> It should be illegal

It should be illegal to host insecure services, especially when you're dealing with PII. Breaches keep happening and nobody gives a fuck, because the worst that'll happen is you might lose a handful of customers and buy some "credit monitoring".

Incidents like this should be followed by an audit and charges being laid. Send corp officers to jail for negligent security failures. If you can go to jail for accounting fraud, you should be able to go to jail for cybersecurity-promises-fraud.

They claim to be compliant with a number of security standards [1]. I would love to see a postmortem audit of how much of this they actually implemented.

[1] https://www.instructure.com/en-au/trust-center/compliance

I don't think that criminal negligence is the most helpful legal tool for incentivizing improved security. It's too hard to prove negligence.

Instead, there should be standard civil penalties for leaking various degrees of PII paid as restitution to the affected individual. Importantly, this must be applied REGARDLESS of "certification" or whether any security practices were "incorrect" or "insufficient". Even if there's a zero-day exploit and you did everything right, you pay. That's the cost of storing people's secrets.

This would make operating services whose whole "thing" is storing a bunch of information about individuals (like Canvas) much more expensive. Good! It's far to cheap to stockpile a ticking time bomb of private info and then walk away paying no damages just because you complied with some out-of-date list of rules or got the stamp of approval from a certification org that's incentivized to give out stamps of approval.

How could you possibly make it illegal to host insecure services? Is any service 100% secure? And if it were how would we know?

I do agree with the audit and punishments for clear failure to adhere to established standards.

If Boeing claimed a plane was airworthy, but it crashed because basic engineering controls were skipped, we have collectively put our faith in the NTSB to preserve evidence, run an independent technical investigation, etc. There is no such authority for software - most security auditors (SOC2, HITRUST, etc) are just looking at self-reported data.

Just take a look at the recent Epic vs. Health Gorilla lawsuit to see how nonexistent the protection is around exchanging your medical records, one of the most sensitive types of PII.

People who haven’t been hacked just haven’t been looked at. If someone wants to hack you, they will hack you. It’s really unfortunate that people have this level of confidence in their ability.

Here’s an example. https://hacks.mozilla.org/2026/05/behind-the-scenes-hardenin...

Has a corporate officer ever gone to jail or been meaningfully fined for a data breach?

> Incidents like this should be followed by an audit and charges being laid

What? Why? Who died? This whole thing is perfectly dealt with through civil process.