Uber Hit With More Than $1M in Fines Over 2016 Breach
Uber was hit with more than $1 million in fines from the U.K. and the Netherlands over a 2016 data breach. The penalty could have been higher under GDPR, which went into effect in May.
November 28, 2018 at 11:23 AM
3 minute read
Ride-hailing company Uber Technologies Inc. has been hit with more than $1 million in fines over its cover up of a 2016 breach that exposed 57 million customers' personal data—a penalty that could have been higher under the May 2018 implemented General Data Protection Regulation.
San Francisco-based Uber's latest fines, which totaled a combined $1.17 million, came from the U.K. and the Netherlands. On Tuesday, the U.K.'s Information Commissioner's Office announced it fined Uber £385,000 ($491,824). In a press release, the ICO said Uber failed “to protect customers' personal information during a cyber attack” and that 82,000 U.K.-based drivers were impacted.
Britain's ICO said the breach was caused by “avoidable data security flaws” and that the incident was a breach of the country's Data Protection Act 1998.
“This was not only a serious failure of data security on Uber's part, but a complete disregard for the customers and drivers whose personal information was stolen. At the time, no steps were taken to inform anyone affected by the breach, or to offer help and support. That left them vulnerable,” said ICO Director of Investigations Steve Eckersley in a statement.
The Dutch Data Protection Authority announced its own separate fine of €600,000 ($676,563) the same day. It said Uber violated the Dutch data breach regulation and was “fined because it did not report the data breach to the Dutch DPA and the data subjects within 72 hours after the discovery of the breach.” According to a press release Tuesday, 174,000 Dutch citizens were impacted by the breach.
News of Uber's 2016 breach emerged in November 2017. The company's new leadership under current CEO Dara Khosrowshahi revealed hackers had accessed names, email addresses and cellphone numbers of users and the names and U.S. driver's license numbers of Uber drivers in a 2016 data breach.
The company had failed to notify users of the breach at the time, instead paying the hackers $100,000 to keep quiet about the attack.
“Paying the attackers and then keeping quiet about it afterward was not, in our view, an appropriate response to the cyber attack,” Eckersley said. ”Although there was no legal duty to report data breaches under the old legislation, Uber's poor data protection practices and subsequent decisions and conduct were likely to have compounded the distress of those affected.”
Under the European Union's GDPR law, which went into effect in May of this year, Uber could have faced larger fines. Companies with breaches after the implementation date could be fined up to 4 percent of global turnover. The ICO said, that under previous law, the maximum U.K. fine was £500,000 ($638,725).
Uber did not respond to immediate request for comment but told CNBC in a statement that, “We've made a number of technical improvements to the security of our systems both in the immediate wake of the incident as well as in the years since. We've also made significant changes in leadership to ensure proper transparency with regulators and customers moving forward.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Marsh McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
Aggressive FTC May Force Merging Companies to Bolster Legal Defenses
4 minute readBest Legal Departments: How Blackstone's Legal and Compliance Team Got the All-Clear to Grow Business
CEOs Want Data-Based Risk Management; GCs Lack the Tech to Do So.
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250