So I am just wondering whats the use then if you protect your computer and someone else you trust leaks the information?
Several things here:
1. The verb "leaks," as used, carries the direct implication of surreptitious release, with intention, on the part of an entity that has the information. Being hacked is the diametrical opposite of leaking. Even if the server was unsecured, which was just plain stupid and could easily be the result of human error, it's clear that the intent was not to share that information.
2. Theft has been a part of every age of human existence. It makes sense to take whatever precautions you can over domains that you control to make theft more difficult.
3. It's irrelevant whether one trusts a given entity or not. Data aggregation and sale has been a part of the cyber age since shortly after it dawned. Huge amounts of this information are part of the public record, while others are often freely offered by folks, mostly via social media of one sort or another. When people (not necessarily you, but in general) willingly "put their business on the cyber-street" it's entirely unreasonable to expect that those who can make a quick buck not to notice.
4. Theft of data stores is now with us since those have value. And no matter what is done to secure them there will be someone else trying to figure out how to defeat that security. It's always been a cat and mouse game, and always shall be.
Brian AKA Bri the Tech Guy (website in my user profile) - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134
. . . the presumption of innocence, while essential in the legal realm, does not mean the elimination of common sense outside it. The willing suspension of disbelief has its limits, or should.
~ Ruth Marcus, November 10, 2017, in Washington Post article, Bannon is right: It’s no coincidence The Post broke the Moore story