Nova Scotia Power says stolen data has been published
The cyber incident reported by Nova Scotia Power last month is a ransomware attack. A statement from the utility said that hackers who stole data from its systems have published it. Gareth Hampshire has the story
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
42 minutes ago
- CBC
Scotiabank holds customer responsible for almost $20K in credit card fraud
Social Sharing Jordon Judge's cellphone rang as he sat in his local Vancouver coffee shop last October — caller ID said the person was from Scotiabank. He had no idea it was actually a fraudster who had manipulated the call display, a practice known as phone call "spoofing." The fraudster said he was calling to flag two suspicious charges that were coming through on Judge's Scotiabank Visa card. Judge said he hadn't approved those charges and the caller said they would be blocked. But two days later, Judge spotted two large charges on his credit card statement, totalling almost $20,000. "Those were not my charges," he told Go Public. "So it was definitely astonishment." Got a story you want investigated? Contact Erica and the Go Public team at gopublic@ It was the beginning of a long and frustrating process, during which Scotiabank continued to insist he was liable for the fraudulent charges. Credit card fraud is a growing problem. The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre doesn't track how much money people lose to it, but says that over the past three years, an increasing portion of identity fraud cases have involved compromised credit cards. WATCH | On the hook for $20K: Bank blames customer for $20K in credit card fraud | Go Public 5 hours ago Duration 2:09 The Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments says complaints related to fraud are the number one issue it deals with, and only e-transfers have more fraud complaints than credit cards. Under federal law, a person's maximum liability for unauthorized credit card transactions is generally capped at $50 unless the bank can prove the customer was grossly negligent in protecting their card. A cybersecurity expert says increasing fraud and the rise in complex technology means financial institutions should be conducting thorough investigations and providing clear evidence when holding customers liable. "All that the bank has done is accuse [Judge] of either negligence or malice," said Claudiu Popa, who has 35 years' experience in cybersecurity and wrote The Canadian Cyberfraud Handbook. "The bank has to prove that the customer is the one who perpetrated this quite significant and sophisticated fraud." Scotiabank declined an interview request, did not answer any written questions and instead sent a brief statement, reminding customers to safeguard their personal information. What happened The fraudster who called Judge asked for his birth date and mother's maiden name, which Judge shared. But then the fraudster asked him to share a "one-time passcode" — a type of two-step verification — that was texted to his phone. Judge says he refused to do that, because the message also told him not to share the code with anyone, and said that no one from Scotiabank would ever ask for it. The fraudster claimed that he stopped the charges from going through and hung up. But two days later, Judge discovered a charge for $17,900 to Anglia Ruskin University in the U.K. on his statement, and a second for $1,800, supposedly paid to someone by the name of Paula S. Taylor. "I wasn't worried at the time because I knew those weren't my charges," said Judge. "I thought I couldn't be held accountable for it." No transparency Judge filed a request for compensation with Scotiabank, which sent him a letter a few weeks later, saying the bank had "examined all relevant documentation" and concluded that he was responsible for the charges. The letter did not outline what evidence had been reviewed and did not explain why the bank concluded he should be on the hook for almost $20,000 — plus the growing interest. "When people sign up for credit cards, they're under the assumption that if they get scammed, they're not liable for the purchases made on their credit card," said Judge. "Apparently that's not the case." He appealed, and a second letter — from Scotiabank's Escalated Customer Concerns Office (ECCO) — also found