News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by gnabgib on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @08:16PM (#43349128)
Title: Thousands of Records, Including PII, Exposed Online in Healthcare Marketplace Connecting Facilities and Nurses Data Leak
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by booi on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:04PM (#43349383)
Uber for ___ has lost all meaning
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by dartos on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:08PM (#43349407)
Well there be any consequences for the company?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ilrwbwrkhv on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:12PM (#43349420)
No. And hence this will keep happening.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by garciasn on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:18PM (#43349454)
Even if there are, it’ll be minuscule compared to what is necessary to drive effective change.

The fine for one person’s information from this site should be equivalent to their entire revenue for the year; should not be permitted to be resolved by bankruptcy, and should be required to transfer to any company purchasing their assets.

Their entire executive team should be jailed for a minimum of 3 years per individual offense.

Only then will there be any modicum of an opportunity for us to see some real change.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by aeries on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:24PM (#43349489)
Your proposal is so bizarrely out of proportion with the harm caused that I can’t tell if it’s parody or not. Why not execute them while you’re at it?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by thfuran on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:33PM (#43349541)
That would be cruel and unusual — their families and friends would needlessly suffer. They'll need to be executed too.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by garciasn on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:52PM (#43349642)
I recommend we summarily execute people who don’t use the middle lane to go straight at an intersection, blocking everyone else from turning right on red; I feel as if jail time for these executives was pretty reasonable.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by richwater on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:42PM (#43349586)
> Their entire executive team should be jailed for a minimum of 3 years per individual offense.

This is so over the top reactionary and stupid, I can't help but write off your entire comment.

You want the Chief Accounting Officer to go to jail for 3 decades because of a data breach?

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by garciasn on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:55PM (#43349658)
I assumed there was more than 10 folks impacted by their poor business decisions; based on the number of images of SS cards, it should be life without parole. Preferably with hard labor in Siberia or western Nebraska.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by franktankbank on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:33AM (#43353787)
> or western Nebraska.

Now you've taken it too far.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by piuantiderp on Thursday March 13, 2025 @03:23PM (#43356451)
Maybe 5y
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by 1970-01-01 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:53AM (#43354531)
This is not so firm. Don't underestimate a wealthy person's medical record going public.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ethagnawl on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:12PM (#43349424)
I'll need to dig up a source but I recently heard about this company and, apparently, before offering gigs they do a credit report to determine how much debt the person is carrying (i.e. how desperate they are) and they use that information to _round down_ the hourly rate they offer them.

In the unlikely event that there are any negative consequences for this breach, they deserve every bit of them and more.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by linsomniac on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:44PM (#43349915)
I don't remember the source, but I believe I listened to a podcast on an "uber for nurses" (not sure if it was this place), but they do all sorts of nasty things that really shaft the nurses. ISTR that the nurses when they get called in, have to be running a phone app that tracks them, and if they get stuck in traffic or lose cell signal, they get demerits. They pretty much do anything they can to give the nurses a demerit, and demerits cause your pay to go down.

So they're pretty much taking the existing terrible nursing environment in healthcare, and weaponizing it. Nurses already have too many patients and not enough CNAs, on top of 12 hour shifts, needing to do charting after those 12 hours. Healthcare squeezes nurses to the breaking point. Data point: my wife is a nurse.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by implements on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:29AM (#43351287)
I think I heard the same Podcast - not only do the Apps try and discover the minimum rate a Nurse might take, they’ll actively attempt to manipulate the circumstances of Nurses who were in a strong position so they too end up more dependent and exploitable.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by rvense on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:33AM (#43351308)
Isn't this exactly what you'd expect from an Uber for (somethign)?

Garbage company, garbage culture, garbage business model.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by potato3732842 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:57AM (#43352054)
Well yes, but more so it's how I expect a shitty and perversely structured industry that makes boatloads of money perpetuating a variety of huge barriers to entry to treat the employees who have the least barriers to entry protecting them.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by TheNewsIsHere on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:48AM (#43353316)
Several of my family members were or have been nurses for decades and your wife’s experience mirrors the experiences I’ve seen from that distance.

And I’ve heard “it used to be so much worse”.

The American healthcare system is fairly well broken from virtually every angle.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by wewtyflakes on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:39PM (#43349568)
This is abhorrent if true; truly evil behavior.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by sudoshred on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:10AM (#43350296)
Game theory transcends basic humanity.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Graziano_M on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:35PM (#43349868)
It's definitely shady, but it's par for the course. Uber charges you more if you have more gift cards loaded, or just spend more on average in general. You charge what the market will bear.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by bqmjjx0kac on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:45PM (#43349924)
You charge what the market will bear, not the individual.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by edoceo on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:04PM (#43350018)
The market ensure (mostly) there is another individual.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by paulcole on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:52PM (#43349966)
Aren’t they just creating a market of 1?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by steve_adams_86 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:05PM (#43350025)
"just" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by paulcole on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:12PM (#43356826)
Aren’t they creating a market of 1?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by steve_adams_86 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:39PM (#43359377)
Perfect!
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by satvikpendem on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:27AM (#43350390)
The market is an agglomeration of many individuals, meaning that there is no hard and fast rule that you must charge only one price for the entire market; indeed, many custom-priced products exist, enterprise SaaS being one example.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by solatic on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:39AM (#43350852)
There's no such thing as "the market", there are market segments that abstractly represent groups of people with similar characteristics. Charging different prices to people in different segments is standard business practice. Burger chains could charge wealthy individuals $100k per burger if they wanted to, just, burger chains usually have difficulty distinguishing the truly wealthy individuals who walk in the door who would have no trouble putting down that kind of money for a burger.

.... which, in the day and age of facial recognition, gives me an idea for a startup.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by xp84 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:33AM (#43351305)
Burger chains have at least gotten a start on differentiating their pricing - by raising prices dramatically across the board, and telling anyone who’s frugal or just broke that they can only get discounts (to bring prices slightly lower than today’s pricing, but still a lot more than before) if they use the app. Upper-class people don’t bother with it and pay full price, frugal people take the time to figure out the cheapest way to use one of the current “offers” to assemble a meal.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by malfist on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:05AM (#43352894)
Upper class people don't bother with it because we all know those discounts are temporary but they'll never let go of the data they extract from those apps and will try to spam you
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by satvikpendem on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:14AM (#43352977)
One can always use a fake email and login account. Upper class people don't bother because they don't eat at fast food chains as often enough as lower class people to warrant needing an app for each one; 99.9% don't give a shit about data collection, only people on HN and other technical fora do.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by amy214 on Friday March 14, 2025 @04:41PM (#43367072)
>One can always use a fake email and login account.

When you're using that fake email be sure to have a burner phone or public internet so they can't link it to your IP, also don't use your computer or any computer you've logged in on so that browser fingerprinting doesn't tag you, also turn off your GPS so they can't geo correlate you.

Of course the rich person is in the same boat, their geolocation will log that they went to Burger King, or their credit card company will snitch on them. Okay, fine, pay with cash, cover your phone in a tin foil faraday cage. Now you also will need to drive a 30 year old car to said establishment since the car manufacturer put a cellular modem and GPS in your car and sells the fact that you went to Burger King to the highest bidder.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head, I'm sure there are dozens of other ways people are tagged. At some level may as well either use the app or just not go.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by satvikpendem on Friday March 14, 2025 @04:44PM (#43367095)
Yep, that's why it's usually not worth it trying to pretend one has online privacy.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by d1sxeyes on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:40AM (#43350854)
No, it just hasn’t been possible to differentiate as well before.

One example is biscuit manufacturing, where it’s a fairly open secret that supermarket own brand biscuits are the same product as name brand, because it’s better to capture that segment at a lower margin than to lose it to competition.

Tech now makes it possible to target individuals rather than demographics, but there’s nothing inherently against the status quo in doing so.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Henchman21 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:56AM (#43353395)
Nothing against the status quo. Yes, let’s perpetuate our dystopian nightmare. Good plan.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by d1sxeyes on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:31PM (#43355510)
Didn’t say it was a good plan, just that unless you’ve got some brilliant replacement for late-stage capitalism, it’s a logical progression.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by quickthrowman on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:52PM (#43356182)
The post you’re replying is an ‘is’ post, not an ‘ought’ post.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by quickthrowman on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:30AM (#43353753)
I have a side business and virtually every customer pays a different price, what you’re saying is simply not true. Airlines do it, hotels do it, I have different rates for my customers at my day job, etc.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Scoundreller on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:35PM (#43354941)
And even if they pay the same price, they’ll have different costs.

I’ll gladly take all the free alcohol an airline will give me, but other people don’t at all!

I sell some stuff on eBay. If you appear untrustworthy, I’ll spend more for tracking/better tracking on your order so you’ll actually get your stuff faster/more reliably.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by bqmjjx0kac on Friday March 14, 2025 @07:13PM (#43368310)
Oh, I'm not denying this is the way things are done. I just don't think it should be legal.

Price segmentation was more palatable a few decades ago, but technology has enabled us to push it to this absurd (to me) extreme where individuals get different prices at different times of the day.

It feels wrong to size up your customer and pick the highest price you think they'll pay.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by mrbungie on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:36PM (#43350168)
Pieces of shit. And then they assign you a score for each travel, as if you are really "carpooling" when in reality is a shitty taxi replacement (not that taxis are on a moral high ground, but the point still stands).
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by inetknght on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:01PM (#43349684)
You might be surprised to learn that they're not the only company to do so.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by speed_spread on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:03PM (#43349695)
Names. We need names.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by zorpner on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:20PM (#43350102)
Not of companies. Of the people who choose to work for them (or, rather, choose not to stop working for them after they build these "features").
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by vkou on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:17AM (#43350779)
We don't need names, we need legislature, and we need to vote for people who will write it, as opposed to grifters who only seek to pad the pockets of billionaires.

These predators aren't scared of name and shame. Any publicity is good publicity (And if it actually gets bad, they'll sue the pants off you.). They are scared shitless of laws censuring their behavior. It's why they fight like mad to ensure that they aren't subject to them.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ethagnawl on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:26AM (#43351891)
> These predators aren't scared of name and shame.

There are exceptions. See the ongoing kerfuffle over "DOGE" employee lists.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by timewizard on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:50PM (#43349629)
It's amazing that, on a cursory look, only 11 states make this practice illegal. The "AI scriptown" is growing.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by B4CKlash on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:44AM (#43350863)
What's interesting is that broadly speaking, people acknowledge that negotiating with asymmetric information is immortal or wrong. Take the stock market for example, insider trading is illegal and you don't often hear calls to reverse these laws.

But when it comes to private markets and semi-private negotiations that same sentiment doesn't easily transfer. Does society benefit in some unique way for allowing asymmetries in labor negotiations, private markets like Uber, or B2C relations like Robinhood (1,2)?

1. https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2020-321 2. Note, Robinhood was fined not for front-runniny customers, just for falsely claiming customers received quality orders. I suspect theyve only stopped the latter behavior.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by potato3732842 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:59AM (#43352072)
Incentive wise you're probably a lot better off if your own broker is front running you than if a HFT desk at a liquidity provider firm is doing it since the broker is at least in a position to kick some of that back to you in the form of reduced fees or whatever.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by collingreen on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:39PM (#43357021)
Might as well get a pat on the head with your punch in the face if you're going to definitely get punched in the face either way.

I don't disagree with you, but wow that requires a bleak outlook.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by robertlagrant on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:24AM (#43352211)
> broadly speaking, people acknowledge that negotiating with asymmetric information is immortal or wrong

I don't think that's true at all. Companies and individuals negotiate all the time with information the other party doesn't have. Insider trading is about fairness on public markets so every negotiating party of the same type has the same information, and is quite specific to that.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by quickthrowman on Thursday March 13, 2025 @08:59AM (#43352855)
> What's interesting is that broadly speaking, people acknowledge that negotiating with asymmetric information is immortal or wrong.

They do? I’m quite happy when I have more information than the party I am negotiating with.

Do you tell your customers all of the input costs of the product or service you sell? I doubt it.

