In an unprecedented turn of events, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) recently issued a public apology to billionaire investor Ken Griffin. The reason? Leaked tax records that exposed sensitive financial information, including Griffin’s personal wealth and tax liabilities.
The Internal Revenue Service issued a rare apology for the "thousands" of tax data disclosed to the public between 2018 and 2020.
Griffin issued the apology as part of a deal with the IRS after filing a lawsuit in December 2022 over the "unlawful disclosure" of his tax information, which was disclosed to the public by a contractor.
The story began with a former IRS contractor named Charles Littlejohn. Littlejohn, who had access to confidential tax returns, allegedly leaked information about several high-profile taxpayers, including Griffin.
The recipient of this unauthorized disclosure was the nonprofit news organization ProPublica. The leaked data revealed intricate details about the financial lives of some of the wealthiest Americans.
Ken Griffin, founder of the hedge fund Citadel, is no stranger to the limelight. With a net worth approaching $42 billion, he ranks among the world’s wealthiest individuals. His investment strategies, philanthropic endeavors, and influence in financial circles have made him a prominent figure. However, the leak of his tax records thrust him into an unexpected controversy.
Upon discovering the breach, Griffin took legal action against the IRS and the U.S. Treasury Department. His lawsuit alleged negligence, violation of privacy, and reputational harm resulting from the unauthorized disclosure.
The leak not only exposed his financial data but also raised concerns about the security of taxpayer information within the IRS.
According to the IRS, the contractor, Charles Littlejohn, "violated" his job contract by disclosing the material to the press. The government also stated that Littlejohn "betrayed the trust" of Americans, including billionaire Elon Musk.
In a rare move, the IRS publicly acknowledged its mistake and issued an apology directly to Ken Griffin. The agency expressed regret for the inadvertent release of his tax records.
The apology came after Griffin dropped his lawsuit, signaling a resolution to the matter. However, questions remain about the broader implications of such breaches and the safeguards in place to prevent future incidents.
Incognito mode promises users a private browsing experience. It suggests that their online activities won’t be tracked, cookies won’t be stored, and their digital footprints will vanish once they exit the browser. However, the reality has been far from this idealistic portrayal.
The Illusion of Privacy: Internal documents revealed that Google employees referred to Incognito mode as “effectively a lie” and “a confusing mess”. Users believed they were operating in a secure, private environment, but Google continued to collect data, even in this supposedly incognito state.
Data Collection Despite Settings: The class action lawsuit filed against Google in 2020 alleged that the company tracked users’ activity even when they explicitly set their browsers to private modes. This revelation shattered the illusion of privacy and raised serious questions about transparency.
Google’s proposed legal settlement aims to address these concerns and bring about meaningful changes:
Data Deletion: Google will wipe out “hundreds of billions” of private browsing data records it had collected. This move is a step toward rectifying past privacy violations.
Blocking Third-Party Cookies: For the next five years, Google Chrome’s Incognito mode will automatically block third-party cookies by default. These cookies, often used for tracking, will no longer infiltrate users’ private sessions.
Global Impact: The settlement extends beyond U.S. borders. Google’s commitment to data deletion and cookie blocking applies worldwide. This global reach emphasizes the significance of the decision.
Transparency and Accountability: The settlement represents an “historic step” in holding tech giants accountable. Lawyer David Boies, who represented users in the lawsuit, rightly emphasized the need for honesty and transparency. Users deserve clarity about their privacy rights.
User Trust: Google’s actions will either restore or further erode user trust. By deleting records and blocking cookies, the company acknowledges its missteps. However, rebuilding trust requires consistent adherence to privacy commitments.
Ongoing Legal Battles: While this settlement is a milestone, Google still faces other privacy-related lawsuits. The outcome of these cases could result in substantial financial penalties. The tech industry is on notice: privacy violations won’t go unnoticed.
As users, we must remain vigilant. Privacy isn’t just a checkbox; it’s a fundamental right. Google’s actions should prompt us to reevaluate our digital habits, understand the trade-offs, and demand transparency from all tech companies.
In the end, the battle for privacy isn’t won with a single settlement. It’s an ongoing struggle—one that requires vigilance, legal scrutiny, and a commitment to safeguarding our digital lives. Let’s hope that this landmark decision serves as a catalyst for positive change across the tech landscape.
According to Anthony Viti, former Met employee – the largest performing arts organization in the country – and the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, the private information that is compromised in the breach includes victim’s Social Security number, driver’s license number, date of birth and financial account information.
When the breach was first reported by The New York Times in December, the company's website and box office had been down for more than 30 hours.
The lawsuit reads, “For approximately two months, The Met failed to detect an intruder with access to and possession of The Met’s current/former employees and consumers’ data[…]It took a complete shutdown of The Met’s website and box office for The Met to finally detect the presence of the intruder.”
Following the incident, The Met requested a third-party forensic investigation, which revealed that cybercriminals had stolen personally identifiable information over a two-month period between September and December.
“Through an investigation conducted by third-party specialists, the Met learned that an unknown actor gained access to certain of their systems between September 30, 2022 and December 6, 2022 and accessed or took certain information from those systems,” Stephanie Basta, the opera’s lawyer, wrote in a letter submitted to the Maine Attorney General on May 3.
Following the lawsuit, The Met responded by offering victims with a year of credit monitoring services.
The lawsuit condemned The Met, stating "The Met failed to detect an intruder with access to and possession of The Met's current/former employees' and consumers' data[…]It took a complete shutdown of The Met's website and box office for The Met to finally detect the presence of the intruder."
Viti said The Met's response to the data breach has been "woefully insufficient" and alleged that the organization did not disclose to affected parties that their data had been compromised until May 3, nearly five months after the incident.
However, The Met dejects the claims, saying “We strongly believe this case has no merit.”