Menu
Court: FTC can bring down the hammer on companies with sloppy cybersecurity

Court: FTC can bring down the hammer on companies with sloppy cybersecurity

Hotel chain Wyndham had challenged the FTC's authority to mandate cybersecurity standards

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has the authority to take action against companies that fail to protect customer data, an appeals court ruled Monday.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit upheld the FTC's 2012 lawsuit against hotel and time-share operator Wyndham Worldwide. The FTC filed a complaint against Wyndham for three data breaches in 2008 and 2009 that led to more than US $10.6 million in fraudulent charges.

The appeals court ruling, upholding a 2014 district court decision, suggests the FTC can hold companies responsible for failing to use reasonable security practices.

Wyndham was one of two companies that had challenged the FTC's authority to enforce cybersecurity standards under the unfair and deceptive practices provisions of the FTC Act. Critics have argued the agency has no clearly defined cybersecurity standards for companies to follow.

Representatives of Wyndham and the FTC didn't immediately respond to requests for comment on the appeals court ruling.

The FTC accused the hotel operator of using cybersecurity practices that "unreasonably and unnecessarily exposed consumers' personal data to unauthorized access and theft."

The company's hotels stored payment card information in clear, readable text, and it used easily guessed passwords to access its property management systems, the FTC alleged. The company also failed to use "readily available security measures" such as firewalls to limit access between the company's property management systems, its corporate network and the Internet, the FTC charged.

Wyndham's privacy policy said the company safeguards customer data "using industry-standard practices," the FTC said.

Wyndham argued on appeal that its conduct did not meet the congressional definition in the FTC Act of "unfair." The company argued that its actions were not unfair because it was the victim of criminals.

Appeals court Judge Thomas Ambro rejected that argument. The company "offers no reasoning or authority for this principle, and we can think of none ourselves," he wrote in Monday's decision.

A company's action can be unfair if it is likely to cause customer injury, and the injuries caused by a third party were foreseeable, he wrote.

Ambro also rejected Wyndham's argument that the FTC's cybersecurity rules are too vague. The unfairness standard in the FTC Act focuses on the substantial injury to consumers that they cannot reasonably avoid themselves, he wrote. "While far from precise, this standard informs parties that the relevant inquiry here is a cost-benefit analysis," he added.


Follow Us

Join the newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Featured

Slideshows

Meet the top performing HP partners in NZ

Meet the top performing HP partners in NZ

HP honoured leading partners across the channel at the Partner Awards 2017 in New Zealand, recognising excellence across the entire print and personal systems portfolio.

Meet the top performing HP partners in NZ
Tech industry comes together as Lexel celebrates turning 30

Tech industry comes together as Lexel celebrates turning 30

Leading figures within the technology industry across New Zealand came together to celebrate 30 years of success for Lexel Systems, at a milestone birthday occasion at St Matthews in the City.​

Tech industry comes together as Lexel celebrates turning 30
HP re-imagines education through Auckland event launch

HP re-imagines education through Auckland event launch

HP New Zealand held an inaugural Evolve Education event at Aotea Centre in Auckland, welcoming over 70 principals, teachers and education experts to explore ways of shaping and enhancing learning using technology.

HP re-imagines education through Auckland event launch
Show Comments