Also, certain parties that trade in public markets have way more information than any retail investor could ever hope to have, hedge funds buy satellite imagery of parking lots, track oil tankers at sea, etc to gain an edge.

Insider trading rules are meant to prevent the public bagholding stocks from the management team having insider information that no other market participant could or should have, there are no rules against legally gathering or purchasing information on your own to gain an edge over other market participants.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by tyre on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:13AM (#43352967)
> What's interesting is that broadly speaking, people acknowledge that negotiating with asymmetric information is immortal or wrong. Take the stock market for example, insider trading is illegal and you don't often hear calls to reverse these laws.

Insider trading is not about fairness. It’s about theft. If you overhear someone in a public place talking about an upcoming merger, you can trade on it.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Tryk on Friday March 14, 2025 @01:45PM (#43365074)
Yes... And why is theft bad?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by belter on Thursday March 13, 2025 @03:32PM (#43356527)
That is why it should be mandatory for companies to publish the salary range for a role.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by B4CKlash on Thursday March 13, 2025 @05:45PM (#43357521)
I agree with you. I'd go further and suggest that candidates should get anonymized information about applicants in the pool. Nothing like negotiating with yourself for a job...
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jmye on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:05PM (#43350030)
I’m interested, given the massive nursing shortages, why any nurses were using this service at all? Especially for higher levels, there’s no reason to mess with a shitty app that underpays you, when you should be able to walk into any provider’s office or facility and get hired almost immediately (and for Runs, you even have wide-ranging telehealth options).
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by hn_throwaway_99 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:58AM (#43350522)
This was my thought exactly. There is a giant nursing shortage. I know some nurses who are traveling nurses and they may bank, and they don't need any BS app. (Just want to emphasize, nursing is an incredibly difficult job at the moment, but there are also currently weird dynamics where traveling nurses can actually make a lot more than "stationary" nurses).

Thus, I'm led to believe that nurses using this app have to have some sort of difficulty finding jobs for other reasons, or they're just not informed about their options.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ethagnawl on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:20AM (#43351244)
I imagine many of them are people who can't commit to full or even part-time jobs because of responsibilities like childcare or eldercare; their own physical or mental health issues; etc.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Scoundreller on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:46PM (#43355038)
Or they have full time jobs already and aren’t generally interested in extra shifts, unless the price is right.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Scoundreller on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:43PM (#43355008)
You can get paid more as a contractor than an employee.

Some may just want to pick up casual shifts without any obligation on top of their full-time work. This is kinda double dipping because your full time work is paying your benefits, so why work overtime at time and a half for them when you can get 2x+ somewhere else with + pay in lieu of benefits?

Big orgs don’t want to deal with 1000 different individual contractors (especially if it means taking potential misclassification of employee as a contractor) risk.

I think the bigger issue is the myth of nurse fungibility. A rando nurse unfamiliar with your setup/org is unlikely to be very productive.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by refurb on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:04PM (#43350022)
That seems like a terrible way to estimate nurse wages.

People have spouses.

People’s parents pay credit cards.

People with bad credit sometimes don’t care.

People have family money.

People with low debt can be desperate for work.

Does it even work?

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by DavidPeiffer on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:50PM (#43350218)
At scale, the corner cases don't really matter. In aggregate, if it's decently well correlated and readily available, it's probably going to be used.

I can't find it now, but I believe LexisNexis or another large similar reporting/data agency had a product catalog of dozens of products that spit out values for ability to pay, disposable income monthly, annual income, etc.

It makes you feel awful thinking about the direction things are headed. Corporations approaching omniscient regarding all facts of our lives that are reasonably of value to them.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by refurb on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:18AM (#43351843)
But I’d argue they aren’t corner cases.

Most people I know with bad credit aren’t desperate for money. At least not educated, highly paid ones like nurses.

Most just ignore their financial problems in the hope they go away.

Not to mention nurse demand outstrips supply, so they have options and can certainly turn down bad offers.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by codedokode on Thursday March 13, 2025 @08:02PM (#43358450)
> Corporations approaching omniscient regarding all facts of our lives

People happily give away lot of info voluntarily, for example by paying with a card instead of cash.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by crazygringo on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:28AM (#43353113)
Agreed. And it's not just those -- if you need to pay off debt, you're extra-incentivized to take the highest-paying job, as opposed to one that pays less but is e.g. closer to home, or has a more predictable schedule, or whatever.

The idea that you'd offer less seems... counterproductive to say the least.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by lotsofpulp on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:19PM (#43355930)
It might not be about high pay, it might be about increasing the odds of a nurse dropped into a dysfunctional environment staying there and not bouncing on day 2 or week 2.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by vincnetas on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:00AM (#43350526)
this is the presentation that discusses this wage suppression for nurses.

https://pluralistic.net/2025/02/26/ursula-franklin/

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ethagnawl on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:12AM (#43351196)
Thanks. This is definitely the source I was referring to.

However, as it applies to my parent comment, the companies mentioned were: Shiftkey, Shiftmed and Carerev. I do not see ENSHYFT mentioned, so I stand corrected.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by user99999999 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:07AM (#43351787)
Proper data privacy laws would make this sort of thing nearly impossible
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by codedokode on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:53PM (#43358399)
In America you can get (buy) someone's credit report without their permission?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by marcus0x62 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:16PM (#43349446)
Move fast and violate HIPAA.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by xattt on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:19PM (#43349466)
Does HIPAA apply to HR into, or just patient health data?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by kryogen1c on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:41PM (#43349580)
HR likely deals with health info related to disability or fmla claims, or work-related injuries that is shared with health care providers and/or insurance companies; this makes them a covered entity subject to the requirements under hipaa.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ahstilde on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:30PM (#43349523)
Protected health information (PHI) under U.S. law is any information about health status, provision of health care, or payment for health care that is created or collected by a Covered Entity (or a Business Associate of a Covered Entity), and can be linked to a specific individual. This is interpreted rather broadly and includes any part of a patient's medical record or payment history.

source: i run Wyndly (YC W21 https://www.wyndly.com), which is most easily understood as a telehealth allergist online.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by SkyPuncher on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:12PM (#43350053)
Yes, but you're missing a massive caveat that is conditional on the definition of "covered entity".

