

Maybe because the President of Victoria's Secret is also a client.

Re:VS might just recoup the $50K in a countersuit

[sir_cello]

Because of "getting brushed by VS's Customer Service", it can be considered in the public interest for him to take the matter elsewhere.

Society becomes bad if don't allow this to happen.

SLAPP, Politics, election year...

[BrookHarty]

Just Curious, if the State needed the support of the company, wouldnt they go after you for some DMCA laws? (Election year and such)

Could you use the SLAPP law argument against the STATE or Company?

Just seems the politics has a hand in this, if it wasnt Victoria Secrets, but a law firm, the person who reported it could have been targeted as a criminal.

Nice to see the law work correctly for once. But then, anything can happen...

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[BrookHarty]

McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

I always thought the McDonalds case was frivolous till I read the facts. Check out McFacts [lawandhelp.com] about the case.

Pasted here.

McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.

McFact No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.

McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.)

McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.

McFact No. 8: A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years.

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[Anonymous Coward]

Almost true.

* Stella Liebeck, age 79, was a passenger in the car.
* The car was at a full stop so she could add cream and sugar to her coffee. [She was not the driver and the car was not moving.]
* The cup tipped and spilled over her lap.
* Within a few seconds, Ms. Liebeck suffered third-degree burns over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, genitals and groin.
* Ms. Liebeck was hospitalized for 8 days, and required skin grafting and debridement treat

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[Blkdeath]

I always thought the McDonalds case was frivolous till I read the facts. Check out McFacts about the case.

In my mind it still amounts to something like this;

• Woman spills hot liquid in own lap.
• Woman sues Big Pocketted Corporation for egregious amounts of financial "compensation"

I've got news for anybody who considers the above lawsuit anything less than frivolous; it's hot coffee. McDonald's (or any other restaurant) should not be under any obligation to inform people of same. FACT: If it weren't

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[BrookHarty]

I've got news for anybody who considers the above lawsuit anything less than frivolous; it's hot coffee.

The coffee was hotter than industry average, it adds nothing to flavor, but can cause 3rd degree burns in 2 seconds. Normal hot coffee wont give you 3rd degree burns or require skin grafts when spilled on your lap.

This is like calling "Lava" a little hot. Spilling normal coffee, "Ouch that hurts", spilling Mcdonalds Coffee "Ouch, I'm bleeding, I have 3rd degree burns, I need to goto the hospital". S

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[Blkdeath]

The coffee was hotter than industry average, it adds nothing to flavor, but can cause 3rd degree burns in 2 seconds.

Awwwwww. Poor people who can't manage to keep a lid on their coffee or keep their fresh, hot coffee away from their crotch. Some of us who have the fortune of working outside actually enjoy really hot coffee. See, it doesn't cool to 5 degrees celcius within ten minutes of hitting the out of doors and we can still enjoy it without the aid of a microwave.

It all boils down to personal respo

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[BrookHarty]

The lady who sued, only asked for hospital bills to be paid. McDonalds refused, she had to sue. She wasnt after millions, only a couple thousand that McDonalds should of paid. The Jury was the ones who awared the millions of dollars, as a punishement.

Also, mcdonalds coffee wasnt the average temperature, this is where its not the consumers fault. She expected the coffee to be hot, not hot enough to burn flesh and muscle.

As Stupidity goes, McDonalds did not turn down the coffee temperature to a normal in

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[crazyphilman]

I feel so sorry for that poor old lady, too -- she had burns on her genitals! Can you imagine how much that must have hurt? Let alone how much it must have hurt to treat the wounds (peeling off the damaged skin, the whirlpool treatments, etc). And, I think that the fact that all she asked for was her medical bills paid shows a remarkable amount of restraint. If this had happened to me, and some ridiculous stuffed suit had told ME they couldn't help me with the bills, I'd have gone ballistic. Fuck money -- I

Re:McDonald's Frivolous Lawsuit

[SuiteSisterMary]

McFact number The Most Important: If you stick a soft, styrofoam cup with a easy-to-remove lid full of hot liquid into your crotch, whilst driving, you DESERVE WHAT YOU GET.

i don't feel so bad anymore

[focitrixilous P]

for failing tomaintain secure access to customer purchase records.

Ah, I don'tfeelbadaboutallmytyposnow.

Re:i don't feel so bad anymore

[Josh Booth]

Tomaintain is not a typo. It is a new kind of fruit -- the cross between a tomato and a plantain. The extra 'i' is due to the redneck farmers (read: Homer Simpson) who created it. Sort of like tomacco, but not addictive. I just wonder what tomaintains have to do with Victoria's Secret.

Official Atty Gen. press release at this link soon

[Speequinox]

http://www.oag.state.ny.us/internet/internet.html [state.ny.us]

There's also info at the same page concerning some other cool Internet work that the NY Attorney General has done.

Why the hell is it

[elmegil]

That corporations never have to admit guilt?

If I break the law, I don't have the same luxury, how is this equal protection?

Re:Why the hell is it

[ChaoticLimbs]

There is no circumstance in US law where you would be required to admit guilt. You may be fined, imprisoned, or executed, but you will never be required to admit guilt, or to confess guilt to anyone verbally or in writing. Sometimes individuals or corporations admit guilt as part of a settlement or plea bargain, but it is never forced upon anyone. So, you DO have equal protection (in this instance). YMMV

VS has a Policy of transparency......

[adsl]

....in everything that they sell;)

Alternate article title...

[weeboo0104]

Victoria's Secret gets fined for having a
"Don't get your panties in a bunch" attitude towards online purchase security.

Who needs Victoria's Secret anyway?

[crazyphilman]

I'd rather any girlfriend I had ran around butt nekkid. All those panties and bras just obstruct my view. Come on, baby, let those things bounce around free! They don't want to be cooped up in that there garmint! I want me some FREE-RANGE boobies, none of that veal-pen bra'd stuff. And everyone knows a wild, bushy forest beaver is much happier than a beat-down zoo beaver. Save the panty and bra money, babe, we'll use it to go to the shore...

Re:Who needs Victoria's Secret anyway?

[crazyphilman]

Better - my ex girlfriend used to wear cotton housedresses with no underwear at all. They come right off with a flick of the wrist! Wonderful, wonderful things, those housedresses... I miss her; she lives out in Arizona, and I live in NY. Sigh... No more housedresses for the Philman...