accenture contractor removed
| |

Accenture contractor removed from FBI following damaging data breach, sources say

WASHINGTON, USA – The Federal Bureau of Investigation removed an Accenture contractor on Monday, October 5, over their role in a damaging data breach that exposed sensitive personal details of thousands of bureau employees, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters.

The development comes as the FBI is still trying to ascertain the ramifications of the breach, which some former bureau officials have described as a major blow to the organization’s operational security.

In a statement to Reuters, a senior FBI official confirmed that an unidentified contractor had failed to properly update — or patch — the system they were responsible for.

“To date, our review has determined that the incident occurred as the result of a security failure of a platform managed by a third-party organization — after a contractor failed to implement a security patch explicitly issued to secure the platform,” FBI cyber chief Brett Leatherman said in the statement. “As such, the FBI has removed the contractor and taken all necessary steps to both mitigate any further risk and protect our workforce.”

The FBI did not identify the platform or third-party organization, but the two sources familiar with the matter said the platform was Oracle’s PeopleSoft, a human resources platform that the hacking group ShinyHunters said it exploited to break into the FBI’s job site last month.

Oracle did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

The sources also said the third-party organization was Accenture. Reuters could not immediately identify the specific contractor or determine their current employment status.

In a statement, Accenture said it was “proud to support the mission of the FBI and will continue to do so.” It did not answer questions about the contractor or their alleged failure to patch.

Critical patches

In June, Google raised the alarm over a ShinyHunters-linked hack-and-extort campaign aimed at organizations using PeopleSoft ‌software. The same day, Oracle issued a security alert identifying a weakness in PeopleSoft and offering security fixes.

Both companies urged organizations running PeopleSoft to “apply all Critical Patch Updates, Critical Security Patch Updates and Security Alerts without delay.”

Swift patching of vulnerable software is considered a key part of defending networks and devices against hackers, but the process can be laborious and difficult, particularly with enterprise software that serves large numbers of people.

Reuters has not been able to determine whether or when those responsible for securing the FBI’s job site followed those recommendations, but ShinyHunters credited a vulnerability in PeopleSoft for facilitating its intrusion.

The breach has triggered concern across the FBI and the wider intelligence community, exposing sensitive personal information, including granular descriptions of named employees’ counterintelligence jobs, street addresses of human intelligence operatives, and medical and psychiatric records of bureau workers.

Last week, a key ShinyHunters suspect was detained in Jordan, Reuters reported. Sources told Reuters the alleged hacker was cooperating, a development that may help the bureau limit — or at the very least understand — the scope of the damage.

Similar Posts

  • | | | |

    CICC gives Discord, Reddit 24-hour ultimatum to establish PH presence

    (1st UPDATED) The CICC demands Discord and Reddit ‘immediately designate, from receipt of the letters, a resident agent or local representative who can facilitate Philippine jurisdiction and enhance coordination and cooperation with Philippine authorities’

  • | | |

    The rise of Gen Z activism in India: A digital era…

    India’s younger generation is increasingly shaping public debate through digital platforms, demonstrating how social media has become a powerful tool for civic engagement and political participation. Unlike previous generations that relied heavily on traditional media or established political organizations, many members of Generation Z use platforms such as X, Instagram, and YouTube to share information, organize campaigns, and amplify public concerns. The growing influence of digital activism reflects a broader global trend. Young people are more connected than ever before, enabling them to discuss social, educational, economic, and political issues in real time. Social media allows ideas to spread rapidly, encourages public participation, and provides a space where diverse opinions can be expressed. As a result, youth-led campaigns can attract national and even international attention within a short period. Peaceful civic participation remains one of the most effective ways for citizens to express their views. When protests and public campaigns remain non-violent and focused on dialogue, they can encourage discussions between governments, institutions, and the public. Digital platforms complement these efforts by helping organizers communicate with supporters, share updates, and raise awareness about issues that affect young people. At the same time, digital activism also presents challenges. Information shared online may not always be accurate, and misinformation can spread quickly if claims are not verified. For this reason, responsible use of social media is essential. Participants, journalists, and readers alike should rely on credible sources, verify facts, and encourage respectful discussion rather than polarization. The increasing involvement of Gen Z in public affairs highlights the importance of youth voices in a democratic society. Young citizens often bring fresh perspectives on education, employment, governance, and social justice. Their participation can contribute to meaningful conversations about policy and accountability while encouraging greater civic engagement among their peers. As digital technology continues to evolve, the relationship between social media and public participation is likely to become even stronger. Governments, civil society organizations, and educational institutions will need to adapt to this changing landscape by promoting digital literacy, transparency, and constructive dialogue. Regardless of political viewpoints, the rise of digitally connected youth demonstrates that technology is transforming how citizens engage with public issues, making informed participation and responsible communication more important than ever.

  • | |

    Capital one defends closure of Trump organization accounts

    Capital One Financial has responded to a lawsuit filed over its decision to close bank accounts linked to the Trump Organization, arguing that the move was based on internal anti-money laundering reviews rather than political or ideological motivations. The bank, in a legal filing submitted on Friday, stated that it closed the accounts following a detailed assessment conducted by its anti-money laundering (AML) specialists. The company argued that the decision was made after months of analysis and was consistent with its internal policies as well as regulatory requirements. The filing represents the first time a major bank has publicly connected concerns related to money laundering risks with its decision to end a banking relationship involving the Trump family business. However, Capital One clarified that it has never accused the Trump Organization of committing illegal money laundering activities. Instead, the bank said that the account closures were the result of routine compliance procedures. Capital One argued that documents presented in the case, along with the plaintiffs’ own claims, demonstrate that the decision was related to AML concerns rather than any attempt to discriminate against the company because of political beliefs. The dispute began after Capital One informed the Trump Organization in March 2021 that it planned to close more than 300 accounts associated with businesses connected to former U.S. President Donald Trump. The Trump Organization and Eric Trump, Trump’s son, later filed a lawsuit in March 2025 in a Florida federal court, claiming that the bank had unfairly “debanked” them because of political pressure and what they described as the company’s “woke” policies. The lawsuit alleged that Capital One’s decision was influenced by the political environment following the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. The plaintiffs argued that the bank wanted to distance itself from Trump and his supporters during a period of intense public and political scrutiny. A federal court in Miami has already dismissed two versions of the complaint but allowed the plaintiffs opportunities to revise and submit updated claims. Capital One argued in its latest filing that the amended complaint continues to contain the same weaknesses as earlier versions and fails to establish evidence of unlawful discrimination. The bank accused the Trump Organization of presenting selective information and relying on statements taken out of context. Capital One maintained that the allegations of political motivation were unsupported and ignored the broader circumstances behind the account closures. According to the bank’s filing, certain transaction patterns identified during its review matched types of activities that federal banking authorities commonly recognize as requiring additional examination. Capital One said its AML team followed established procedures before reaching the decision to terminate the accounts. The legal battle comes during a broader political debate in the United States over the issue of “debanking,” with some conservatives accusing financial institutions of unfairly targeting individuals and organizations because of their political views. During his second presidential term, Trump’s administration has criticized such practices and taken steps aimed at preventing what it describes as discriminatory banking decisions. The controversy has also involved other major financial institutions. Trump previously filed a lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase, making similar allegations regarding political discrimination. During his first term in office, Trump also took legal action against Capital One and Deutsche Bank in an effort to prevent the release of his financial records to Congress. The case continues to highlight the growing tension between banking compliance practices, political concerns, and the debate over whether financial institutions should have broader restrictions on ending relationships with controversial clients.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *