Security

CSO

FTC accuses DNA testing company of lying about dumping samples

1Health must strengthen protections for genetic information as part of settlement


The Federal Trade Commission has alleged that genetic testing firm 1Health.io, also known as Vitagene, deceived people when it said it would dispose of their physical DNA sample as well as their collected health data.

To make matters worse, the FTC also alleged in a consent order made public last week that the company didn't secure the information properly, and further, that it changed its privacy policy retroactively without properly notifying or getting consent from people whose data the company had already collected – people who had signed a different, earlier version of the policy.

Under the proposed settlement, Vitagene/1Health.io will have to sharpen its data protection practices and put into place procedures to keep them sharp, as well as a pay a fine. The company has neither admitted nor denied any of the allegations.

"Companies that try to change the rules of the game by re-writing their privacy policy are on notice," said Samuel Levine, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "The FTC Act prohibits companies from unilaterally applying material privacy policy changes to previously collected data."

The company asks users to spit into a tube and uses the customer's genetic data, in combination with a health quiz, to check if a user has, or may soon have, certain health conditions. After a user buys a product package from that costs between $29 and $259, the company gives them a report about their health, wellness, and ancestry.

According to the order [PDF], the company, which the FTC said also trades as Vitagene, "identifies salient genotype data, pertinent questionnaire answers, and, based on the genotype data and questionnaire answers, the level of risk for having or developing certain health conditions, such as high LDL cholesterol, high triglycerides, obesity, or blood clots."

The document, which proposes a settlement of $75,000 and to extract a promise from the company to police its data protection, claims that Vitagene did not securely store consumers' health reports and raw genotype data.

100 points to whoever guesses what comes next. The order goes on to claim it was all bunged in Amazon S3 buckets, and that the containers' access controls were conspicuous by their absence.

In all fairness, misconfigurations of Amazon's cloud buckets are common, even after AWS introduced a new set of controls in 2018 to set "blanket policies" blocking public access to cloud storage from being enabled that you can apply to your S3 buckets via access control lists.

Bloomberg reported on the leak back in 2019, saying the company had left people's health records publicly accessible for years.

Vitagene told the newswire at the time that the files dated from when the company was in beta testing and affected a small fraction of its customer base.

The FTC's recent order goes on to detail another count from the proposed complaint alleging Vitagene posted revised privacy policies on its websites in April and December 2020 that described "materially expanded practices for the company's sharing of consumers' sensitive health and genetic information with third parties." According to the commission, this included the information of consumers who purchased products and services from the company before April 2020 — "without taking any additional steps to notify consumers or obtain consumers' consent."

The FTC said the proposed order contained "provisions" to address Vitagene's conduct and prevent it from "engaging in the same or similar acts or practices in the future."

Mehdi Maghsoodnia, CEO of 1Health, told The Register in a statement: "In July 2019, we were for the first alerted to the fact that a small number of customer files had been inadvertently stored in a publicly accessible location. There is no evidence these customer files were improperly accessed.

"In response, the FTC launched an investigation which has now dragged on for nearly four years. This is a case of extraordinary government overreach. Ultimately, we disagree with many of the FTC's conclusions. But we look forward to finally putting this matter behind us." ®

Send us news
4 Comments

AWS exec: 'Our understanding of open source has started to change'

Apache Foundation president David Nalley on Amazon Linux 2023, Free software, and more

AWS accuses Microsoft of clipping customers' cloud freedoms

World's biggest off-prem service slinger submits comments to UK cloud inquiry, mostly has Redmond HQ's rival in its sights

The AI everything show continues at AWS: Generate SQL from text, vector search, and more

Invisible watermarks on AI-generated images? Sure. But major tools in the stack matter most

AWS unveils core-packed Graviton4 and beefier Trainium accelerators for AI

Also hedging its bets with a healthy dose of Nvidia chips too

Senate bill aims to stop Uncle Sam using facial recognition at airports

Legislation would eliminate TSA permission to use the tech, require database purge in 90 days

AWS plays with Fire TV Cube, turns it into a thin client for cloudy desktops

$195 a pop, delivered, pre-provisioned ready to stream desktops or apps

Rackspace runs short of Cloud Files storage in LON region

Rackspace? More like Lackspace as customers face upload and delete problems

Now AWS gets a ChatGPT-style Copilot: Amazon Q to be your cloud chat assistant

Anthropic CEO also rocks up on stage for reasons

You're so worried about AWS reliability, the cloud giant now lets you simulate major outages

Fake it 'til you break it, for a whole availability zone or WAN FAIL

Watchdog claims retaliation from military after questioning cushy federal IT contracts

IT-AAC had a hand in scrutinizing JEDI, now faces probe for challenging $300M+ single-source deals

AWS previews AppFabric for productivity – pitched as AI-powered glue between apps

Park user data in Amazon's servers for ML-generated insights and actions – yea or nay for you?

AWS rakes in half a billion pounds from UK Home Office

Someone has to top up the Bezos rocket fund, like British taxpayers