Black Friday Fraud Reduction?

Black Friday fraud dipped in 2024? Maybe good news…maybe not.

Frank on Fraud shared a TransUnion report of a 30% decrease in fraud on Black Friday this year. (Links below.)

This in turn was shared and analyzed by Hilton McCall, who noted several theories as to why fraudsters apparently took Black Friday off.

“Tighter fraud prevention measures by merchants and platforms.”

That’s good news.

“Shifting fraud tactics targeting other high-value days like Cyber Monday.”

“A possible focus on new fraud methods, like account takeovers and loyalty point scams, rather than traditional purchase fraud.”

That’s bad news.

Remain vigilant—and if your firm offers a fraud-fighting solution, share your message.

Frank on Fraud: https://frankonfraud.com/fraud-trends/fraudster-vacation-fraud-plunges-on-black-friday/

TransUnion: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2024/12/05/2992306/0/en/New-TransUnion-Analysis-Finds-More-Than-4-of-U-S-Attempted-Ecommerce-Transactions-Between-Thanksgiving-and-Cyber-Monday-Suspected-to-be-Fraudulent.html

Hilton McCall: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/hilton-mccall_fraudprevention-blackfriday-cybersecurity-activity-7272611182727909376-lsyD

Survey Says

So Deloitte announced the results of a survey earlier this month.

“The fifth annual Deloitte “Connected Consumer” survey reveals that consumers have a positive perception of their technology experiences and are increasingly embracing GenAI. However, they are determined to seek balance in their digital lives and expect trust, accountability, and transparency from technology providers.”

Deloitte conducted the survey BEFORE the RIBridges hack.

On the RIBridges Benefits System Hack

I originally worked with state benefits systems during my years at Printrak, and have performed analysis of such systems at Bredemarket. These systems store sensitive personal data of many Americans, including myself. And they are therefore a target for hackers.

The hack at RIBridges

A huge benefits system was hacked in Rhode Island, according to the State.

“On December 5, the State was informed by its vendor, Deloitte, that the RIBridges data system was the target of a potential cyberattack….”

That was just the beginning.

“On December 10, the State received confirmation from Deloitte that there had been a breach of the RIBridges system based on a screenshot of file folders sent by the hacker to Deloitte. On December 11, Deloitte confirmed that there is a high probability that the implicated folders contain personally identifiable information from RIBridges. On December 13, Deloitte confirmed there was malicious code present in the system, and the State directed Deloitte to shut RIBridges down to remediate the threat.”

RIBridges is…um…a bridge from Rhode Island residents to various Federally sponsored but State administered benefits programs, including:

  • Medicaid,    
  • Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),    
  • Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF),    
  • Child Care Assistance Program (CCAP),    
  • Health coverage purchased through HealthSource RI   
  • Rhode Island Works (RIW),    
  • Long-Term Services and Supports (LTSS), and    
  • General Public Assistance (GPA) Program

State benefits systems such as RIBridges are complex and often hosted on old infrastructure that requires modernization. (“Modernization” is a great buzzword to use to toss around when describing aging state computer systems, as I know from my years working with driver’s license and biometric identification systems.) The older and more complex the system, the easier to hack.

The history of RIBridges

This complexity is certainly true of Deloitte’s hacked RIBridges system.

As StateScoop noted in 2021:

“Gov. Daniel McKee…said the state will pay the firm $99 million over the next three years to manage and build out the RIBridges computer system….The firm has been developing the software, which handles the state’s Medicaid, SNAP and other welfare programs, since 2016, though delays and errors during (previous Governor) Raimondo’s administration caused the state to overspend by at least $150 million as of 2019, the last time the state renewed Deloitte’s contract.”

Why is Deloitte’s performance less than ideal? Anthony Kimerv of Biometric Update explains the issues facing RIBridges.

“Federal agencies, including the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, had warned Rhode Island before the system’s launch that it was not ready for deployment….RIBridges proceeded despite clear operational risks, leading to immediate and widespread problems. The launch resulted in significant disruptions to benefits distribution, with thousands of residents experiencing delays in receiving critical assistance. Backlogs soared, with more than 20,000 cases piling up due to system malfunctions.”

After much time and effort the backlogs decreased, but the treasure trove of personally identifiable information (PII) remained a target.

“As a central repository for sensitive personal data, including financial information and health records, RIBridges became a potential target for cyberattacks. Security audits revealed vulnerabilities in the system’s defenses….Cybercriminals exploited weaknesses in RIBridges to access sensitive data. The attackers bypassed existing security measures, inserted malicious code, and obtained unauthorized access. The breach exposed flaws in the system’s technical defenses and highlighted issues with its oversight and vendor management.”

The consequences for RIBridges applicants

So now the system is down, applicants are using paper forms, and a cyber criminal is requesting a payout.

(Image by Google Gemini)

If the World is Flat

(Part of the biometric product marketing expert series)

(August 1, 2025: image img_2522-1.jpg and video flat2412a-1_mp4_hd_1080p.original.jpg?h=1378 removed by request)

(also deleted related content on Bluesky, Facebook, LinkedIn, TikTok personal, and YouTube)

If the world is flat…

…there’s no need to look beyond the horizon.

…only the current quarter counts.

If you want to survive…

…think beyond the current quarter.

…invest in the long term.

…invest in product marketing.

…invest in a product marketer.

John E. Bredehoft on LinkedIn: LINK

I’m seeking a Senior Product Marketing Manager role in software (biometrics, government IDs, geolocation, identity and access management, cybersecurity, health) as an individual contributor on a collaborative team.

Key Accomplishments

  • Product launches (Confidential software product, Know Your Business offering, Morpho Video Investigator, MorphoBIS Cloud, Printrak BIS, Omnitrak).
  • Multiple enablement, competitive analysis, and strategy efforts.
  • Exploration of growth markets.

Multiple technologies.

Multiple industries.

Over 22 types of content.

Currently available for full-time employment or consulting work (Bredemarket).

More details on the latter at Bredemarket’s “CPA” page.

Digital Identity and Public Benefits

Both the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology and the Digital Benefits Hub made important announcements this morning. I will quote portions of the latter announcement.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Digital Benefits Network (DBN) at the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University, and the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) are collaborating on a two-year-long collaborative research and development project to adapt NIST’s digital identity guidelines to better support the implementation of public benefits policy and delivery while balancing security, privacy, equity, and usability….

In response to heightened fraud and related cybersecurity threats during the COVID-19 pandemic, some benefits-administering agencies began to integrate new safeguards such as individual digital accounts and identity verification, also known as identity proofing, into online applications. However, the use of certain approaches, like those reliant upon facial recognition or data brokers, has raised questions about privacy and data security, due process issues, and potential biases in systems that disproportionately impact communities of color and marginalized groups. Simultaneously, adoption of more effective, evidence-based methods of identity verification has lagged, despite recommendations from NIST (Question A4) and the Government Accountability Office

There’s a ton to digest here. This impacts a number of issues that I and others have been discussing for years.

NIST’s own press release, by the way, can be found here.

A Few Thoughts on FedRAMP

The 438 U.S. federal agencies (as of today) probably have over 439 different security requirements. When you add state and local agencies to the list, security compliance becomes a mind-numbing exercise.

  • For example, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation has its Criminal Justice Information Systems Security Policy (version 5.9 is here). This not only applies to the FBI, but to any government agency or private organization that interfaces to the relevant FBI systems.
  • Similarly, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has its Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule. Again, this also applies to private organizations.

But I don’t care about those. (Actually I do, but for the next few minutes I don’t.) Instead, let’s talk FedRAMP.

Why do we have FedRAMP?

The two standards that I mentioned above apply to particular government agencies. Sometimes, however, the federal government attempts to create a standard that applies to ALL federal agencies (and other relevant bodies). You can say that Login.gov is an example of this, although a certain company (I won’t name the company, but it likes to ID me) repeatedly emphasizes that Login.gov is not IAL2 compliant.

But forget about that. Let’s concentrate on FedRAMP.

Why do we have FedRAMP?

The Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP®) was established in 2011 to provide a cost-effective, risk-based approach for the adoption and use of cloud services by the federal government. FedRAMP empowers agencies to use modern cloud technologies, with an emphasis on security and protection of federal information. In December 2022, the FedRAMP Authorization Act was signed as part of the FY23 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The Act codifies the FedRAMP program as the authoritative standardized approach to security assessment and authorization for cloud computing products and services that process unclassified federal information.

From https://www.fedramp.gov/program-basics/.

Note the critical word “unclassified.” So FedRAMP doesn’t cover EVERYTHING. But it does cover enough to allow federal agencies to move away from huge on-premise server rooms and enjoy the same SaaS advantages that private entities enjoy.

Today, government agencies can now consult a FedRAMP Marketplace that lists FedRAMP offerings the agencies can use for their cloud implementations.

A FedRAMP authorized product example

When I helped MorphoTrak propose its first cloud-based automated biometric identification solutions, our first customers were state and local agencies. To propose those first solutions, MorphoTrak partnered with Microsoft and used its Azure Government cloud. While those first implementations were not federal and did not require FedRAMP authorization, MorphoTrak’s successor IDEMIA clearly has an interest in providing federal non-classified cloud solutions.

When IDEMIA proposes federal solutions that require cloud storage, it can choose to use Microsoft Azure Government, which is now FedRAMP authorized.

It turns out that a number of other FedRAMP-authorized products are partially dependent upon Microsoft Azure Government’s FedRAMP authorization, so continued maintenance of this authorization is essential to Microsoft, a number of other vendors, and all the agencies that require secure cloud solutions.

They can only hope that the GSA Inspector General doesn’t find fault with THEM.

Is FedRAMP compliance worth it?

But assuming that doesn’t happen, is it worthwhile for vendors to pursue FedRAMP compliance?

If you are a company with a cloud service, there are likely quite a few questions you are asking yourself about your pursuits in the Federal market. When will the upward trajectory of cloud adoption begin? What agency will be the next to migrate to the cloud? What technologies will be migrated? As you move forward with your business development strategy you will also question whether FedRAMP compliance is something you should pursue?

The answer to the last question is simple: Yes. If you want the Federal Government to purchase your cloud service offering you will, sooner or later, have to successfully navigate the FedRAMP process.

From https://www.mindpointgroup.com/blog/fedramp-compliance-is-it-worth-it.

And a lot of companies are doing just that. But with less than 400 FedRAMP authorized services, there’s obviously room for growth.

Ransomware Doesn’t Celebrate a Holiday

Government Technology posted an article on a ransomware attack that affected Ardent Health Services facilities in multiple U.S. states, including Texas, Idaho, New Mexico, Oklahoma, New Jersey, and Kansas over Thanksgiving Day, requiring some ambulances to be diverted and some services suspended.

By Mangocove – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=133200606

Government Technology observed:

The Thanksgiving timing of the attack is unlikely to be coincidental. Hackers are believed to see holiday weekends as an opportunity to strike while network defenders and IT are likely “at limited capacity for an extended time,” the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has noted

From https://www.govtech.com/security/ransomware-impacts-health-care-systems-in-six-states

And it’s not like the hackers are necessarily having to pass up on their turkey dinner. Few if any holidays are universal, and over 7 billion people (including many hackers) did NOT celebrate Thanksgiving last Thursday.

Does this mean that companies need to INCREASE security staff during holiday periods?

Is Your Healthcare Bot Healthy For You?

Robert Young (“Marcus Welby”) and Jane Wyatt (“Margaret Anderson” on a different show). By ABC TelevisionUploaded by We hope at en.wikipedia – eBay itemphoto informationTransferred from en.wikipedia by SreeBot, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=16472486

We’ve come a long way since the days of Marcus Welby, M.D. (who was a fictional character).

  • Back in the days of Marcus Welby, M.D., we trusted the doctor as the sole provider of medical information. Doctor knows best!
  • Later, we learned about health by searching the Internet ourselves, using sources of varying trustworthiness such as pharmaceutical company commercials.
  • Now, we don’t even conduct the searches ourselves, but let an artificial intelligence healthcare bot search for us, even though the bot hallucinates sometimes.

