Flawed Assumptions in the Albert Gonzalez Case

Evan Schuman of StorefrontBacktalk has a column over on CBS News that points out some of the flaws in lawyers’ arguments revolving around the Albert Gonzalez case, such as arguments that disclosure of retailers’ names would hurt their stock prices. Evan points out what those of us who track breaches know all too well: there has generally been no major stock impact even from huge breaches. He similarly decimates other arguments that might have sounded good to the attorneys but are not confirmed by what we all see on a daily basis. I don’t know whether I would call these “flawed assumptions” in the lawyers’ arguments as much as “meritless arguments,” but nevertheless, his points are well taken.

Evan also takes the opportunity to give StorefrontBacktalk a well-deserved pat on the back for being the one to break some of the developments in this case before any other news source or site, which is why his site has long been on my daily to-read list.

Read more here.

About the author: Dissent

Comments are closed.