Covered Entity has a narrow meaning. Notably, if you don't accept insurance, it's very unlikely you're a covered entity.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by nradov on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:29PM (#43349843)
Sure, that's the definition of PHI but is ESHYFT a HIPAA covered entity? If not then the definition of PHI isn't legally relevant (although they still have an ethical requirement to secure employee data, and might have violated other data protection laws).

https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/covered-entities...

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by thfuran on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:30PM (#43349524)
It considers non-health-specific identifying info about patients that might be stored with the health-specific info to also be PHI.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jppope on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:18PM (#43349459)
Worth mentioning, because the authority level of medical practitioners throws people off. Don't ever give a doctor or practice your Social Security Number. They don't need it. Similarly if they want to check an ID that doesn't mean scan or photograph. Doctors, practices, etc are the worst at infosec. They have no training, basically no penalties if they do something wrong and all of that info is only to follow up in case you don't pay your bill.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by thfuran on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:29PM (#43349515)
In the US, HIPAA is pretty much the strongest privacy legislation there is. There's probably no group that would have a more severe penalty for leaking your info than your healthcare provider.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jandrese on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:49PM (#43349626)
HIPAA has strict rules with severe penalties, but enforcement is at best spotty. So honest hospitals and doctors offices bend over backwards to comply with the rules at great expense, but bad actors are rarely punished. It's the worst of both worlds. I'm pretty sure that is why the punishments are so harsh, because they need to put the fear of god into practitioners to make them take it seriously since there are so few inspectors.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by timewizard on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:52PM (#43349641)
It's the difference in medical establishment skill level between your doctor and you. You are always at a disadvantage. I've long thought that a disinterested third party needs to be involved. Someone with real oversight taking a position adversarial to the hospital and strictly to create the best possible outcome for the patient.

The Hippocratic model isn't awesome.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by edoceo on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:05PM (#43350028)
In 2025 an oath don't mean shit.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by athenot on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:23AM (#43353682)
This is true, however getting it funded is the difficult task.

For it to be effective, the money can't come from the provider, meaning it's either from the payer or the patient. The payer doesn't really care, costs are contained as far as they are concerned, with the various Quality Initiatives. That leaves the patient to sign up for a subscription model.

I explored that as a business 12 years ago, and sadly there is still a need. The worst part is that most clinicians actually want to do the right thing but it's the admins in their organization who set up processes that result in terrible outcomes.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by scarmig on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:51PM (#43349637)
Perhaps true, but the strongest privacy protections in the US are still pretty weak. The biggest penalty I know of is Anthem 2018, where they leaked HIPAA-qualifying records on 80 million customers. Their financial penalty was a whopping... $16 million. Two dimes per affected customer!
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by thfuran on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:09PM (#43349736)
It's true that the US rarely penalizes corporations enough to really disincentivize things, but healthcare providers probably take client data security more seriously than just about any other group besides maybe law firms. It's weird to single them out as being particularly unconcerned with and unpenalized for leaks.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by mixmastamyk on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:38PM (#43349886)
We saw ours input PII into a Windows box. The idea that their ActiveX monstrosity has any security is not very persuasive.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by RGamma on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:56PM (#43355132)
ActiveX... haven't read that in a long time...
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by slt2021 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:25PM (#43349820)
PCI-DSS is the strongest, HIPAA is just a rubber stamp
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by thfuran on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:38PM (#43349883)
That's not actually law at all. It's part of the contract with payment processors.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by SR2Z on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:37PM (#43349559)
And yet the data still seems to leak pretty frequently...
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by paulcole on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:55PM (#43349985)
How many healthcare providers do you know personally who have faced severe penalties for leaking information?

The reality is that for a small doctor/dental/whatever office, there is essentially 0 risk. HIPAA violations that carry significant penalties go to huge hospitals and healthcare companies.

Your neighborhood doctor has to screw up in a major way for an extended period of time to have a minute risk of any consequence.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jmye on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:13PM (#43350062)
How much information do you think your neighborhood PCP is “leaking” compared to, say, Elevance? This is such a goofy take. Are you expecting that every small provider group is just firing your data off on Facebook every Tuesday, and somehow, no one cares? They’re all using certified EMRs. They all take security seriously because their licenses are literally on the line. Do you work in healthcare?

If they provably expose your data, and you report them, they will get fined. Or they would have last year, who knows if those people still have jobs.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by andrewmcwatters on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:50PM (#43349952)
Only the young and inexperienced believe the law is enforced when it matters.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by colechristensen on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:07PM (#43349719)
Eh.

Last year the total HIPAA violations fines were less than $9.2 million.

A figure I could find for hospital revenue in the same year which is a good enough proxy for fines vs revenue is about $1.2 trillion.

Which rounding because who cares comes to 0.001% of medical revenue ends up being paid for HIPAA violation fines.

Or the equivalent ratio of about a cup of coffee for a typical enough person per year.

HIPAA needs teeth, what it says you're supposed to do is quite strong, the enforcement of it is pathetic.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by eclipticplane on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:35AM (#43350431)
HIPAA was designed for portability -- the 'p' standards for portability not privacy -- of health info, so there are immense carve outs in service of that objective. Fines for violating HIPAA are almost non-existent.

HIPAA is wildly misunderstood by the public as a strong safeguard, meanwhile medical offices just get any patient (a captive audience) to sign a release waiver as part of patient intake ...

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by thfuran on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:27AM (#43353724)
They get patients to sign something permitting them to share PHI with other entities like e.g. the lab that runs blood work, not to disclaim liability for leaking it unintentionally.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by supertrope on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:56PM (#43349659)
What do you do if they refuse to book an appointment without it?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by mayneack on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:12PM (#43350054)
I've never had that happen (sample size ~5). They accept non-citizen patients, so they probably don't make SSN a required field.

