What US Businesses Need to Know About Foreign Governments' Theft of Their Data
From notifying law enforcement to setting up IT controls when an employee leaves the company, cybersecurity lawyers and experts discussed during an ACC-Georgia event Tuesday ways to mitigate the threat caused by both inside and outside data compromises.
April 30, 2019 at 04:21 PM
4 minute read
The exact frequency is difficult to estimate, but what is calculable about foreign governments' theft of U.S. companies' data is cause for great concern: In 2016, for example, Google notified its users of 4,000 state-sponsored cyberattacks per month. And last month, a BAE Systems report found an increase in cyberattacks on financial institutions linked to nation-states.
But it's not just the financial services industry that is at risk. According to public indictments in various U.S. Department of Justice cases, dozens of industries—from aviation to health care to nuclear and telecommunications—are vulnerable, cybersecurity lawyers and experts told more than 100 lawyers gathered at Atlanta firm Taylor English Duma on Tuesday for the 2019 annual Value Challenge conference held by the Georgia chapter of the Association of Corporate Counsel.
The main actors are Russia, Iran, increasingly North Korea and China, the latter of which aggressively goes after companies' intellectual property, often through phishing scams, in an attempt to discover their research and development and beat them to market, said John Boles, a principal at PwC and formerly assistant director of international operations at the FBI.
In addition, China also uses insiders, both through recruiting employees in a target company and repeatedly paying off corporate insiders at U.S. companies “to simply walk out the door with high-value trade secrets,” Boles said.
And when those most-dreaded incidents of data compromise occur, it's not just the information technology team on the hot seat. A company's legal department and its in-house attorneys have an important role to play in the immediate aftermath, said Andrew Young, an attorney who works on cybersecurity, global investigations and intelligence issues for The Coca-Cola Co. and a former supervisory special agent with the FBI.
“We have to ask a lot of questions because our next call is going to be from the C-suite asking what happened,” he said. “I don't think our role should be to reverse-engineer malware. Our job is to translate all of the tech talk into strategic risks to the board” and executives, he said.
In addition to foreign actors, companies also should be aware that it is often insiders who expose their data, either intentionally or unintentionally, as in the case of an employee who, in the course of removing personal materials from his or her work computer, also inadvertently takes some company data, the panelists said.
“People aren't walking out with boxes anymore,” Young said.
For that reason, Young advises implementing strong human resources policies with a detailed checklist for when employees, including independent contractors, leave a company. These items should include the return of laptop computers, identification and access badges, parking passes, USB drives and other storage devices if employees are allowed to have them, he added.
According to the panelists, other tips can mitigate the potential loss of company data, including:
- Implementation of IT controls once the company is aware that a particular employee is leaving
- Development of an incident response plan
- Avoidance of the specific terms “breach” and “compromise” until such has been confirmed
- Notification to law enforcement
“The intelligence you get back is incredibly helpful for how you respond,” said Kamal Ghali, counsel at Atlanta firm Bondurant Mixson & Elmore and former assistant U.S. attorney and deputy chief of the cyber and intellectual property crime section of the federal prosecutor's office in Atlanta.
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 AllHow Dana Rao Built a 'Yes' Culture at Adobe and Why He Walked Away
Old Laws, New Tricks: Lawyers Using Patchwork of Creative Legal Theories to Target New Tech
Inside Track: Lawyers for Big Tech Give Harris Benefit of Doubt, Despite Pummeling They Took Under Biden
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Election 2024: Nationwide Judicial Races and Ballot Measures to Watch
- 3Guarantees Are Back, Whether Law Firms Want to Talk About Them or Not
- 4How I Made Practice Group Chair: 'If You Love What You Do and Put the Time and Effort Into It, You Will Excel,' Says Lisa Saul of Forde & O'Meara
- 5Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 6How Much Does the Frequency of Retirement Withdrawals Matter?
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