Russians behind JPMorgan cyberattack: ‘It scared the pants off many people’ – By Douglas Ernst – The Washington Times – Saturday, October 4, 2014

Russian president Vladimir Putin. (Associated Press) ** FILE **
Russian president Vladimir Putin. (Associated Press) ** FILE ** more >
The July cyberattack on JPMorgan Chase & Co. that compromised the names, addresses, phone numbers and contact information of over 83 million people are believed to have originated in Russia with at least some level of state approval.

“It could be in retaliation for the sanctions” placed on Russia, one senior official briefed on the intelligence told The New York Times on Saturday. “But it could be mixed motives — to steal if they can, or to sell whatever information they could glean.”

JPMorgan Chase has worked with the Treasury, the Secret Service and intelligence agencies since the attack, which did not completely shut out the attackers until August, the paper reported. More than 90 servers were accessed and over 7 million small businesses were compromised.

“It was a huge surprise that they were able to compromise a huge bank like JPMorgan,” said Al Pascual, a security analyst with Javelin Strategy and Research, told the Times. “It scared the pants off many people.”

Experts fears that similar attacks in the future could ignite a financial crisis. JPMorgan Chase may be particularly vulnerable: The Times noted that the hackers were able to steal “a list of every application and program deployed on standard JPMorgan computers that hackers can crosscheck with known, or new, vulnerabilities in each system in a search for a backdoor entry.”

JPMorgan Chase has responded to the hacking by disabling compromised accounts and resetting passwords for its employees. The company also notified customers that they would not need to change their passwords or account information, nor would they be held liable for unauthorized transactions, The Associated Press reported Thursday.

Read more:
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

JP Morgan says data breach affected 76 million – By Jessica Chasmar Thursday, October 2, 2014

FILE - This Oct. 15, 2008, file photo, shows the exterior view of JPMorgan Chase offices in San Francisco. In a settlement announced Wednesday, Oct. 16, 2013, JPMorgan Chase & Co., has agreed to pay a $100 million penalty and admitted that it “recklessly” distorted prices during a series of London trades that ultimately cost the bank $6 billion in losses. (AP Photo/Paul Sakuma, File)
FILE – This Oct. 15, 2008, file photo, shows the exterior view of JPMorgan Chase offices in San Francisco. In a settlement announced Wednesday, Oct. 16, 2013, JPMorgan Chase & Co., has agreed to pay a $100 million penalty and … more >
 – The Washington Times – Thursday, October 2, 2014

JPMorgan Chase & Co. said a data breach affected 76 million households and 7 million small businesses, the biggest U.S. bank said Thursday.

Customer names, addresses, phone numbers and e-mail addresses were taken. Internal bank information “relating to such users” also was compromised, the company said, Bloomberg reported.

“There is no evidence that account information for such affected customers — account numbers, passwords, user IDs, dates of birth or Social Security numbers — was compromised during this attack,” the company said.

Read more:
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

US probing cyberattacks on banks – August 28, 2014 1:50AM ET

Security experts say the attack appears ‘far beyond the capability of ordinary criminal hackers,’ according to reportsScreen Shot 2014-08-28 at Aug 28, 2014 3.56

The FBI it is working with the Secret Service to determine the scope of recently reported cyberattacks against several U.S. financial institutions.

“We are working with the United States Secret Service to determine the scope of recently reported cyber attacks against several American financial institutions,” FBI spokesman Joshua Campbell said in a statement late on Wednesday.

He did not name any firms or give further details. A Secret Service spokesman could not be reached for comment.

The New York Times, citing people familiar with the matter, said JPMorgan Chase and at least four other firms were hit this month by coordinated attacks that siphoned off huge amounts of data, including checking and savings account information.

JPMorgan Chase & Co was the victim of a recent cyber attack, according to two people familiar with the incident who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the matter. They declined to elaborate on the severity of the incident, saying JPMorgan was still conducting an investigation to determine what happened. JPMorgan is the largest U.S. bank by assets.

JPMorgan spokesman Brian Marchiony declined comment when asked about the attack.

“Companies of our size unfortunately experience cyber attacks nearly every day. We have multiple, layers of defense to counteract any threats and constantly monitor fraud levels,” he said in a statement.

Bloomberg first reported the cyberattacks, saying on Wednesday that the FBI is investigating an incident in which Russian hackers attacked the U.S financial system this month in possible retaliation against U.S. government-sponsored sanctions aimed at Russia.

The attack, Bloomberg said, led to the loss of sensitive data. Bloomberg cited security experts saying that the attack appeared “far beyond the capability of ordinary criminal hackers.”