Judge responsible, stating that a one-time passcode was used for the university charge, calling it "a feature that has a proven track record in mitigating fraudulent and nefarious activities". The ECCO letter said that because the code was sent to Judge's phone, it "indicates" that the code was disclosed. Judge appealed that decision, but Scotiabank's Customer Complaints Appeals Office also claimed in a letter that evidence "suggests" Judge revealed a one-time passcode. "Evidence that may 'suggest' something isn't evidence of a fact," said Geoff White, executive director of the Public Interest Advocacy Centre. "One would like to see more in terms of actual evidence demonstrating that the customer was negligent — rather than simply an assertion." White also said the onus shouldn't be on individuals to prove they are innocent of a crime. "The onus is in fact on institutions to take care of their systems," said White. "Make sure that their processes are secure." Popa, the cybersecurity expert, took a look at Scotiabank's correspondence and says the financial institution didn't provide evidence of "the most basic investigation," which would include reviewing a log of activities that would be time-stamped — such as showing when an individual received the one-time passcode and when it was entered into a web interface. "This was never provided," said Popa. "Nor was there an indication that this kind of log was inspected." Contrary to Scotia's insistence that a one-time passcode is a proven fraud deterrent, Popa says a code sent via email or SMS is vulnerable to "a number of different types of compromises" and is less safe than using an authenticator app. Cellphones can be hacked using malware or spyware and SIM cards can be hijacked — allowing fraudsters to intercept text messages. The Canadian Anti-Fraud Centre also told Go Public that it recommends people use an authenticator app when possible. "Unlike SMS/text messages or email messages, authenticator apps generate time-sensitive passcodes that are not vulnerable to SIM swapping or potential text message and email interception," wrote CAFC spokesperson Jeff Horncastle. The Quebec-based advocacy group Option consommateurs has been calling on the federal government to strengthen protections for banking customers in cases of fraud. In a proposal to MPs earlier this year, the organization said the Bank Act should require transparency when a bank investigates, and clarify that the burden of proving the customer was highly negligent rests on the bank. Judge gets his money back Go Public contacted Anglia Ruskin University to ask about the charge on Judge's credit card. A representative said Scotiabank never contacted the university — another disappointment to Popa. "Why would you not contact an organization that you know exists?" asked Popa. "They have a duty to investigate and to protect their customers." After Go Public made several inquiries with the university, it said it conducted an investigation and reimbursed Judge. A spokesperson said it could not elaborate on its findings, such as whether the money was used to pay for someone's tuition. Go Public also asked Scotiabank several times what evidence it had to hold its customer responsible for the fraudulent charges. Although the bank did not reply, it recently credited Judge's bank account — covering the outstanding $1,800 paid to "Paula S. Taylor" and the interest that had accrued on both charges. Judge says no one from Scotiabank contacted him to explain the about-face. "I do think it's ridiculous that it took the media to get involved until they decided they would even act as if they cared," said Judge. Previously, Scotiabank had offered Judge $200 as a "goodwill gesture," but said he would have to acknowledge his claim was resolved and drop any further action. Judge declined. Although he has been fully compensated, Judge had to push for almost eight months, and is still left without any answers about why Scotiabank insisted for so long that he was responsible for the fraud. "My biggest concern is that there are people in his situation … who may not have the ability to pressure their financial institution to be more transparent or to recognize the fact that they might not be guilty," said Popa, the cybersecurity expert. "People are out there who are simply being silently victimized."
