DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

Possible security breach involving Xavier University?

Posted on January 29, 2011 by Dissent

On January 26, Jennifer Baker of the Cincinnati Enquirer reported that Miller Beckham III, 32, of Springfield Township was charged with demanding $20,000 from Xavier University in exchange for not publicly releasing personal student documents.

On January 27, Cliff Peal of the same paper reported that students had not been notified of any breach and that the university reported it was “still investigating” the situation.

On January 28, the paper reported:

An alleged extortion case at Xavier University involved personal information of a “limited number” of students and parents, a university spokeswoman said Friday, and there is no evidence the information was misused or that any university databases were breached.

The university sent a message to students and staff Friday alerting them of the Jan. 25 arrest of Miller Beckham III, 32, of Springfield Township on a felony extortion charge. Beckham allegedly demanded $20,000 from the university Jan. 14 in exchange for personal student documents.

The “nature of the information and how it was obtained” remain under investigation by Cincinnati police, said University spokeswoman Deb del Valle. She could not say Friday how many students may have been victims, but said those individuals have been contacted directly.

Beckham has never worked for the university. He remained jailed Friday on $10,000 bond. His next court appearance is Feb. 4, according to jail records.

I fail to understand how people can say that “no information was misused” when it was used for an extortion attempt. How is that not misuse?

There is no statement on the university’s web site as of the time of this posting. Since the extortion attempt was directed to them, it seems reasonable to hypothesize that the student and parent information was obtained from them somehow, even if they have found no evidence that any database was breached. Are they defining “breached” only as a hack? Have they really ruled out an employee downloading information and giving it to the accused?

If anyone received the letter or has additional information on this, please let me know.


Related:

  • ModMed revealed they were victims of a cyberattack in July. Then some data showed up for sale.
  • Protected health information of 462,000 members of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana involved in Conduent data breach
  • TX: Kaufman County Faces Cybersecurity Attack: Courthouse Computer Operations Disrupted
  • KT Chief to Resign After Cybersecurity Breach Resolution
  • Cyber-Attack On Bectu’s Parent Union Sparks UK National Security Concerns
  • Attorney General James Announces Settlement with Wojeski & Company Accounting Firm
Category: Breach IncidentsEducation SectorU.S.

Post navigation

← Veterans Administration December report to Congress
Minnesota Education Department improperly releases transcripts from online charter school →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • District of Massachusetts Allows Higher-Ed Student Data Breach Claims to Survive
  • End of the game for cybercrime infrastructure: 1025 servers taken down
  • Doctor Alliance Data Breach: 353GB of Patient Files Allegedly Compromised, Ransom Demanded
  • St. Thomas Brushed Off Red Flags Before Dark-Web Data Dump Rocks Houston
  • A Wiltshire police breach posed possible safety concerns for violent crime victims as well as prison officers
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Almost two years later, Alpha Omega Winery notifies those affected by a data breach.
  • Court of Appeal reaffirms MFSA liability in data leak case, orders regulator to shoulder costs
  • A jailed hacking kingpin reveals all about the gang that left a trail of destruction
  • Army gynecologist took secret videos of patients during intimate exams, lawsuit says

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • As shoplifting surges, British retailers roll out ‘invasive’ facial recognition tools
  • Data broker Kochava agrees to change business practices to settle lawsuit
  • Amendment 13 is gamechanger on data security enforcement in Israel
  • Changes in the Rules for Disclosure for Substance Use Disorder Treatment Records: 42 CFR Part 2: What Changed, Why It Matters, and How It Aligns with HIPAAs
  • Always watching: How ICE’s plan to monitor social media 24/7 threatens privacy and civic participation

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net
Security Issue: security[at]databreaches.net
Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight
Signal: +1 516-776-7756
DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.