3 Comments
User's avatar
Patricia's avatar

Does this mean LifeLabs is a victim twice over: first by the ransom they paid to the hackers and secondly to the people for whom the data was breached? This could be precedent setting, no?

Expand full comment
Caroline's avatar

Well I think the idea is that companies that hold private data have a responsibility to protect it. I didn’t follow the case but I’m assuming they were found to be negligent.

Expand full comment
Caroline's avatar

Well I think the idea is that companies that hold private data have a responsibility to protect it. I didn’t follow the case but I’m assuming they were found to be negligent.

Expand full comment