(for SSN, never tried to prevent scanning of my ID)

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by x3n0ph3n3 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:01PM (#43350006)
Find a new provider. I have gone 2 decades without providing my SSN to doctors.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by edoceo on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:07PM (#43350042)
New provider is unrealistic for many in USA. In NYC, maybe easy; in rural WI/KS much less so.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by RandomBacon on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:13AM (#43353585)
Not in my case, I do not provide my Social Security Number to (new to me) healthcare providers from small practices to major hospitals with different branches, either.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jppope on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:51AM (#43350502)
You can just use my SSN: 123-45-6789.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by RandomBacon on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:15AM (#43353609)
In my experience, no one has ever asked it when booking, just when you fill out forms on your first visit. I always leave it blank (and most other things that don't pertain to my healthcare issue) blank and have never been hassled.

I also always ask for a paper copy of the disclosures to sign, saying that "I don't sign blank checks" when asked to sign the electric pad. I've never had an issue with them printing it out, letting me sign, and them scanning it in.

Healthcare "security"/"authentication" is just "protected" by your name and date of birth which is easily discovered for anyone online.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by gtirloni on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:30PM (#43349518)
Why "Uber for nurses" and not the actual company name in the title?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by nick__m on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:50PM (#43349630)
According to the article the name is ESHYFT. It sounds like a brand of electronic found on aliexpress but with less quality!
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ks2048 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:04PM (#43349705)
Please invest in my startup, ENSHITIFY
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by intelVISA on Thursday March 13, 2025 @02:45AM (#43350866)
Which one?!
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by hotsauceror on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:16AM (#43354201)
I think I once bought an iPhone charging cable from you guys on Amazon.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Mistletoe on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:44PM (#43349600)
It lets me know the company is bullshit in a way the company name never would.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by mhitza on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:32PM (#43349534)
I wonder how old the S3 bucket was, because at some point AWS made new S3 buckets private by default.

Which means it's either old, or they recklessly opened it up because they couldn't get files uploaded/downloaded to the bucket from their mobile app/services.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by bpodgursky on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:04PM (#43350019)
Also possible a webdev opened it up so they could use the assets on a website, and didn't think about other private data in the bucket.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by CaffeineLD50 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:36PM (#43349555)
Yeah I remember when Amazons AWS was new and people said "hey its cool but not secure." Then AWS added all these security features but added a caveat: BTW security is your responsibility

Here we are. I guess we can blame the users and not any shitty security architecture slapped on AWS.

Clearly what matters most is that legal culpability be avoided, not that users will be secure. The former is 'shite security' while the latter is good security

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by wsatb on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:46PM (#43349616)
The only mistake AWS made was making buckets originally public by default. It’s been many years since that’s been the case. At this point, you have to be completely ignorant to be storing PII in a public bucket.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by richwater on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:40PM (#43349573)
> shitty security architecture slapped on AWS

It's literally, and I do mean this literally, 1 click to block all public traffic to an S3 bucket. It can be enabled at the account level, and is on _by default_ for any new bucket. What exactly more do you want?

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by dragonwriter on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:43PM (#43349598)
> It's literally, and I do mean this literally, 1 click to block all public traffic to an S3 bucket.

I'm reasonably certain that for quite a while blocking all public access has been the default, and it is multiple clicks through scary warnings (through the console; CLI or IaC are simpler) to enable public access.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by CaffeineLD50 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:06PM (#43357697)
Swimmers on a beach that had lifeguards were dying because the ocean was quite strong and even experienced swimmers would occasionally be drowned.

The city decided to remove the life guards and replace them with signs saying "swim here at your own risk, people die here."

Having a simple classification system like "public" and non public with a system that ensures non public data isn't published might prevent data leaks with automation that checks for publishing non-public data.

A system that let's you publish non public data "with warnings" is just a sign saying "swimmers die here". Its not safe, it just excuses the city from culpability

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jihadjihad on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:48PM (#43349622)
In the section of their Privacy Policy titled Data Security [0]:

> We use certain physical, managerial, and technical safeguards that are designed to improve the integrity and security of information that we collect and maintain. Please be aware that no security measures are perfect or impenetrable. We cannot and do not guarantee that information about you will not be accessed, viewed, disclosed, altered, or destroyed by breach of any of our physical, technical, or managerial safeguards. In particular, the Service is NOT designed to store or secure information that could be deemed to be Protected Health Information as defined by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”).

IANAL and all that, but I’m not sure you can use the excuse “We didn’t design our system to be HIPAA compliant, sorry,” and hope your liability disappears. Does anyone know?

0: https://eshyft.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/ESHYFT-Privacy...

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by weezin on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:58PM (#43349994)
HIPAA applies to patient data not providers data.

> I also saw what appeared to be medical documents uploaded to the app. These files were potentially uploaded as proof for why individual nurses missed shifts or took sick leave. These medical documents included medical reports containing information of diagnosis, prescriptions, or treatments that could potentially fall under the ambit of HIPAA regulations.

It looks like providers accidentally uploaded some PHI.

IANAL so may be wrong, but I worked for a healthcare company. Whether HIPAA applies to them depends on if they are considered a covered entity or a business associate [0].

IMO they aren't bound to HIPAA requirements as a covered entity.

Business associate is a little tricky to determine. But business associates have to sign a BAA (Business Associate Agreement). And I doubt they would have signed one if they have that in their privacy policy.

Also just as a side note, HIPAA is not a ideal standard to begin with for security. Many large companies exchange bulk PHI via gmail since it is HIPAA compliant..

0: https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/covered-entities...

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by hn_throwaway_99 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:02AM (#43350534)
> Also just as a side note, HIPAA is not a ideal standard to begin with for security. Many large companies exchange bulk PHI via gmail since it is HIPAA compliant.

You seem to imply using GMail is a bad thing? I think GMail, when appropriately configured to handle PHI, is probably a million times more secure than some crappy bespoke "enterprise" app.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by weezin on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:30AM (#43350627)
It isn't that hard to setup a secure SFTP server to automate the exchange. But then again this is a post about configuring a S3 Bucket with public access for SSNs.

