[DexesTTP]

Context: This is for a 2019 data breach on a system that was created in 2012. The GDPR was instated in 2018 (has it really been that long? Wow feels like yesterday) and Meta failed to disclose the 2019 data breach properly under GDPR, hence the fine.

[sakisv]

Honest question: How was it discovered?

Was it reported by a pentester? (ex-)employee? Facebook itself? How do we know that it goes back to 2012?

I know in the public sector you have to disclose such things to ICO, but does that also apply to private companies? Who is going to hold them accountable?

[chrismorgan]

I was concerned, reading your thing first, that the title (“Meta fined $102M for storing passwords in plain text”) was going to be false—that they were actually only fined for not disclosing the breach. But the article says the decision also claimed a GDPR violation for storing the passwords in plaintext, so that’s good:

> The DPC found that Meta violated several GDPR rules related to the breach. It determined that the company failed to "notify the DPC of a personal data breach concerning storage of user passwords in plaintext" without undue delay and failed to "document personal data breaches concerning the storage of user passwords in plaintext." It also said that Meta violated the GDPR by not using appropriate technical measures to ensure the security of users' passwords against unauthorized processing.

[pibefision]

GDPR fine is 4% of global turnover from previous fiscal year. 102m seems low to me.

[poincaredisk]

That's the maximal fine (that was never used as far as I know, at least on a large company). In this case the fine is understandably much smaller, since the privacy incident is not critical, and Facebook reported the problem to the authorities on its own.

[bootsmann]

Thats the maximal fine I think, the judges can set the amount depending on the severity of the violation.