Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Data Security Incident topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County staff investigating data‑security incident; LifeLock purchase held pending law‑enforcement review
Summary
County officials described a data‑security incident involving an Excel workbook; staff have contained the incident, are consulting law enforcement and insurers, and will not purchase identity‑protection services for affected individuals until investigators advise whether a breach occurred.
Holmes County staff and the county coordinator updated commissioners on an apparent data‑security incident involving an Excel workbook. County officials said they have contained and recovered the file, are consulting law‑enforcement partners and their insurer, and are continuing an internal review.
Resident Richard Wilson and other speakers pressed the board about timely notification and protective steps for potentially affected employees. “If the beneficiary information was included in that spreadsheet, we're looking at more than … 450 people,” Wilson said during public comment and urged the county to provide guidance on credit monitoring and identity protection.
County coordinator Nate (last name not stated) said staff had received initial pricing on identity‑protection services — noting both per‑individual rates and bulk pricing in the meeting packet — but that statute and law‑enforcement guidance govern if or when notice is required. “PRM has advised us that at this point in time, they don't see a security breach. They're calling it a security incident, tightening up our internal controls,” Nate said.
Staff told commissioners that if law enforcement or investigators determine the event meets the statutory definition of a breach, county protocol will require notices to affected individuals and the county will revisit enrollment in identity‑protection services (such as LifeLock). In the meantime, staff will prepare affidavits from internal employees who can attest they did not disseminate the file and will continue to coordinate with PRM (the county insurer) and local law enforcement. The board asked staff to continue the investigation and to call a special meeting if investigators recommend immediate notification and remedial measures.