According to people familiar with the probe who were cited by Bloomberg, investigators have determined that the attacks were routed through computers in Latin America and other regions via servers used by Russian hackers

The attackers stole large quantities of data, including checking and savings account information, though their motivation is not yet clear, according to the Times report, which said several private security firms have been hired to conduct forensic reviews of infected networks.

Wire services

America’s 10 Most Hated Banks – —By Erika Eichelberger | Tue Jul. 29, 2014 6:00 AM EDT

According to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, these financial institutions draw the most complaints


If you put out a complaint box for customers of US banks and financial firms, you will get hundreds of thousands of complaints. That’s what the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau—which was set up by Elizabeth Warren before she became a US senator—has discovered. And the bank that has drawn the most complaints is Bank of America. Wells Fargo, JPMorgan Chase, and Citibank were other top targets of consumer wrath.

In June 2012, the CFPB launched a consumer help center where Americans can lodge complaints against banks and financial institutions they believe are ripping them off. The information in the center’s data base is public. So you can tell which Wall Street entities provoke the most gripes. Ranked by number of complaints, the top five most reviled institutions are Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Equifax, which is a credit-reporting agency, JPMorgan Chase, and Citibank. Debt collectors, mortgage servicers, and student loan servicing companies also fall within the top 20. As of this weekend, consumers had filed over 265,000 complaints. Bank of America earned 38,833 complaints, Wells Fargo drew 26,055, and JPMorgan Chase was the subject of 20,057. Check it out:

Screen Shot 2014-08-06 at Aug 6, 2014 1.43

These numbers show that bigger is not necessarily better. The number of complaints largely corresponds with the size of the bank. JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo are the largest four US banks by assets. All other banks on the list above are among the 20 largest.

The majority of complaints targeting Bank of America—over 27,500 of them—concern mortgage practices, including foreclosure processing. In 2012, Bank of America, Citi, Chase, Wells Fargo, and Ally Bank—the nation’s five largest mortgage servicers—entered into a $25 billion settlement with 49 states and the federal government over the banks’ use of faulty foreclosure documents. (Bank of America recently agreed to pay a fine of $16.6 million to the Treasury Department to settle allegations that it processed nearly $100,000 in transactions for drug traffickers between 2005 and 2009.)

Article continues:

Jamie Dimon got a raise that conveniently looks like a pay cut – ALEX PAREENE FRIDAY, APR 11, 2014 6:00 PM UTC

Jamie Dimon got a raise that conveniently looks like a pay cut

Jamie Dimon, in his own words, had a “difficult and nerve-wracking” 2013.This is because he is the chairman, president and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, a financial firm that is constantly getting into trouble for doing terrible things.In 2013, the firm spent billions in settlements for various violations of securities laws — and that was them getting off easy. The firm is so inherently rotten that this year Dimon was forced to hire more than 10,000 new employees dedicated solely to attempting to make sure the bank isn’t breaking the law. (This is considered prudent leadership in finance.) The bank has been investigated or fined for money laundering, bribery, energy market manipulation, foreclosure fraud and much, much more. But not only has Dimon managed to keep his job, he was actually given a raise last year.

The raise, though, was not reported as a raise by some outlets. The regulatory filing issued by JPMorgan says Dimon’s 2013 compensation totaled $20 million, making him the best-paid bank CEO in New York. But the Associated Press, and other news outlets, have reported that Dimon made $11.8 million in 2013, which would represent a significant pay cut from 2012, when, because the board was concerned about all that crime and so forth, he was paid half what he had been paid in 2011.

The discrepancy is because JPMorgan is (sensibly) counting everything it gave Dimon as compensation. For some reason, much of Dimon’s 2013 bonuses were in the form of restricted shares. But the SEC doesn’t count restricted shares as compensation until they vest. The shares are a delayed payment, basically, which allows the bank’s board of directors to pay Dimon a generous fortune while making it appear that they’re merely paying him a small fortune. And that’s how Dimon got a raise that could also be reported as a pay cut.

The board is probably not rushing to correct the AP for reporting that Dimon took a haircut. It’s good, in this regulatory environment, to appear contrite, especially when you keep committing crimes all the time. But to ensure that “the markets” understand that the board is very, very confident in the man who has steered JPMorgan through (and into) these difficult times, the board wanted to be clear that Dimon is sticking around and getting paid, once again, like the invaluable asset that they have convinced themselves that he is.

Of course, even paying Dimon a “mere” $11.8 million is completely bonkers, considering that the vast majority of the things that JPMorgan is rewarding him for overcoming happened under his watch. That’s exactly why Dimon gets the big bucks, though: He is able to convince people that he is the only man capable of cleaning up the messes that happen while he’s in charge. His genius is in convincing people of his genius. If it weren’t for the fact that JPMorgan Chase’s size and reach makes it a grave threat to the world economy, I’d just laugh at the dumb millionaires getting bamboozled by a slightly cleverer millionaire.

