Technology: We have met the enemy, and he is us
In a prior column, we discussed the inevitability of technology-related accidents occurring at virtually every company.
October 12, 2012 at 03:25 AM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
In a prior column, we discussed the inevitability of technology-related accidents occurring at virtually every company. One particularly common mishap is the loss of customer, client or employee data. These data breaches may present a substantial problem for organizations, as the number of discrete records lost often runs into the hundreds, thousands or millions. Even if there is no evidence of actual misuse of the lost data, the costs to provide legally required notice, together with the potential cost of mitigation efforts such as providing credit monitoring, quickly mount. If the breach is sufficiently serious to interest regulators such as the Federal Trade Commission or a state's attorney general, then costs associated with investigation, defense and, potentially, future mandatory compliance and fines further add to the data loss burden.
Many people think of data loss as the work of hackers, offshore data thieves and other external threats. But, as Pogo once said, “We have met the enemy, and he is us.” The vast majority of data loss events are an inadvertent, or sometimes intentional, “inside job.” If your organization experiences data loss, it will most likely be an employee, not an external actor, who caused the loss.
In a recent Forrester Research survey, respondents cited external attacks as the causal event in only 25 percent of data loss cases. Other causes, such as employee loss of data, employee misuse of data or malicious insider activity combined to pose a far greater threat to organizations' information assets. We recently provided counsel with respect to data losses arising from a laptop stolen from an employee's car, and a professional data thief who moved from company to company as a human resources employee, stealing employee personal information at each stop. Regulatory authorities pursue enforcement actions arising from, for example, data losses arising out of the theft of an employee's briefcase, and employees ignoring company disposal rules for sensitive data.
Focusing on several key elements of a company's data flow and storage can mitigate this internal threat. Start by asking questions regarding employee access, transmission and storage/disposal of company-held data.
Key access questions include:
- In what ways can employees access data?
- What security measures are in place to guarantee only authorized access?
- Is access allowed to persons beyond those who reasonably need it?
- What measures are in place to log employee access?
- Is access limited to on-site means, or can employees remotely access data?
- What gateways to sensitive data are available via smartphone or other mobile device?
Key transmission questions include:
- What data is validly being carried outside the organization's “four walls”?
- What methods to carry or transmit data are available to employees (including USB access, third-party email accounts and data stored locally on laptops)?
- Is unencrypted data being transmitted?
- What vendors receive company data, and how is the data transmitted to those vendors?
- What systems and procedures are in place, if any, to log data being moved?
Finally, storage/disposal questions include:
- Where is company data stored? Does the company control these storage assets, or does it rely on third parties?
- Is internally stored sensitive data encrypted?
- Is sensitive data being held for period longer than necessary?
- What policies and procedures are in place to ensure secure disposal of data? Is there any audit or follow-up to ensure adherence?
A sound data security strategy must account for the threat of internally generated data loss events. Key components of the strategy should include appropriate policies, training, appropriate technology and auditing. An organization's policies should include ones on allowable access to sensitive data, allowable transmission of data, and appropriate retention and disposal of data. Hiring policies should include provisions, perhaps as simple as required reference checks, for employees whose jobs allows for access to sensitive information. Employee training should cover the company's data security and retention/disposal policies, as well as information to emphasize the potentially disastrous consequences of inappropriate data practices. The company's information technology team should engage in questions of internal data security. Finally, companies should implement procedures to chronicle access and transmission of data, and routinely check for data-policy compliance.
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
© 2025 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 AllCrypto Industry Eyes Legislation to Clarify Regulatory Framework
SEC Official Hints at More Restraint With Industry Bars, Less With Wells Meetings
4 minute readTrump Fires EEOC Commissioners, Kneecapping Democrat-Controlled Civil Rights Agency
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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