Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 177 posts

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#141

Post by yborg »

khuey wrote: post #97
drewmol wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not financial advise: I remember a few commentors on HN recently saying they have made large gains by buying stock of companies after the news of cyber security breaches significantly reduced the share value, then waiting for the dust to settle(reaction-news-cycle to complete) and the price to rise again.

For the benefit of those reading: given that this may very well be the worst breach ever by far, and is likely to attract significant attention from government regulators and prosecutors, this is likely a particularly unwise time to begin attempting this strategy.

The direct financial impact to Equifax is likely to be tiny, and their customers aren't the people who's personal information they just left on the side of the road. Once the news cycle is past, it will be business as usual at Equifax.

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#142

Post by mercurialshark »

devonkim wrote: post #69
nilved wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Recognized that the law doesn't apply to rich people?

More like the law was written in cooperation with the people that became wealthy through means that used to be legal and protected themselves and their legacy by kicking away the ladders they used.

> the law was written in cooperation with the people that became wealthy through means that used to be legal and protected themselves...

Hey, if nothing else, you are super-confident. Also, way to not generalize or be presumptuous in any capacity. Fucking super buttoned up analysis. It all checks out.

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#144

Post by toephu2 »

tunetine wrote: post #100
dahdum wrote: post #13

John Gamble (CFO) has been dumping heavily since May 20th ( http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/insider-trading/EFX?sy... ).

Am I the only one surprised a CFO is making this amount of money?

Yes. You must be a new college grad?

A CFO of a $17B company making $3m/year[1] is normal.

[1] http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/officer-profile/EFX/25...

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#145

Post by jannes »

rshm wrote: post #109

Is it possible or are there free data sources if an average person wants to dig into tradings of Jul 27, two day before official date of discovery.

No, that's not possible. These trades are only public because there is regulation that mandates Equifax to file trades by their employees above a certain level.

Statement of Changes in Beneficial Ownership: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_4

Otherwise you have this trading information spread across thousands of brokers (and it doesn't become public)

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#146

Post by shelbyfinally »

wsxcde wrote: post #111
ISL wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a normal person. My first attempt at key management was an utter failure, accidentally broadcasting a private key instead of the public one.

I'm a computer security researcher. At some point I posted a public key for people to send me encrypted email. Nobody ever did and at some point I lost that private key. Point is, key management is hard problem for big corporations with dedicated IT staff. Relying on normal people to be able to do that is just insane.

I'll give another example. My medical practice tried to do GPG encryption in a shared DropBox folder. Within the first week, someone decrypted half the files into the same shared folder...

It was all just a test with non-critical data, but the test was a total failure. And that didn't even get into key-related issues.

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#147

Post by snowwolf »

mathattack wrote: post #79
korethr wrote: post #7

So, does this count as insider trading? My intuition says 'yes'. But my intuition about a thing and what the law says don't always match.

From the article: Regulatory filings show that three days later, Chief Financial Officer John Gamble sold shares worth $946,374 and Joseph Loughran, president of U.S. information solutions, exercised options to dispose of stock worth $584,099. Rodolfo Ploder, president of workforce solutions, sold $250,458 of stock on Aug. 2. None of the filings lists the transactions as being part of 10b5-1 scheduled trading plans.…

The "president of U.S. information solutions" had no knowledge of a massive information breach. Sure...

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#148

Post by Bootvis »

peterwwillis wrote: post #80
ConnorBoyd wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They traded based on material, non-public information, so I would have to say yes, this is definitely insider trading, but I'm not a lawyer...

Food for thought: you are basing your admittedly uneducated opinion of a legal matter on a single criteria. If you end up being right, it will have been almost pure luck, but it may reinforce certain incorrect assumptions, like your theory that this single criteria was the deciding factor, or that this kind of armchair analysis is productive. Point being: even if you are right, it's probably a bad idea to even take t…

Acting on material, non-public information is considered insider trading by most definitions, no need to get lawyers involved.

However, whether these managers broke the law and if and how they should be punished is a legal question most people here should probably shut up about.

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#149

Post by walshemj »

dkfmn wrote: post #124
khuey wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intent doesn't need to be proven. If you knew of the material non-public information and you then decided to execute a trade you're guilty of insider trading.

Actually there are three criteria: 1) Information is material 2) Information is not public 3) Breach of duty through the "trust and confidence" clause. It would be highly unusual for the CFO not to have the burden of confidence but even for a division president it's not clear they'd have corporate officer responsibilities. During compliance training in my old life they covered the classic "overheard in a coffee shop"…

I think all employees are covered by 3 breaching trust is gross misconduct in the UK

Re: Three Equifax Managers Sold Stock Before Cyber Hack Was Revealed

#150

Post by wpietri »

mankash666 wrote: post #130
wpietri wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This strikes me as sadly typical of so many "just use a blockchain" plans: it has a hopelessly naive understanding of the topic. Credit reporting agencies aren't just a big ledger. They collect a lot of information from a variety of sources, verifying and evaluating them. They contextualize, evaluate, and summarize the information. They comply with extensive laws that regulate the use of the information. And then the…

This is a naïve interpretation of my comment. Here's a real product [1] that considers all the pitfalls you enumerated, and achieves what I had in mind. [1]: https://hellobloom.io

It's a pretty straightforward reading of your comment.

Bloom is a fancier but also naive attempt. Nobody on that team has experience with loan origination, loan underwriting, loan rating, loan syndication, credit reporting, credit scoring, credit cards, debit cards, or debt collection. Having read the white paper, it is weirdly specific on record formats, and weirdly hazy on almost any important issue. It seems a fine example of the XKCD cartoon about physics majors. [1]

Remember when somebody who built a Magic the Gathering card exchange and then decided they could build a currency exchange? I'm not an expert [2], but that's what the Bloom.io stuff reads like to me. People joke that Bitcoin is basically the Dunning-Krugerrand, and things like Bloom don't do much to challenge that view.

[1] https://xkcd.com/793/

[2] Although I have build financial trading software, worked on a loan accounting system focused on the underbanked, and am currently consulting for a commercial lender, so I'm not entirely ignorant.

Post reply on HN