Equifax execs sold shares before mega-hack reveal. All above board – Equifax probe

I'm so glad we live in a society where everyone equally follows the rules. Well done to these other directors for checking that no wrong doing was done as clearly they wouldn't dream of doing the same thing in their situation. I'm really glad this has been cleared up quickly and efficiently.

As you were, carry on good fine upstanding citizens.

Sarcasm aside but don't the S.E.C. get involved in this sort of thing?

Tell us, how independent was this report again?

Don't these fuckers sit on each other's boards and play golf / bridge together? Either way, not buying it! Why? Equifux lied about the dates of the earlier hacks...

So basically, on hearing there might be some hidden contraband on "E" wing, Mr Barraclough asked Fletcher and 3 or 4 other lags to do a cell search and amazingly it came up clean!?

Equifox declares henhouse clean

All is well.

As for all of the people who had no choice about being customers, they can go to hell.

"a day before the hack was uncovered"

That should say, "a day before the hack was officially uncovered." There were surely individuals looking at odd events in the three months preceding the official announcement of discovery. Standard tech practice is to fully evaluate the scope of a problem and peer review the findings before making internal announcements. That's plenty of time to start covering butts.

Uh, this is directors investigating directors. I suspect all they could do was review the public facts about meetings and timings. They are not the police or the SEC - did they check everyone else trading (relatives, friends, etc...) for others that might have known? Did they subpoena phone or message logs, speak to brokers and other staff and many other activities only government investigators can do? WHITEWASH!!! Worse still, the dummies now may be considered to have colluded in a cover-up. I await the SEC's investigation.

Do we need any more information?

Equifax deserves the commercial equivalent of the Usenet Death Penalty. It's that simple.

And anyone working with them or using their data should receive the same - it's the only way to be certain because nuking them from orbit is now just playing with the little rocket men.

Oh, bollocks. Their findings have the integrity of Koch brothers funded climate scientist.

In favor of maybe

Since people love mentioning their own unique particular peculiar experiences as guides to general reality for all, let me participate.

I worked for a mid-sized tech company many-moons-ago and had incentive stock options. Decided to sell 'some' to move it out of that company - no specific knowledge required to be dubious generally.

The company's stock options selling people called back the next day and said "Oops, we thought that first digit on the number of shares was a '2' instead of the '1' you wrote. Is that okay?" Did I mention my feelings about the company? I said yes.

Monday following something burped, stock dropped 15+% and my dubiosity had been rewarded doubly. Did I know something? Not specifically, just generally, and ya'kno, diversify, right?

A review like this carries all the conviction of, say, the EU Justice Commissioner and the US Sec of Commerce reviewing the Privacy Figleaf. Did I just write conviction? How odd.

Lawyers (blood sucking) and official knowledge

The company attorneys should have been told about a major hack and they cleared the trades? Sounds a little bit on the shady side. For something this major, information being held on about half of the US population, word will get around and those at the top will confer "off the record" before they circulate anything in writing so everybody "officially" knows. That it took the company 3 months to realize they had been hacked and then delayed announcement should mean prison time for the execs. There needs to be very harsh penalties when it comes to data breaches such as this. Exploding a nuclear bomb, even a big one, would affect fewer people.

About auditors being held responsible...

IF the SEC investigates (and I sure hope it does), and IF they find the directors guilty of insider trading (which they may or may not do), then that would raise the question of whether those who have compiled this whitewash report should face any punishment for either:

(1) knowing that that there was insider trading and explicitly covering it up

OR

(2) being "deaf monkeys" who put out a report purporting to exonerate their friends without actually doing the required diligence to know whether or not their statements were true.

If they were prosecuted for doing this, then that might actually dissuade others from participating in such "private investigations" in the future, and that would be a good thing.

Different story now

So now that these dishonest and libellous accusations have been shown to be false, those who made them will be equally as voluble in retracting them and making amends...?

No, I didn't think that would happen either.

"Different story now"—no, not really

"So now that these dishonest and libellous accusations have been shown to be false, those who made them will be equally as voluble in retracting them and making amends...? No, I didn't think that would happen either."

But the accusations were clearly neither dishonest nor libellous, given that there was reasonable suspicion about the nature and timing of the events, and given that the company felt obliged to conduct a formal investigation.

Also, you'll note that "cannot be proven" is not the same as "shown to be false": this investigation was not a formal criminal trial, merely an internal enquiry conducted to very different standards.

So, not dishonest; not libellous; not false. Therefore, no retraction, no "making amends".

Anyone with a grain of common sense will consider the circumstances, which even the most charitable apologist would agree stank like a week-dead haddock, and form their own conclusions. One may hope that when these executives soon choose to resign, reasonable observations upon their honour and integrity will be high on the list of considerations for future prospective employers.

I fear that this investigation has the same level of credibility as asking Jimmy Saville and Gary Glitter to look into whether Rolf Harris has ever done anything inappropriate.