MOVEit Hack Brings Vendor Assessment to Forefront

SPARK Institute members provide guidance on how advisers can both prepare for and respond to participant data concerns stemming from nationwide breach.


Retirement plan providers and advisers should be taking a close look at vendor cybersecurity protocols after a software transfer hack exposed the private data of millions of people, including retirement plan participants, according to industry experts.

A hack of data transfer software firm MOVEit, which is owned by Progress Software Corp., has hit nearly 20 million people and more than 378 firms, according to the most recent data from anti-malware company Emsisoft. At least 1 million consumers were exposed by participant locater services vendor Pension Benefit Information LLC, which works with numerous retirement plans.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

A hack to PBI’s services led to data exposure to more than 350,000 participants with Fidelity Investments and more than 1 million combined between the California Public Employees’ Retirement System and the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, according to filings. The breach also reached nonprofit retirement provider TIAA via PBI, thus reaching colleges and universities across the country, according to alerts from those organizations.

While the breach does not necessarily mean fraud will take place, it is certainly a possibility in the months and even years to come, according to Brett Callow, a threat analyst with Emsisoft.

“Fraud happens all the time, and it’s not always easy to link it to any particular incident,” he says. “How this unfolds and if any connection can be made over the next months and years will be something to watch.”

Response Tactics

For organizations hit by the data breach, they first need to patch their system to make sure it is secure, Callow says. The government’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has been issuing regular software release updates related to the hack from Progress Software. PBI is also, according to filings, providing impacted consumers with free data protection services for a set period of time.

The real work, however, should be done at the front end to prevent future attacks, Callow notes, with organizations and their advisers doing as much as possible to vet vendor cybersecurity protocols when starting business. This can be a tall order in an ever-evolving world of cyber-threats.

“It runs deeper than [one vendor],” he says. “In some cases, organizations are impacted because their vendor is using a contractor who was using a subcontractor who was using MOVEit.”

The SPARK Institute, a retirement member and advocacy group, has stated that upfront cybersecurity assessment for vendors is critical for both retirement plan advisers and plan sponsors.

“The real work should be done prior to contracting with a third-party vendor,” the institute stated in an email expressing the thoughts of various members focused on cybersecurity.

Vetting Vendors

Advisers should also understand a vendor’s incident response plan and have a contract with a reputable independent cyber-forensic expert, the members noted. “A firm should not accept the word of just their vendor that their environment is clean without assurance from a third party,” SPARK Institute members wrote.  

Members of the institute also noted that, after a breach occurs, firms should look at the severity of the incident and their own risk tolerance when it comes to continuing the relationship with the vendor.

In the event of a breach, “SPARK members will typically: 1) Assess the impact of the breach, 2) Communicate with their clients, 3) Review the vendor’s security measures, 4) Conduct a risk assessment to mitigate any further risks, and 5) Enhance monitoring and controls over the vendor.”

Beyond preparation, if and when a breach occurs, the best thing an adviser can do is be “transparent, empathetic, and proactive” with those impacted, SPARK committee members said.

“The most common steps in this process include: 1) Prompt communication, 2) Have all the necessary facts and details, 3) Know client-specific impact, 4) Share your firm’s response and mitigation plans, 5) Assure them of your firm’s availability for questions and concerns,” they wrote.

The MOVEit breach saga looks to be continuing in the courts. Progress Software has been sued by those exposed in the breach in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, according to court filings. Meanwhile, law firms are posting advertisements for people who have been notified by the exposure to participate in class action complaints.

Industry Group Says Roth Catch-Ups Too Burdensome for 2024

SECURE 2.0 rules expanding catch-up contributions into a Roth source will be a huge undertaking for sponsors and recordkeepers.


The ERISA Industry Committee sent an open letter to the Department of the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service on Wednesday requesting a two-year delay in the implementation date for Roth catch-up contributions.

Section 603 of the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 requires that catch-ups from participants earning $145,000 or more be made as Roth contributions and takes effect on December 31, 2023. The ERIC letter requests that this be postponed to December 31, 2025, joining a request for more time from other industry groups such as the National Association of Government Defined Contribution Administrators and the American Benefits Council.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

Unlike NAGDCA’s letters, which focus on the unique challenges faced by government plans, ERIC’s letter explains that Section 603 presents administrative issues for all DC plan sponsors.  

The committee notes that the $145,000 threshold is not tied to any other number commonly used by DC plans and is not even consistent with the highly-compensated-employee figure, currently set at $150,000 for 2023. That will create an administrative burden, as recordkeeping methods have to be updated, and employers are often unaware of whose salary will fall above or below this limit until after filing W-2 tax forms.

In NAGDCA’s letters, the association notes that tracking compensation is further complicated by employees who work for more than one employer within a network, such as at multiple state universities, and by workers whose income can vary and is therefore unknown ahead of time.

ERIC’s letter explains that recordkeepers currently use two methods to administer catch-up contributions. The first is an elective spillover election in which employee contributions that exceed the annual limit simply “spill over” into catch-ups. The second is a separate contribution election, in which contributions are added to regular and catch-up sources concurrently throughout the year and are reconciled at year’s end if the participant did not actually exceed their annual limit.

Mandatory Roth designation will complicate the concurrent method, according to ERIC. If a participant elects a traditional source for normal contributions, the sponsor will have to add contributions to a Roth source concurrently, which would require additional recordkeeping and communication. If the participant does not exceed the limit by year’s end, the sponsor would have to move the catch-up amount back to the traditional account in a Roth-to-traditional conversion, which ERIC says most recordkeepers cannot currently accommodate.

ERIC’s letter joins a growing body of similar letters beseeching the Treasury Department to postpone Section 603 implementation. Mark Iwry, a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and former deputy assistant treasury secretary for national retirement and health policy, said he is reasonably optimistic that the Treasury Department and IRS will agree to at least a one-year delay for the provision.

The letter is co-signed by Aon PLC, Empower, the Insured Retirement Institute, the Investment Company Institute, the Investment Adviser Association and the Teachers’ Retirement System of the City of New York, among others.

«