A 9-point checklist for storing data in the cloud
Cloud computing has significant information governance ramifications companies should consider before moving data to the cloud.
October 31, 2011 at 07:53 AM
8 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Within the last year we have seen a rush of companies moving to store their corporate data in the cloud. While cloud computing promises easier data management, scalability and the potential for lower costs, organizations need to ensure that the cloud technology solution they select can also meet their information governance requirements. Here are some areas to consider:
1. Data Security: Companies should ask how data security and encryption are handled. There are specific compliance requirements governing the secure storage of sensitive information, including PII, PHI, PCI. While security is often the top concern for clouds, I believe that most major providers offer data security as good or better than that provided within most corporations' internal systems. Still, make sure you review the cloud service provider's security program. Also look at the level of access control—who can see whose data?
2. European Data Privacy: European Union privacy laws (especially in Germany) make it a risk to store data about its citizens outside of their geographic borders. (By the way, this is really a jobs protection issue.) You may have a requirement to segregate and store EU data in-country in clouds based within those countries.
3. Retention Periods: Does your cloud service provider allow data to be separated in to different buckets? Can an organization define its own retention periods for these buckets? Some cloud providers allow only a single retention period for all data, forcing companies to set high-water-mark retention periods saving most of the data much, much longer than needed. Can your organization live with a monolithic retention period? How much data will this force you to save? Or does your company really need variable retention buckets?
4. e-Discovery: Can legal holds be implemented within the cloud, and protect against charges of spoliation? Can the legal hold be applied narrowly to a subset of the data? Does the cloud service provider enable easy eDiscovery against the data in the cloud? Can metadata be preserved? Can data be identified and reviewed within the cloud? Can held data be easily extracted from the cloud?
5. Deprovisioning and Expiration: How is user access and deprovisioning implemented when employees are terminated? What reporting mechanisms are in place for monitoring active and inactive data usage in the cloud? Can older, unneeded data be easily deleted? If you release a legal hold, does the older, released data get expired per the policy?
6. Application Access: Will you be forced to access your data in the cloud through your service provider's applications exclusively, or does the provider allow other applications to access through open, published interfaces (called APIs)? Will these APIs support use of your preferred e-discovery tools?
7. Data Comingling: Most cloud services achieve economy of scale by storing and com-mingling many companies' data on the same systems, while making it look to each company like its data is on its own system. Furthermore, as this co-mingled data is backed up on the same backup tapes, some companies fear that one company's discovery could expose another company's data. It is not clear how much of a real risk this represents; nevertheless some companies may want to insist on complete data segregation within the cloud, including backup systems.
8. Performance: Is there acceptable, minimum network bandwidth to access the cloud? Particularly important for companies with locations in many countries, is this minimum bandwidth available for all sites. Has this bandwidth been tested? Visualize your cloud computing environment four years from now. Imagine you have two terabytes of data in the cloud and receive a discovery request. Can you get your data back quickly? How quickly? Will you be in trouble?
9. Data Classification: Most companies decide to put some, but not all of their data in the cloud. They need to implement a data classification process separating the more sensitive from less sensitive data. (Increasingly, companies are making this classification part of their record retention policy.) Have you considered how you are going to create these internal processes? Will your cloud vendor's solution be compatible with them?
Cloud computing does offer some real advantages. Yet above the technology considerations, cloud computing has some significant information governance ramifications organizations would be well advised to consider before moving to the cloud.
Within the last year we have seen a rush of companies moving to store their corporate data in the cloud. While cloud computing promises easier data management, scalability and the potential for lower costs, organizations need to ensure that the cloud technology solution they select can also meet their information governance requirements. Here are some areas to consider:
1. Data Security: Companies should ask how data security and encryption are handled. There are specific compliance requirements governing the secure storage of sensitive information, including PII, PHI, PCI. While security is often the top concern for clouds, I believe that most major providers offer data security as good or better than that provided within most corporations' internal systems. Still, make sure you review the cloud service provider's security program. Also look at the level of access control—who can see whose data?
2. European Data Privacy: European Union privacy laws (especially in Germany) make it a risk to store data about its citizens outside of their geographic borders. (By the way, this is really a jobs protection issue.) You may have a requirement to segregate and store EU data in-country in clouds based within those countries.
3. Retention Periods: Does your cloud service provider allow data to be separated in to different buckets? Can an organization define its own retention periods for these buckets? Some cloud providers allow only a single retention period for all data, forcing companies to set high-water-mark retention periods saving most of the data much, much longer than needed. Can your organization live with a monolithic retention period? How much data will this force you to save? Or does your company really need variable retention buckets?
4. e-Discovery: Can legal holds be implemented within the cloud, and protect against charges of spoliation? Can the legal hold be applied narrowly to a subset of the data? Does the cloud service provider enable easy eDiscovery against the data in the cloud? Can metadata be preserved? Can data be identified and reviewed within the cloud? Can held data be easily extracted from the cloud?
5. Deprovisioning and Expiration: How is user access and deprovisioning implemented when employees are terminated? What reporting mechanisms are in place for monitoring active and inactive data usage in the cloud? Can older, unneeded data be easily deleted? If you release a legal hold, does the older, released data get expired per the policy?
6. Application Access: Will you be forced to access your data in the cloud through your service provider's applications exclusively, or does the provider allow other applications to access through open, published interfaces (called APIs)? Will these APIs support use of your preferred e-discovery tools?
7. Data Comingling: Most cloud services achieve economy of scale by storing and com-mingling many companies' data on the same systems, while making it look to each company like its data is on its own system. Furthermore, as this co-mingled data is backed up on the same backup tapes, some companies fear that one company's discovery could expose another company's data. It is not clear how much of a real risk this represents; nevertheless some companies may want to insist on complete data segregation within the cloud, including backup systems.
8. Performance: Is there acceptable, minimum network bandwidth to access the cloud? Particularly important for companies with locations in many countries, is this minimum bandwidth available for all sites. Has this bandwidth been tested? Visualize your cloud computing environment four years from now. Imagine you have two terabytes of data in the cloud and receive a discovery request. Can you get your data back quickly? How quickly? Will you be in trouble?
9. Data Classification: Most companies decide to put some, but not all of their data in the cloud. They need to implement a data classification process separating the more sensitive from less sensitive data. (Increasingly, companies are making this classification part of their record retention policy.) Have you considered how you are going to create these internal processes? Will your cloud vendor's solution be compatible with them?
Cloud computing does offer some real advantages. Yet above the technology considerations, cloud computing has some significant information governance ramifications organizations would be well advised to consider before moving to the cloud.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFatal Shooting of CEO Sets Off Scramble to Reassess Executive Security
5 minute readBen & Jerry’s Accuses Corporate Parent of ‘Silencing’ Support for Palestinian Rights
3 minute readShareholder Activists Poised to Pounce in 2025. Is Your Board Ready?
Regulatory Upheaval Is Coming. How Businesses Prepare and Respond Will Separate Winners and Losers
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250