The issue with Gmail is sending to the wrong email, sending to a broad email list, having people download it to their local machines. And the amount of PHI being transmitted in these files is larger than this s3 bucket.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by potato3732842 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:06AM (#43352113)
>It isn't that hard to setup a secure SFTP server to automate the exchange

When you've got a trickle of information coming and going from hundreds or thousands of other individuals working at tens or hundreds of other entities it is.

You'd eventually wind up developing the kind of ridiculous "secure messaging and file drop" type service that every megabank builds on top of their SFTP and ticketing systems for that purpose. That stuff ain't cheap to run and keep running.

Better to just start with a solution that's 99% there.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by SkyPuncher on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:09PM (#43350044)
HIPAA only applies to a very specific entity called a "covered entity". At a high level, "covered entities" are health care providers that accept insurance or insurers. That's right, there's a massive caveat on "accepts insurance". You can be a healthcare provider and do not have to comply with HIPAA if you don't accept insurance.

That being said, HIPAA isn't even relevant here because "ESHYFT" is just a provider a labor. No different than a big consultant providing staff augmentation services.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by hn_throwaway_99 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:19AM (#43350594)
> At a high level, "covered entities" are health care providers that accept insurance or insurers. That's right, there's a massive caveat on "accepts insurance". You can be a healthcare provider and do not have to comply with HIPAA if you don't accept insurance.

Again, HIPAA continues to be the most colloquially misunderstood law out there.

The rule that makes providers "covered entities" isn't really about insurance, it's about whether they transmit specific HIPAA "transactions" electronically. Now, yes, most of these transactions having to do with providers are thing like claim submissions or pre-authorizations to insurance. But there are other reasons a provider may need/want to send a HIPAA transaction electronically.

My point is that there isn't some sort of "loophole" where providers that don't accept insurance are somehow being sneaky. The whole point of the HIPAA security rule is to protect PHI when it is transferred around to different entities in the healthcare system. If the information is going just between you and your doctor, HIPAA isn't relevant, and that is by design.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by SkyPuncher on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:43AM (#43350666)
> it's about whether they transmit specific HIPAA "transactions" electronically.

That's correct, but if you don't accept insurance then you will not transmit anything that meets the criteria to be covered by HIPAA. At least, in terms of being a provider. Things are different if you're a health plan or clearing house.

I spent a lot of time and money questioning this with lawyers at a health tech startup I previously worked at. The underlying reality is nearly the entire US healthcare system falls under HIPAA because nearly everyone wants to accept insurance. However, if you're a doctor running a cash-only business you will not be a covered entity, even if you send PHI electronically.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by hansvm on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:39PM (#43350184)
HIPAA doesn't care about your POS TOS. It either applies or does not.

That said, it's both less broad and more toothless than I'd like. If FB convinces you to install a tracking pixel (like button) stealing your private medical data, they likely haven't violated any laws. At most you'd be able to file a claim against the person who created the leak.

Not a lawyer and all that, but for TFA I don't think HIPAA would be a valid way to try to limit your losses. It's a bit closer to what would happen if you (a doctor) uploaded patient data to Google Drive and then somehow leaked that information (one of Google's contractors disclosing it, a hack, whatever). Nothing about ESHYFT's offerings requires or would be benefited by the data HIPAA protects, and (ignoring incompetence and other factors) I'd be as surprised to see my health data leaked there as I would to see a YT video going over my last lab reports because of some hospital's actions.

They could still be liable for all sorts of other damages (and maybe somebody can convince a court of a HIPAA violation), but it's not an easy HIPAA win.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by tclancy on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:37PM (#43349877)
If you're not a direct health provider, you probably can. Don't take that as an endorsement.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by skue on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:52PM (#43349964)
If you partner with a healthcare provider to provide any sort of technical services, you will be required to sign a BAA (Business Associates Agreement), which makes you similarly liable to the HIPAA & HITECH acts.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by weezin on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:05PM (#43350031)
It depends there are some exceptions.[0]

>With persons or organizations (e.g., janitorial service or electrician) whose functions or services do not involve the use or disclosure of protected health information, and where any access to protected health information by such persons would be incidental, if at all.

Based on the context from the article of the PHI uploaded being incidental, it would probably fall under this exception. It sounds like ESHYFT isn't meant to be storing any PHI based on the privacy policy above.

0:https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/guidance...

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by colechristensen on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:51PM (#43349638)
[Nevermind]
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by johann8384 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:02PM (#43349688)
The PII of the nurses being accidentally shared by a staffing agency isn't a HIPAA violation. Yes the nurses are providers but their relationship with the Uber for nurses service isn't a medical provider relationship. It's definitely a legal and ethical failing but I don't think it's a HIPAA one.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by AlotOfReading on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:47PM (#43349936)
HIPAA avoidance is much narrower than that. Entities which perform administrative or managerial duties on behalf of a mandated organization that have to transmit PII to provide that service are also covered, even if the entity itself isn't a provider.

If 'Uber for nurses' is acting on behalf of nurses, it probably doesn't apply? If it's acting on behalf of the hospitals (who are indisputably covered entities), then the situation is much less clear.

I encountered a similar situation with my startup many years ago and decided "better safe than sorry" after consulting the lawyer.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by hn_throwaway_99 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:53PM (#43349971)
I used to work in the field. HIPAA protects patient data, not provider data. If my understanding is correct that only nurse PII was leaked, this has nothing to do with HIPAA.

In general, I've found that people tend to think HIPAA applies much, much more than it actually does. Like people thinking if you're in a meeting at work with clients and say "Sorry, Bob couldn't be here today, he's got the flu" that that's a HIPAA violation. No, it's not.

This is just an employee data leak, just like a bajillion other employee data leaks. The fact that the employees happen to be nurses still doesn't mean it has anything to do with HIPAA.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by SkyPuncher on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:12PM (#43350057)
ESHYFT isn't a covered entity, so HIPAA doesn't apply to them. Even if they have health data of their employees in their system, they're still not a covered entity.

Really, "Uber for Nurses" is a title to drum up interest. "Large Staffing Service" would be factually accurate.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by DistractionRect on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:15PM (#43349762)
This is what I took away from the reading. It's basically a shift/employee management platform. The only reason we're even discussing HIPAA is because health care industry adjacent.

