The Internet turned 25 not too long ago, and as everyone looked to its humble beginnings, we had a chuckle at Newsweek’s 1995 prediction that no one would buy anything over the Web.

In 1995, there weren’t many secure ways to send money over the Internet, but in the 2010s, even brick and mortar shops aren’t safe from the perils of the World Wide Web.

Target’s major data security breach in November 2013 compromised over 110 million pieces of customer information. It left a lasting mark on not only shares and profits, but also something invaluable: customer perception.

As a rule, customers stay loyal to the brands and stores they trust. Leaked personal information is a tough situation to overcome. Stocks fell 11 percent after the data breach and took nearly two months to recover. Households who shop at Target dropped 10 percent between January 2013 and January 2014 – a more drastic decline than similar retailers, especially throughout the holiday season.

To counter the breach and failing trust, Target is re-evaluating its security protocols – especially after new reports claim that Target knew about the hack and failed to act quickly enough.

Instances like the Target breach show that data security isn’t a one-time initiative – it’s an ongoing process as hackers and their techniques become more sophisticated. Customers expect their data to be protected, and it’s becoming a facet of customer service.

Other retailers including Neiman Marcus, Michael’s and Wal-Mart have reported security hacks since last July – and each is faced with the task of regaining their customers’ trust.

Aaron’s, a rent-to-own furniture and electronics company, came under fire last week for knowingly using surveillance software to capture images from rented computers. Aaron’s and its franchise owners used this data to track the computers, collecting late payments and regaining computers after payments defaulted. Images stored included private family scenes, nudity, kids – and put the renters’ personal, financial and medical information at risk.

While there is no monetary penalty for Aaron’s use of the data, the company compromised trust in the brand, which is just as harmful.

We believe that a brand’s value lies heavily with customer’s perception and trust. Damage done due to a breach in security seems to cost a company more than the upfront reparations – customers rely on retailers to protect their privacy and information. What do you think? Do you still shop at Target? Would you ever consider renting through Aaron’s? Let us know in the comments or on Twitter @MagnetoAgency.

Share: