More Legal Departments Are Taking Control of the Cybersecurity Budget
"Assigning the budget to the department with responsibility for compliance gives them the power and authority to act," Michael Rynowecer, president of BTI Consulting Group in Wellesley Hills, Massachusetts, said.
March 31, 2020 at 05:18 PM
3 minute read
An increasing number of companies are placing their cybersecurity budgets in the hands of their legal departments because of increased compliance efforts and scrutiny from regulators.
According to BTI Consulting Group's Cybersecurity & Data Privacy 2020 report, 46% of companies put the legal department in charge of the cybersecurity budget. The report states that 20% of respondents said the budget is held by information technology, 19.9% in privacy and data security, 7% in compliance, and 6.9% responded the budget is in another department.
The numbers in the report are based on interviews with more than 250 corporate legal decision-makers, including chief compliance officers, chief privacy officers and chief privacy counsel.
Michael Rynowecer, president of BTI Consulting Group in Wellesley Hills, Massachusetts, said the trend of legal departments housing the cybersecurity budget has moved upward over the past couple of years. He said he would expect the number of companies that put legal in charge of the cybersecurity budget will increase.
"Assigning the budget to the department with responsibility for compliance gives them the power and authority to act," Rynowecer said.
The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation and the California Consumer Privacy Act have forced companies to put a greater focus on data privacy and compliance. The changing data privacy and cybersecurity climate make legal "a good crossroad for the budget to sit," Mark Yacano, global practice leader with Major, Lindsey & Africa's transform advisory services in Washington, D.C, said in an interview.
Yacano explained that because legal departments are more often interacting with different elements of the business, those attorneys can "proactively shield the company from risk" by handling cybersecurity budgets and deciding the best ways to prevent a data breach in conjunction with the information technology function.
Allowing only the legal department to totally control the cybersecurity budget "reinforces siloing," Edward McAndrew, a partner at DLA Piper in Washington, D.C., said.
"Siloing is problematic in this area," McAndrew said. "If you think about a cyber incident, you're going to need a multidisciplinary team including legal, information technology, communications, compliance to come together to work on the issue."
He explained that there may be complications tied back to who controls what part of the budget when searching for vendors.
"Legal could be saying we want to bring in a particular service provider, and IT could be thinking something else," McAndrew said.
For companies to have one department control the cybersecurity budget, they need to make certain there is an effective communication line between departments.
"The disadvantage is that legal may not be in a position to make all of the decisions within the scope of the budget," Yacano said. "I think if the governance mechanism for how you approach cybersecurity is not sound there could be issues."
"The best strategy is to work with IT to ensure everyone understands the risks and exposures," Rynowecer said.
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 AllFactSet Finds New Legal Chief at Financial Data Rival S&P
11 Red State AGs Demand Damages in Antitrust Lawsuit Shaming ESG Climate Investors
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1King & Spalding E-Discovery Director Jumps to Nebraska Women-Owned Firm
- 2Nation's Largest Utility Parts Ways With CLO Who Helped It Navigate Bribery Scandal
- 3Advocates Renew Campaign for Immigrant Right to Counsel in New York
- 4From ‘Unregulated’ to ‘A Matter of Great Concern’: PFAS Regulation under Biden
- 5Public Interest Lawyers in NY Fear Rollback of Federal Loan Assistance in '25, Ask Gov. to Add $4M to State Program
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