Alex Pareene writes about politics for Salon and is the author of “The Rude Guide to Mitt.” Email him at and follow him on Twitter @pareene

Wall Street Predicts $50 Billion Bill to Settle U.S. Mortgage Suits By JESSICA SILVER-GREENBERG and PETER EAVIS

Tony West, the associate attorney general, helped broker the government's settlement with JPMorgan Chase.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images |Tony West, the associate attorney general, helped broker the government’s settlement with JPMorgan Chase.

Wall Street could pay nearly $50 billion to buy peace from federal authorities who are taking aim at the banks over their role in the mortgage crisis, according to interviews and a confidential analysis of the industry’s potential legal exposure.

Bracing for a potential reckoning, the banks and their outside lawyers are quietly using JPMorgan Chase’s record $13 billion mortgage settlement in November to do the math and determine just how much each bank might have to pay to move beyond the torrent of government mortgage litigation that has dogged them since the financial crisis. Such calculations, people briefed on the matter said, have gained particular urgency among the banks’ board members.

If the settlements materialize, they could yield, according to the analysis, $15 billion in relief for consumers — a mixture of cash payments and other assistance, like reductions in the size of homeowners’ loan payments. A payment of $50 billion, made up of a string of separate deals, would amount to roughly half the total annual profit of large American banks in 2012.

Article Tools

The JPMorgan settlement has stepped up the pressure on other banks to strike their own separate deals in the coming months, some top bank executives say. When the JPMorgan settlement was announced, the Justice Department official who took the lead in brokering the deal, Tony West, said it could offer a model for other financial institutions being investigated in their sales of troubled mortgage investments. The government made JPMorgan a test case, knowing the nation’s largest bank, facing a wide swath of legal woes, was vulnerable. The $13 billion deal has left some on Wall Street worried that the cost of their own deals will now be inflated, the people said.

The government is facing pressure of its own to make the banks pay for their role in the housing crisis, zeroing in on whether the banks duped investors into buying mortgages in the heady days before the financial downturn.

Article continues:

Wall Street fat cats just get fatter – By Paul R. La Monica December 12, 2013: 1:58 PM ET

The big banks on Wall Street and other financial firms are still doing just fine despite new regulation.

The big banks on Wall Street and other financial firms are still doing just fine despite new regulation.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Paul R. La Monica. Other than Time Warner, the parent of CNNMoney, Abbott Laboratories and AbbVie, La Monica does not own positions in any individual stocks.

President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law on July 21, 2010. That was supposed to help prevent big banks and financial firms from doing the things that got them into the mess that ultimately led to the 2008 financial crisis.

Guess what? Not much has changed. In fact, the so-called “fat cat bankers” that Obama famously criticized in a “60 Minutes” interview in December 2009 could still stand to lose a few pounds. Kind of like Garfield. Pass the lasagna!

The nation’s Big Six banks — JPMorgan Chase (JPM), Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), Wells Fargo (WFC), Goldman Sachs (GS) and Morgan Stanley (MS) — are all very profitable. And several of them have continued to engage in shady-ish behavior despite Dodd-Frank.

Related: Big bank stocks shrug of Volcker Rule

Remember JPMorgan Chase’s infamous London Whale, and that $6 billion trading loss? Sorry. I meant to call that a hedge. That happened in the spring of 2012.

But here’s what really tells you how toothless Dodd-Frank is. The bank stocks have surged since the bill went from just sitting on Capitol Hill to becoming a law (remember that old Schoolhouse Rock song?) in the summer of 2010.

The Financial Select SPDR (XLF) exchange traded fund, which owns the Big Six banks as well as many regional banks and large insurers — is up nearly 60% since July 21, 2010. That has lagged the broader market’s performance slightly (the S&P 500 is up 66%) but it’s not exactly a low return.

What’s more, financial stocks have really started to gain momentum in the past two years, and have trounced the S&P 500 since 2011. That’s despite the fact that JPMorgan Chase and most of its peers have been hit with one fine after another to pay for the sins of the financial crisis.

Now you would have thought that tougher reforms would lead to banks becoming less profitable than they used to be during the go-go days of those early-mid Naughty Aughties. More restrictions should turn bank stocks into utilities — boring companies that investors value for their dividends and little else.

That hasn’t happened. Instead, investors seem to be betting that banks will continue to find novel new ways to generate strong profits. After all, the Volcker Rule component of Dodd-Frank, which was finally approved earlier this week, probably won’t hurt banks too badly.

Article continues:

%d bloggers like this: