Irish Police Arrest Teen in Connection to TalkTalk Cyberattack

Add Your Comments

A 15-year-old boy has been arrested on Monday in connection to Wednesday’s TalkTalk cyberattack. The UK telecom informed customers last week that its website was compromised and that customers’ bank account numbers may have been accessed.

The teenager was arrested in Northern Ireland on suspicion of offences under the Computer Misuse Act by officers from the Police Service of Northern Ireland, working with the Metropolitan police’s cybercrime unit, according to a report by The Guardian.

Earlier this year, thousands of TalkTalk customers were targeted by a scam that tried to trick individuals into handing over sensitive information and downloading malware after their personal details were compromised through a security breach at a third-party vendor.

“TalkTalk can confirm that we have been informed by the Metropolitan Police of the arrest of a suspect in connection with the cyber attack on our website on 21st October 2015,” TalkTalk said in a notice about the breach on its website. “We know this has been a worrying time for customers and we are grateful for the swift response and hard work of the Police. We will continue to assist in the ongoing investigation.”

While the investigation is still ongoing, TalkTalk warned customers that names, addresses, dates of birth, email addresses, telephone numbers, TalkTalk account information and bank details could have been accessed. There is also a chance that previous TalkTalk’s customer details may have been compromised.

TalkTalk My Account passwords were not accessed, the company said.

In a notice to customers about the cyberattack, TalkTalk said it will provide customers with 12 months’ free credit monitoring from credit agency Noddle.

Shares in the company fell 12 percent on Monday, and it is believed that TalkTalk will face further financial strain as it could face legal claims in the millions of pounds from fraud victims, and could face a maximum fine of £500,000 should it be in violation of the Data Protection Act.

Add Your Comments

  • (will not be published)