If you replaced nurses with gig workers and uber for nurses with something like WeWork this would just be like every other leak we talk about on HN.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by skue on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:53PM (#43349979)
This 100%. This needs to be a top level comment.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by colechristensen on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:17PM (#43349778)
Ah, doing more than skimming the article

>I also saw what appeared to be medical documents uploaded to the app. These files were potentially uploaded as proof for why individual nurses missed shifts or took sick leave. These medical documents included medical reports containing information of diagnosis, prescriptions, or treatments that could potentially fall under the ambit of HIPAA regulations.

The title is exaggerating what the article says and the article is making a big stretch about this being possibly HIPAA covered, I stand corrected, this has nothing to do with HIPAA.

What was leaked was nurses' doctors notes submitted justifying calling out of work. Still a serious leak but nowhere near what is being suggested.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by refulgentis on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:16PM (#43349772)
I'm confused because the article lays it out by the 4th paragraph, and you have the right understanding, up until "we're a startup"

Maybe you think the startup maintains patient records?

The article lays out the nurses uploaded them, the provider. This is a temp booking system. The health records were uploaded by the nurses to communicate reasons for absences to their employee and weren't required or requested

They have as much responsibility as Dropbox does. Nurses shouldn't have uploaded them.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ripped_britches on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:52PM (#43349646)
What makes this uber for nurses?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by ants_everywhere on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:19PM (#43349786)
It's Kelly Services for nurses, but Uber sounded cooler 10 years ago
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by rad_gruchalski on Friday March 14, 2025 @09:16AM (#43362342)
Maybe nurses come over by Uber.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by dikaio on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:54PM (#43349654)
Would be surprised if this company makes it out of this. Medical records…. Yikes
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by xyst on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:30PM (#43349848)
A company of this size definitely wouldn’t be able to tank a multimillion dollar lawsuit.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by SamuelAdams on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:55PM (#43349655)
I am confused, the article seems to be short on details. Was the attack an open S3 bucket? The company in question seems to be hiring for GCP, so I imagine they don’t use S3 at all.

Did the submitter intentionally change the post title to get more clicks?

https://eshyft.com/careers/gcp-devops-engineer/

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by colechristensen on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @09:58PM (#43349675)
Multi-cloud isn't uncommon, especially interacting with vendors. It has been a long time since I've worked somewhere that didn't have at least some usage in more than one cloud provider.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by whatever1 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:07PM (#43349721)
I thought the cloud was safe, that is why you pay premium.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by morkalork on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:39PM (#43349890)
They just sell pick axes, they don't care if you plant one right through your foot.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by whatever1 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:21PM (#43350106)
No that is not the sales pitch to enterprise customers. They are pitching that sys admins are stupid and that security nowadays is too complicated, hence cloud is the only safe solution.

Yet every month I see a story here about an huge data leak from an unrestricted bucket.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by markus_zhang on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:37PM (#43349880)
What a surprise. How do we, the common people dealing with corporations and governments leaking out information left and right? Even password storage services are not really safe AFAIK.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by 999900000999 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:41PM (#43349903)
Are y'all gonna blame AWS like you blamed Firebase last week ?

The security procedures I take while hacking out something for my friends at 3am should not extend to products hosting PII. It's up to YOU to implement basic data security.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by onion2k on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:55AM (#43350512)
It's up to YOU to implement basic data security.

You definitely need to do this, but a platform should help where possible, and try to have users fall into a 'pit of success' where if a dev just goes with the defaults everything is fine. In this case, S3 buckets should be private and encrypted by default and devs should need to actively choose to switch those things off (which I think may be the case now, but it wasn't in the past.)

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by 999900000999 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @03:12AM (#43350964)
This is like having a small store and instead of locking up at the end of the day, blaming the door for not automatically locking. Yes new automatic locks exist now, but you still need to check.

Cloud technology allows us to build fantastic software very fast. But if you’re too lazy to implement a basic api to get S3 data on a needs to know basis, that’s on you.

AWS makes this very easy. You can’t blame anyone else.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by jeffhuys on Thursday March 13, 2025 @05:42AM (#43351659)
> S3 buckets should be private and encrypted by default and devs should need to actively choose to switch those things off

Yeah, that's the case right now. There's multiple screens you have to go to, that almost scream at you that you're making EVERYTHING PUBLIC. Also, in the overview, it distinctly says "!! PUBLIC".

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by bigfatfrock on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:45PM (#43349925)
Sorry for the dude that built their infra and was really tired and then woke up to this, what a bummer.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by elevatedastalt on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @10:51PM (#43349956)
Annual reminder that the P in HIPAA stands for Portability, not Privacy.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by RobotToaster on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:20PM (#43350096)
Why does this keep happening? It seems like every month there's a new leak from an open S3 bucket?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by dmix on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:30PM (#43350149)
New companies with immature systems, old companies hiring young developers doing side stuff off in their own world, bad default configurations etc

Most importantly there's a large amount of highly incentivized people probing constantly at mass scale. These days it's very easy to scan the internet (github, IPs, domains, etc) for information and "bad S3 configuration" detection is just a script anyone can use. No advanced programming skills required.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by reustle on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:40AM (#43352304)
S3 (and most of AWS) is terribly designed, so you end up googling for access policies that likely work when you are trying to get a new project off the ground. That policy may not be right for prod in the future.

Not saying it is right, it's just what happens.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by j45 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:22PM (#43350108)
I wish private data was more independently audited.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by albert_e on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:32PM (#43350159)
The linked article does not mention Amazon S3 or AWS

Is there a different source for the "open S3 bucket" in HN title?

