|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Jun 4, 2015 18:51:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by saaao on Jun 4, 2015 19:32:47 GMT -5
I feel worse for the people whose information they were holding (i.e. all of us).
|
|
|
|
Post by christina on Jun 4, 2015 19:43:03 GMT -5
im with ssaao on this one. this is not good news at all.....
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jun 4, 2015 20:20:24 GMT -5
OPM has 23 years of my employment records, my pension and retirement information, as well as records of each excruciatingly slow step I've taken on the road to hopefully becoming an ALJ. Of all that, the thing I most dread is that the hackers might release the results of my LBMT.
|
|
|
|
Post by cheesy on Jun 4, 2015 20:23:48 GMT -5
The article raises one common misconception, for which I offer a solution. Whoever believes that anything within the Federal Government is state-of-the-art, needs to work for the Federal Government. Complete with a starter box of the long white Skilcraft pens that leak every time and are still mandated at GAO. Not to be confused with the higher priced "deluxe" black clicker Skilcraft pens that work forever - those are combat-ready.
I'm looking forward to another free year of credit monitoring. Perhaps Gaidan can poll us.
|
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Jun 5, 2015 5:36:26 GMT -5
OPM has 23 years of my employment records, my pension and retirement information, as well as records of each excruciatingly slow step I've taken on the road to hopefully becoming an ALJ. Of all that, the thing I most dread is that the hackers might release the results of my LBMT. Thank you for starting out my day with a laugh Gary. This is a definite double like post. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2015 7:11:07 GMT -5
Current, past and future federal employees should now take it for granted that their personal data has been stolen in this massive hack attack on OPM and DHS. The OPM is now sending out notices to all federal employees that essentially confirms this aspect.
What is not being fully addressed by the US and now has been touched upon in inquiry by the FBI is the following additional breach that has very likely resulted:
The hack also directly targeted federal employees references. That data includes references from private individuals whose own background and data were previously gathered by the OPM/US and stored. That literally means for every 1 federal employee another 3-8 and more persons' (private nonfederal) personal data may as well have been hacked. This private hack is being posed by the FBI as the "true" hack that has occurred. The federal employee data breach was merely the opening door. The non-federal employee breach could literally involve tens of millions of private individuals. From there, cybersecurity firm Forrester Research, estimates the breach will exponentially expand as those federal security clearances went into personal data of family and friends of family of the references.
Current, past and future federal employees may be well advised to inform their nonfederal references that their data may well have been breached. There are no current plans of the govt announced at this time to address the likely hacking of those millions of nonfederal individuals. |
|
|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Jun 5, 2015 9:45:11 GMT -5
I'm not sure it's as bad for the references, papajudge. The data on federal employees is far more detailed than the information for the references. Basically the only info for the references is what used to be in the local phone book - name address phone. Admittedly it includes work phones and addresses -- all of which may or may not be current. But the employee data has much more compromising info.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2015 10:06:29 GMT -5
I would not be so quick to poopoo this one away.
This attack on US infrastructure is spreading quickly.
Premera and Anthem have announced they are tied into the recent Chinese hacks. Premera and Anthem are two huge medical/insurance data firms with OPM/DHS ties; Premera estimates 11 million individuals and Anthem estimates 80 million SSNs may have been collected as well.
J. David Cox AFGE President announces breach apears to have affected "all" current federal employees and an additional 2 million former employees.
|
|
|
|
Post by luckylady2 on Jun 5, 2015 10:24:09 GMT -5
I'm not saying that the attacking was insignificant at all. I was merely pointing out that the data on fed employees was far more damaging
|
|
|
|
Post by keepsake on Jun 5, 2015 12:36:20 GMT -5
And the other aspect of this that is concerning - as highlighted by Papajudge - is that from what some have said/reported - this hack went after the background check database/materials OPM maintained. For those with TS level - SSBI - and above, the PII details of references/interviewees (not just family members) might - or might not have been comrpomised depending in the level of detail maintained from those interviews and where that data was kept. Thus, the scope of information obtained might be well beyond just current and former federal employees. Presumably, OPM would tell such individuals too if that is the case but it seems that given the multiple and varied hacks a lot PII is being compromised either through one's employment, shopping, habits, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Propmaster on Jun 5, 2015 12:44:42 GMT -5
I wonder where can we send our FOIA-like request to the hackers to get info on this ALJ process?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2015 14:56:10 GMT -5
I would note that by end of day now, based only on personal contacts coming, this hack is spreading rapidly and is outside federal employee sphere.
|
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Jun 5, 2015 15:04:32 GMT -5
I wonder where can we send our FOIA-like request to the hackers to get info on this ALJ process? Oh, that's a good one! Yes, the Chinese hackers have more info on ALJ hiring that we do. Maybe that's part of the holdup in getting new certs from OPM...it seems to take 5 or 6 months between them! LOL! |
|
|
|
Post by anotherfed on Jun 5, 2015 15:24:45 GMT -5
I wonder where can we send our FOIA-like request to the hackers to get info on this ALJ process? Now THAT is making lemonade out of lemons. Well done! |
|
|
|
Post by tricia1 on Jul 29, 2015 21:59:33 GMT -5
I was a frequent flyer on this board a couple of years ago under tricia. I got through the test and interview and then was honored to be one of the first candidates to be three-struck on the first go-around. I just got the letter yesterday. Is there anything new on the "cybersecurity intrusion"? Is there any downside to the one free year of credit monitoring? Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jul 29, 2015 22:20:16 GMT -5
Tricia, how do you know you were three-struck?
|
|
|
|
Post by JudgeRatty on Jul 29, 2015 22:25:02 GMT -5
Tricia, how do you know you were three-struck? Exactly. No one has proof as far as I have seen unless you stop making Certs on cities for which you should be listed. Interested in knowing the same. |
|
|
|
Post by tricia1 on Jul 29, 2015 22:48:07 GMT -5
Can someone help me here? How did we know, those several years ago, that we were three-struck on the first go-around? I guess that I've put the brain cells that were holding that information to other uses.
|
|
|
|
Post by gary on Jul 29, 2015 23:16:50 GMT -5
Our puzzlement (meaning my puzzlement) was because we thought you were talking about being three-struck on the current register. However I found the following post by "tricia" (which is the name you said you used previously) which would indicate you were talking about being three-struck on the prior register:
"
tricia Avatar tricia
Forum Legend
******
Jul 8, 2012 at 2:46pm
Quote
likePost Options
SSA ALJ New Hires through 01/2013
Asterisk, I don't think that it's that difficult to figure out if you have been three-struck. If you had at least one city on the March GAL, a score above some low 50s number which can be found on the survey board, and you did not get the email for that cert, you were three-struck. That has been confirmed now that we did not get the email for the July cert."
Sorry for my misunderstanding of what you were saying.
|
|
