ANSPDCP (Romania) - Fine against Homelux SRL

Summary

The Romanian Data Protection Authority (ANSPDCP) has fined Homelux SRL a total of €20,715 for a personal data breach and cookie non-compliance. The breach occurred due to an unpatched website vulnerability and weak password policies, leading to the disclosure of names, addresses, emails, and passwords. Additionally, Homelux was fined for placing non-essential cookies without user consent.

Full text

Help ANSPDCP (Romania) - Fine against Homelux SRL: Difference between revisions From GDPRhub Jump to:navigation, search ← Older editVisualWikitext Revision as of 04:31, 6 August 2026 view sourceCerasela (talk | contribs)5 editsm Tag: Visual edit← Older edit Latest revision as of 09:55, 10 August 2026 view source Ds (talk | contribs)Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, noContributionReport, Administrators262 editsmTag: Visual edit Line 99: Line 99: HOMELUX S.R.L. (the controller) notified the Romanian DPA (ANSPDCP) of a personal data breach pursuant to [[Article 33 GDPR]].HOMELUX S.R.L. (the controller) notified the Romanian DPA (ANSPDCP) of a personal data breach pursuant to [[Article 33 GDPR]]. The controller was operating a website on a platform that had not been updated to the latest version released by the software provider. Thus, a cyberattack exploited this vulnerability and affected the personal data processed through the website.The controller was operating a website on a platform that had not been updated to the latest version released by the software provider. The website subsequently suffered a cyberattack affecting the security of the personal data processed through it. This incident was further facilitated by weak password requirements for user accounts, a deficiency that remained unremedied after the breach.This incident was further facilitated by weak password requirements for user accounts, a deficiency that remained unremedied after the breach. As a result, personal data processed by the controller, including names, surnames, addresses, email addresses, and passwords, was disclosed to unauthorised parties.As a result, the security of personal data processed by the controller, including names, surnames, addresses, email addresses and passwords, was compromised. During the investigation, the DPA also found that the controller stored non-essential cookies on users' devices and accessed this information without obtaining the users' prior consent.During the investigation, the DPA also found that the controller stored non-essential cookies on users' devices and accessed this information without obtaining the users' prior consent. === Holding ====== Holding === First, the DPA found that the controller infringed [[Article 32 GDPR]] by failing to implement adequate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk presented by the processing. These shortcomings enabled a cyberattack that compromised personal data. The DPA also found that the controller had failed to establish a process for regularly testing, assessing, and evaluating the effectiveness of its security measures. For this infringement, the DPA imposed a fine of RON 78,570 (€15,000).First, the DPA found that the controller infringed [[Article 32 GDPR|Article 32(1)(d) and 32(2) GDPR]] by failing to implement adequate technical and organisational measures to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk presented by the processing. The DPA considered these shortcomings insufficient to ensure a level of security appropriate to the risk. It also found that the controller had failed to establish a process for regularly testing, assessing, and evaluating the effectiveness of its security measures. For this infringement, the DPA imposed a fine of RON 78,570 (€15,000). Second, the DPA found that the controller infringed Article 4(5) of Law No. 506/2004 on the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector by placing non-essential cookies on users' devices without obtaining prior consent. The DPA noted that these cookies were not technically necessary for the operation of the website and therefore could not be deployed without user consent. For this infringement, the DPA imposed a fine of RON 30,000 (€5,715).Second, the DPA found that the controller infringed Article 4(5) of Law No. 506/2004 on the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector by placing non-essential cookies on users' devices without obtaining prior consent. The DPA noted that these cookies were not technically necessary for the operation of the website and therefore could not be deployed without user consent. For this infringement, the DPA imposed a fine of RON 30,000 (€5,715). In addition, as corrective measures, the DPA ordered the controller to implement a procedural plan for the regular testing, evaluation, and updating of its IT systems. The DPA also required the controller to strengthen access controls by introducing stronger password requirements, multi-factor authentication, the deactivation of inactive accounts, and the principle of least privilege. Furthermore, the DPA required the controller to implement measures aimed at reducing vulnerabilities, including mechanisms to detect and block cyberattacks and restrictions on access to administrative interfaces. Finally, the DPA ordered the controller to ensure compliance with Article 4(5) of Law No. 506/2004 on its website.In addition, as corrective measures, the DPA ordered the controller to implement a procedural plan for the regular testing, evaluation and assessment of its IT systems and subsequent modifications. The DPA also required the controller to strengthen access controls by introducing stronger password requirements, multi-factor authentication, the deactivation of inactive accounts, and the principle of least privilege. Furthermore, the DPA required the controller to implement measures aimed at reducing vulnerabilities, including mechanisms to detect and block cyberattacks and restrictions on access to administrative interfaces. Finally, the DPA ordered the controller to ensure compliance with Article 4(5) of Law No. 506/2004 on its website. == Comment ==== Comment == This case shows that basic security weaknesses, such as outdated software and weak password policies, can lead to significant GDPR liability when they contribute to a personal data breach. It also underlines that cookie compliance remains a distinct enforcement area, capable of attracting additional fines alongside GDPR sanctions.This case illustrates how relatively basic security shortcomings, such as outdated software and weak password policies, may result in an infringement of Article 32 GDPR when they leave personal data insufficiently protected. It also underlines that cookie compliance remains a distinct enforcement area, capable of attracting additional fines alongside GDPR sanctions. == Further Resources ==== Further Resources == Latest revision as of 09:55, 10 August 2026 ANSPDCP - Fine against Homelux SRL Authority: ANSPDCP (Romania) Jurisdiction: Romania Relevant Law: Article 32(1)(d) GDPR Article 32(2) GDPR Article 4 (5) Law 506/2004 (implementing ePrivacy Directive) Type: Investigation Outcome: Violation Found Started: Decided: Published: 31.07.2026 Fine: 108570.0 RON Parties: HOMELUX S.R.L. National Case Number/Name: Fine against Homelux SRL European Case Law Identifier: n/a Appeal: n/a Original Language(s): Romanian; Moldavian; Moldovan Original Source: ANSPDCP (in RO) Initial Contributor: cerasela The DPA fined a home and furniture retailer RON 78,570 (€15,000) after a cyberattack exploited an outdated website platform and weak passwords. It also imposed a RON 30,000 (€5,715) fine for placing non-essential cookies without consent. Contents 1 English Summary 1.1 Facts 1.2 Holding 2 Comment 3 Further Resources 4 English Machine Translation of the Decision English Summary Facts HOMELUX S.R.L. (the controller) notified the Romanian DPA (ANSPDCP) of a personal data breach pursuant to Article 33 GDPR. The controller was operating a website on a platform that had not been updated to the latest version released by the software provider. The website subsequently suffered a cyberattack affecting the security of the personal data processed through it. This incident was further facilitated by weak password requirements for user acco

Entities