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Hospital alleges its floors aren't flat, files $100M lawsuit against builder
Humber River Health is suing the consortium contracted to build and maintain its Toronto hospital for $100 million, alleging that negligent design and construction is creating health and safety problems for patients and staff. The lawsuit, filed in early April, alleges that a "sizable portion" of the hospital's floors are not level or flat and that some of the flooring itself is deteriorating. "Floor levelness is a critical operational and safety issue," reads Humber River Health's claim, filed in Ontario Superior Court. "Non-level floors make it difficult for staff to move equipment, supplies, food, and patients on wheeled transportation devices. Often, wheeled carts have to be placed behind rubber stoppers to prevent the carts from sliding out of position." The statement of claim goes on to say that the floor conditions "have led, and will continue to lead, to health and safety issues" for patients and staff. It also says that durability problems with the floors are having a major operational impact as "critical rooms" and areas of the hospital have been unavailable because of maintenance. Touted as North America's first fully digital hospital, construction on Humber River Hospital began in 2011 and it opened in October 2015. The facility was built through a public-private partnership with Plenary Health Care Partnerships. The Ontario government contracted Plenary to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the hospital for 30 years. WATCH | Why this hospital is suing the consortium that built it: Toronto hospital sues builder for $100M claiming uneven floors create safety issues 19 minutes ago Duration 2:15 In a statement, Humber River Health spokesperson Joe Gorman said the hospital is "implementing all necessary measures to ensure the best experience for our patients, staff and community" while it works to resolve these problems. Plenary Health Care Partnerships hasn't filed a statement of defence yet. Due to contractual obligations, the consortium told CBC Toronto it couldn't comment. Not the first lawsuit The floor lawsuit is the latest in a series of claims filed in the last couple of years concerning alleged issues with the design and construction of the northwest Toronto hospital. Since 2023, four other lawsuits totalling at least $10.4 million have been filed by Plenary Health Care Partnerships against the contractor and various subcontractors hired to design and build the hospital. The claims are looking for compensation for property damage from flooding caused by valve and breaker leaks and for design flaws with its domestic water system, which affected hot and cold water in patient rooms within the first year the hospital opened, according to the court filings. The leaks included one above the ceiling of the hospital's cancer care unit. The contractor and subcontractors have filed statements of defence in some of those lawsuits. They deny the allegations and any liability claimed by the consortium. Two of the lawsuits concerning leaks and issues with the water system have spawned third-party claims from the subcontractors being sued claiming another third-party subcontractor should be held liable in their place if the courts determine damages are warranted, which they deny. CBC Toronto contacted Ontario's Ministry of Health for comment on whether it is concerned about these alleged construction and design issues with a public hospital that is just 10 years old and on the impact the problems are having on hospital operations and patient care.
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Making sense of some of the evidence in the Hockey Canada sexual assault trial
Social Sharing WARNING: This article references sexual assault and may affect those who have experienced sexual violence or know someone impacted by it. The sexual assault trial of five players who were on Canada's 2018 world junior hockey team isn't just being followed closely in sports circles and by advocates against gender-based violence. The legal community is also watching the proceedings, where there have been many dramatic developments since they began in late April in London, Ont. The accused men — who all at one time had NHL careers — are Cal Foote, Dillon Dubé, Alex Formenton, Carter Hart and Michael McLeod. All have pleaded not guilty. The charges stem from allegations by the complainant, E.M., and their time at a London hotel in June 2018 following a Hockey Canada gala to celebrate the hockey team's world title. CBC News spoke to three lawyers who are not involved in the case but are closely watching it. "Every episode of this trial is jam packed with legal drama," said Nick Cake, a London-based criminal lawyer and former Crown. Since the trial began, there has been a mistrial, followed four weeks later by a second jury being discharged as the case shifted to being heard by Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia alone. There have also been numerous evidentiary applications and arguments in voir dires, or trials within a trial. "For me, it's really a love of the law. I think there are very interesting issues that have arisen," said London-based criminal defence lawyer Sam Puchala, who frequently slips into the courtroom to watch the world junior proceedings. "These are some of our colleagues in the defence bar who are very notorious. They have very good techniques, and so it's just been a pleasure to watch but also learn. So I'm learning things every day in this trial as well." Keeping on top of the proceedings from Vancouver, Sarah Leamon, a defence lawyer and prosecutor, says, "It's a very unusual trial given that we have five different co-accused all on trial. "Not only that, but there's also a great deal of interest given the fact that this is a Hockey Canada issue," Leamon said. (Hockey Canada hosted the London gala for the world junior team in 2018, and has also faced criticism over eventually settling a civil lawsuit by the complainant, whose identity is protected under a standard publication ban. During this trial, defence counsel for the accused have also noted Hockey Canada settled the suit without communicating with or seeking the consent of the players.) There has also been a preponderance of evidence. The exhibits shown in court include surveillance footage from a bar, photos of a hotel room, the phones of hockey players, text messages and even a pair of stilettos. In one memorable moment during cross-examination, Julianna Greenspan, who represents Foote, hoisted a pair of stilettos into the air. They were, she said, the same make as the ones worn by E.M. Greenspan's questioning revealed the shoes — with long, thin high heels — were difficult to put on, and the lawyer used them as part of her arguments that E.M. never actually was wearing them when she tried to leave the room. Greenspan suggested it was because she never intended to leave. A photo of E.M.'s shoes was also entered into evidence. Here are more thoughts from Cake, Puchala and Leamon, focusing on how some of the evidence/exhibits may play into the trial. The '3 way' text One of the first exhibits the Crown put forward was a screenshot of a text from McLeod that timestamped 2:10 a.m. on June 19, 2018. Sent after McLeod and E.M. left Jack's bar and had sex in Room 209 at the Delta hotel (court heard the first time they had sex was consensual), the text appears to invite teammates to his room for a "3 way." " Without any context, it's just one small piece of the puzzle," Cake says of that text. "I don't think that this particular piece of evidence does a whole heck of a lot because all it does is explain what we already know, that there were a lot of men in that room with one woman and the allegations are that something happened." Leaman said it needs to be viewed more as narrative evidence — which is evidence that helps tell the story. "We know that this message was sent, and we know who sent it, what time they sent it. But again, the context, as [Cake] has pointed out, it needs to be filled in." Puchala said the message helps support the Crown's narrative of how the night unfolded. "It really is just something that leads to how it begins in a concrete way so that you know there can't be any sort of denial about this message being sent." Puchala said the text inviting players to the room for a "3 way" doesn't really serve as evidence of consent or lack thereof even if E.M. consented to the text being sent. "That's not what her evidence is, that she wanted a three-way, but this is really suggesting something that isn't even what ends up happening in terms of the allegations." The 'consent videos' The trial also saw two videos of E.M. that were taken from McLeod's phone. One video is timestamped 3:25 a.m. In it, McLeod is heard saying: "You're OK with this?" E.M. responds: "I'm OK." The next video is timestamped 4:26 a.m. A male voice is heard saying: "It was all consensual?" E.M. is heard replying: "It was all consensual. Are you recording me? K, good. You are so paranoid. Holy. I enjoyed it. It was fine. I'm so sober — that's why I can't do this right now." " I've had a lot of members of the public ask me, why is it that we're even coming to a trial if there are videos that confirm her consent?" Puchala said. "I know lawyers have spoken up about this before, that just because a video is recorded of you saying that you were fine with something that happened, doesn't mean that you are consenting at the time of the act." Puchala has watched the videos several times in court. One thing she says Carroccia will have to take into account is E.M.'s demeanour, particularly in the second video. "Some could view that as very skittish, right? That she wants to get out of there. So I think it really comes down to the analysis," Puchala said. In the first video, E.M. appears to be wiping her eyes. She has testified to weeping at times in the night. "This will be up to Justice Carroccia now that she is the trier of fact. She is going to rewatch that video many, many times, and that is going to be for her to determine in weighing the complainant's credibility and reliability." Leaman suggests the fact the videos even exist raises questions useful to the Crown. " Why would somebody feel the need to get a consent video after they've engaged in what they believe to be consensual sexual activity with an individual?" Because, under Canadian law, consent has to occur at the time of the sexual activity, Leaman said she would find defending the videos problematic. "We could make the argument, of course, that this is consent and it was valid consent, and this is documenting the valid consent that was obtained at the time. It just seems unusual." Cake pushed back on Leaman's assessment. "If you're wearing a world juniors championship ring, you're on the verge of a 10-year, $12.5-million contract to play in the professional hockey association that dominates North America, and you've just engaged in sexual activity," Cake said. 