A “hallucination” occurs when generative AI is convinced that its answer is correct, even when it is wrong. These hallucinations could be a problem—in healthcare, literally a matter of life or death.

What can go wrong with AI healthcare?

The Brookings Institution details several scenarios in which reliance on artificial intelligence can get messy from a legal (and ethical) standpoint. Here is one of them.

From LINK REMOVED 2025-01-20

For example, a counselor may tell a patient with a substance use disorder to use an app in order to track cravings, states of mind, and other information helpful in treating addiction. The app may recommend certain therapeutic actions in case the counselor cannot be reached. Setting aside preemption issues raised by Food and Drug Administration regulation of these apps, important questions in tort law arise. If these therapeutic actions are contraindicated and result in harm to the patient or others, is the app to blame? Or does the doctor who prescribed the app bear the blame?

From https://www.brookings.edu/articles/when-medical-robots-fail-malpractice-principles-for-an-era-of-automation/

Who is going to ensure that these bots can be trusted?

Who is concerned? Yes.

It seems to me they give these robot doctors now-a-days very peculiar names. By Public Domain – Snapshot Image – https://archive.org/details/ClassicComedyTeams, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=25914575

That’s right. WHO is going to ensure that these bots can be trusted.

A World Health Organization publication…

…underscores the critical need to ensure the safety and efficacy of AI systems, accelerating their availability to those in need and encouraging collaboration among various stakeholders, including developers, regulators, manufacturers, healthcare professionals, and patients.

From https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/who-outlines-responsible-regulations-needed-for-artificial-intelligence-in-healthcare/170622/

According to WHO, its document proposes six areas of artificial intelligence regulation for health.

  • To foster trust, the publication stresses the importance of transparency and documentation, such as through documenting the entire product lifecycle and tracking development processes.
  • For risk management, issues like ‘intended use’, ‘continuous learning’, human interventions, training models and cybersecurity threats must all be comprehensively addressed, with models made as simple as possible.
  • Externally validating data and being clear about the intended use of AI helps assure safety and facilitate regulation.
  • A commitment to data quality, such as through rigorously evaluating systems pre-release, is vital to ensuring systems do not amplify biases and errors.
  • The challenges posed by important, complex regulations – such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in the United States of America – are addressed with an emphasis on understanding the scope of jurisdiction and consent requirements, in service of privacy and data protection.
  • Fostering collaboration between regulatory bodies, patients, healthcare professionals, industry representatives, and government partners, can help ensure products and services stay compliant with regulation throughout their lifecycles.
From https://www.who.int/news/item/19-10-2023-who-outlines-considerations-for-regulation-of-artificial-intelligence-for-health

The 61 page document, “Regulatory considerations on artificial intelligence for health,” is available via https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/373421.

If You’re on the Biometric Digital Identity Prism, Enlighten Your Prospects

In marketing, move quickly.

On Saturday, September 30, FindBiometrics and Acuity Market Intelligence released their joint document on the Biometric Digital Identity Prism.

From https://findbiometrics.com/prism/ as of 9/30/2023.

For those who don’t know, the Prism presents an organized view of all of the digital identity companies—or at least the ones that FindBiometrics and Acuity Market Intelligence knew about. In the last few days, they were literally beggin’ to give companies a last chance for inclusion.

On Monday, I began to see a trickle of companies that talked about their place on the Prism, including iProov and Trustmatic.

But many companies remained silent. They have the right to do so, but it’s mystifying.

Why were they quiet?

What if they knew they had to say something…but they didn’t have someone to help them craft a statement?

Do you need to enlighten your prospects?

If you need help making your statement to your prospects and customers, perhaps Bredemarket can assist.

I’ve been in the industry for 29 years, and remember when the “Big 3” were a (mostly) different Big 3.

If the biometric content marketing expert can help you with identity blog post writing (or identity LinkedIn article writing or whatever), contact me and we can work together to position your company.

  • Book a meeting with me at calendly.com/bredemarket. Be sure to fill out the information form so I can best help you.