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by devonbleak on Thursday March 13, 2025 @03:18PM (#43356410)
I had the same thought. Closest I can tell there's screenshot that looks like s3 console listing csv files if you click over far enough in the carousel.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by bn-l on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:39PM (#43350187)
Always. Always the open bucket.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by tmpz22 on Wednesday March 12, 2025 @11:52PM (#43350225)
Are we pretending that there are still functional regulatory agencies that are able to take action over this?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by fads_go on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:54AM (#43353374)
The person working the hardest to find these is then immediately shutting them down. Makes government more efficient.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by mordae on Thursday March 13, 2025 @03:19AM (#43350991)
Now if only this data found its way to some union organizer.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by littlestymaar on Thursday March 13, 2025 @04:27AM (#43351278)
When do we start making that kind of thing criminal negligence with prison sentences for this kind of bullshit…
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by amelius on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:01AM (#43351752)
It is really unfair, the way capitalism treats nurses (and police officers, school teachers). Without them, the entire system wouldn't even exist. Capitalism may sound like a great idea at first, but in the end you have a few rich bastards milking the rest.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by piokoch on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:23AM (#43351884)
It has nothing to do with capitalism. You can have capitalism and society that is aware that having good public services pays-off, as overall spending on schools, security, etc. will be smaller if done at the whole country level.

In the USA it is not that easy to achieve, as, historically, it is not a single country but a union of "states" that is countries, so the main boss should not interfere too much with local bosses and force on them particular "federal" laws.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by amelius on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:57AM (#43352052)
That doesn't answer whether it is fair. Capitalism will always push for a smaller government and with all the power they have at their disposal. At the same time, why can capitalists have their rich-making business schemes while nurses and other (semi) public servants are stuck with whatever society decides is good for them? The system is rigged in favor of capitalists.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by _xtrimsky on Friday March 14, 2025 @02:23PM (#43365573)
it has nothing to do with capitalism. this company could have hired a cheap student, that would have known best AWS practices and would have kept it secure. at the same time a communist government with lots of funds, could have made this mistake.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by user99999999 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @06:07AM (#43351781)
Close it. Sell off all the assets and give the proceeds as compensation to those whose data was exposed. Why do we have a human death penalty but not a corporate one?
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by game_the0ry on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:14AM (#43352975)
Incredible. Healthcare is a busted industry through and through. Even the tech companies that serve it are incompetent. There are so many things wrong here:

- the uber-fication of nursing, bc of cheap and corporate owned hospitals won't just hire them as w2 employees

- cheapness probably led hospitals to this crappy app, which probably gave kick backs to the admins that approved it

- this should totally bankrupt the ESHYFT, but more likely nothing will happen

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by zero_k on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:22AM (#43353063)
Bankrupt only? It should also be criminal negligence. Until some exec goes to jail, this kind of stuff will keep happening. Someone was (likely is...) making good profit out of this business by not investing in IT security. They cheaped out, and other people paid the price, who didn't have anything to do with the profit of the company. Watch out for the execs going around in a few years giving talks about how to build a successful company. If we let this kind of behaviour have zero repercussions, the public will continue to pay the price of private profits.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by game_the0ry on Thursday March 13, 2025 @07:09PM (#43358139)
Do not disagree here. As long as it is on the CEO and head on eng. No some poor intern.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by franktankbank on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:22AM (#43353665)
I'm really curious about the kickbacks comment. I'm sympathetic to it but how do you root it out practically? Noone has much incentive to fix it because the people aware of the ill doing are the ones benefiting from it.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Scoundreller on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:59PM (#43355165)
To some extent, apps like this keep independent hospitals/providers viable.

A big bad health system will have its own “float” pool of W2 nurses or internal offer system.

Heck, that’s part of the “sell” when selling out: to get access to a robust vacation/vacancy handling system.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by only-one1701 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:16AM (#43352996)
As an AWS Solution Architect - Associate, I can confidently say they should’ve been using AWS Macie (tongue in cheek btw)
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by kittikitti on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:33AM (#43353174)
How does the medical and healthcare industry that is notorious for gatekeeping have these problems? Leaving a database open and unprotected is just hard to understand given the levels of red tape you have to complete to develop in this space. Theranos was jailed and defamed whereas this will likely cause more damage as a whole (instead of some billionaires becoming slightly less rich).
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by donatj on Thursday March 13, 2025 @09:49AM (#43353333)
Huh, I worked for an agency and built a site that was essentially "Uber for Nurses" back in 2010. I was immediately like "it's not them is it?" No, seems they shut down in 2017.

As far as I know, never really took off, at least while I was maintaining it, but the gig economy wasn't in full swing yet.

All that said, the sheer number of forms and amount of paperwork the site required you to fill out just to sign up had to have been a limiting factor in getting you in the door. Real high friction getting people in the door.

I wonder if Eshyft was able to somehow simplify the process.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by Scoundreller on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:01PM (#43355186)
You were probably too early.

Covid lead to a wave of quitting, retirements, sick calls and increased health care demand so nurses could flex their spot in the market place and get the new market rate through contracting.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by insane_dreamer on Thursday March 13, 2025 @10:06AM (#43353516)
“Uber for X” has become equivalent to “let’s extract as much value as possible out of X for the benefit of some Big Corp while making the experience as horrible as possible for the people this is supposedly benefits” (drivers, nurses).
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by redwoolf on Thursday March 13, 2025 @11:51AM (#43354512)
This is shameful. S3 buckets have not been public by default for many years. You have to make a choice to make them publicly accessible. And to not have the contents encrypted at rest. I just can’t.

The lack of respect that some companies have for their customers is appalling.

Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by dhab on Thursday March 13, 2025 @12:57PM (#43355137)
I know I won't be able to dig it up, but certain that I read this research paper where they concluded in words to the effect that jobs which require a bit of passion are the most underpaid/overworked - e.g. teachers, nurses, musicians, sports-people.
Re:'Uber for nurses' exposes 86K+ medical records, PII via o... by localghost3000 on Thursday March 13, 2025 @01:32PM (#43355515)
I’ve worked in healthcare tech and this is pretty bad. You get fined per patient record and it’s not cheap. You also get put on a “wall of shame” where anyone who might do business with you in the future can look and see. You can also be held personally liable if you mess up. It’s really intense.

At my old job we didn’t even allow PII to pass through our API so we couldn’t accidentally log it and kept all of it in its own VPS totally isolated from the rest of our system. When we needed a record we’d put it into an S3 bucket and hand back temp link that only the caller could access (and expired within a short period of time) Total pain but you could sleep at night.