'Isn't there a part of you that might think, 'You know what, I want to protect myself from this exact situation or from a potential civil lawsuit. And so I'm going to grab this video.' That's potentially one of the ways that I see it." Texting between McLeod and E.M. McLeod found E.M. on Instagram a day after the alleged assaults and the two started texting. "I think text messages are always useful in terms of framing the evidence that the parties give," Puchala said. She sees several different ways the Crown and the defence teams could interpret the exchange. "When E.M. says, 'I was really drunk, didn't feel good about it at all after,' I think the word 'after' is interesting because of course not feeling good, or feeling shame or disgust even after an otherwise consensual encounter does not amount of sexual assault," Puchala said. "When she says, 'But I'm not trying to get anyone in trouble,' that could be true, even if there's a sexual assault. So, even if she was not consenting, and lots of sexual assault victims do not want accused persons to get into trouble." Puchala said the texts corroborate E.M.'s testimony that the initial encounter with McLeod was consensual and "'it was everyone else after that I wasn't expecting." "So, again, what exactly was it that you were not expecting?" Puchala said, adding that "needs to be a determination from Justice Carroccia." Puchala then zeroed in on E.M.'s line "just felt like I was being made fun of and taken advantage of." "Being 'made fun of' is not a crime," Puchala said. "But if it's really being taken advantage of, 'I did not consent to these other men coming into the room and engaging in the behaviours that they did,' that's a whole other story." Leaman zeroed in on the text in which E.M. tells McLeod she "didn't feel good about it at all after." "You can have buyer's remorse, to put it that way, after a sexual encounter that was consensual at the time, but now you look back and you think, 'Oh, I really wish I hadn't done that,'" Leaman said. "That does not vitiate the consent that was given at the time. And this may also speak to the defence that I expect these young men will likely mount." WATCH | WARNING: This video contains graphic content: Crown questions complainant E.M.: E.M. grilled again at Hockey Canada trial as cross-examination wraps 19 days ago Duration 1:54 WARNING: Video contains disturbing details | The Hockey Canada trial complainant, known only as E.M., was again questioned by the defence over her drinking and her account of her alleged sexual assaults, as the defence wrapped seven gruelling days of cross-examination at the sexual assault trial of five former junior hockey players. Leaman was also struck by the manner in which McLeod texted E.M. "He's being very, I think, you know, firm in instructing her to straighten things out right now," Leamon said. " When you look at what MacLeod's doing here, I think that he's incredibly pushy," Cake said. "I mean, the texts started at 10:51 in the morning. And they go, sure, until 7:40. "You can see that E.M. is like, 'Hey, I can't talk right now, I'm at work. I'm sorry. I'm unavailable.' And he's like, 'Are you going to fix this? Are you going to do it today? What are you gonna say to the police?'" Cake said. "I think that these text messages are a fantastic way to frame what obviously the Crown would be pushing as the power dynamic inside that hotel room." "Mr. McLeod comes across as somebody who is sophisticated enough to know he's in some trouble and he's trying to get himself out of it," Leaman said of the text exchange. "And he might just be papering this conversation with things that may assist him later. So that's also a possibility." Puchala said Carroccia will have to view these messages within the context of all the other evidence. "He [McLeod] ends it off with, 'I appreciate you telling the truth. Thank you all the best.' So is it, as [Leamon] was saying, to try to paper the file to make it look a certain way or is it genuinely, 'Oh phew we agree … that it was a mistake.'" The players' group chat On June 26, 2018, as they learned Hockey Canada was starting an investigation, the players who were in Room 209 that night began a group chat. The Crown has suggested there was collusion, but McLeod tells other players in the group chat that they need to tell the truth. "When I read through this group chat — it's just so difficult to determine what's going on here," Leaman said. "Are these guys getting together to collude, to create a narrative that assists them because they know they've done something that's questionable, if not just wrong? Or is this a situation where they're concerned about something that was consensual and they felt it was consensual at the time, but now they're looking back and they're a little bit worried?" Puchala said: "You have young men here that are sort of trying to grapple with what's going on and it doesn't necessarily seem like they really think that it's going to be sort of a criminal affair. "It's really, I think they're nervous about dealing with their families and with Hockey Canada, so in these messages, there's a lot a lot going on. "It has to be analyzed," said Puchala, who noted Carroccia has to think about these exchanges without having heard from many of the players who were in the group chat. "If there's uncertainty about something, like, it can look bad," Puchala said, but pointed out the judge will apply a standard of reasonable doubt that is very high. "Any sort of question about that lack of certainty usually favours the defence."
