Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Data Stolen by Pfizer May Be Very Valuable



[ad_1]

Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine data stolen by Pfizer could be very valuable - Photo 1.

Pfizer COVID-19 Vaccine Potential – Illustration by REUTERS

In a statement issued on the morning of December 10 (Vietnam time), the pharmaceutical company Pfizer and its partner BioNTech said that the EMA has ensured that the cyberattack will not delay the review and evaluation of vaccines due to two this company develops.

EMA is the agency responsible for reviewing and licensing medicines and vaccines in the European Union. It is not yet known which group of hackers carried out the cyberattack on December 9.

The EMA also said the stolen documents were related to the Pfizer / BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine and the review and evaluation process. Information from research participants, Pfizer and BioNTech data systems were confirmed to be unaffected after the attack.

According to Reuters, the COVID-19 vaccine jointly developed by Pfizer and BioNTech is one of the first two vaccines based on complex mRNA technology, used for the first time in the vaccine industry.

Experts say the stolen documents can be extremely valuable to other countries and companies competing to develop vaccines.

“When it comes to submitting data to regulators like the EMA, we are talking about confidential information about vaccines and how they work, how well they work, how they are at risk. Include possible side effects and instructions on what to do in special cases,” he said Security expert Marc Rogers, founder of a group of volunteers against COVID-19, told Reuters.

Cyber ​​attacks targeting pharmaceutical companies and pharmaceutical regulators have increased in recent months. According to Reuters, there are many hacker groups, from government-backed groups to independent groups that specialize in searching for valuable information to buy and sell.

EMA only released certain information about the attack and said the incident is under investigation by European police. The EMA spokesperson declined to give further information when contacted.

[ad_2]