Mergers, Acquisitions and Breaches: How to Evaluate Cyber Risk for a Deal
Buyers need to ensure that they approach a deal with an equal understanding of the seller’s financial and cyber risk.
August 12, 2019 at 05:30 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
|
(Editor’s note: This is an article from Property/Casualty 360, an affiliate of the Daily Report through parent company ALM Media.)
June marked the anniversary of the Verizon and Yahoo! deal — not that there was anything to celebrate. No company wants an acquisition to end up the way Yahoo! did for Verizon. The massive breach of every single Yahoo! account — over 3 billion in all — contributed to the significant devaluation of Yahoo! for Oath, the subsidiary of Verizon that made the purchase. This devaluation amounted to a writedown of almost $5 billion after the original acquisition price of under $4.5 billion. Talk about adding insult to injury.
While perhaps it’s not always the first thing business leaders think about when discussing a deal, cybersecurity audits are a vital aspect of mergers and acquisitions (M&A). Businesses need to vet companies that they would like to acquire in order to determine their cyber vulnerability, because the buyer ultimately inherits all of the target’s exposures and liability.
However, despite the Verizon-Yahoo! debacle, there is still a gaping hole in the M&A due diligence process when it comes to evaluating cyber risk. A cyber review is just as vital as the financial and employee analysis, but not enough professionals know how to do this diligence on the fast-paced timeframe that deals are conducted.
Here are some actions to consider before engaging or finalizing a deal:
- Test the network: In the ideal scenario, deal rooms would include a copy of a recent penetration test of the selling company. A penetration test is an authorized simulated cyberattack on a company’s IT system to evaluate weaknesses. It provides an inside-out view of the selling company from the perspective of a criminal actor attempting to breach the network. A team of IT specialists typically conduct these tests to determine the manner in which the selling company manages cybersecurity. From these simulations, the specialists can gather a complete understanding of how data is stored, by who, where, and if this confidential information is vulnerable. As penetration testing may take longer than “deal time” (if a penetration test has not taken place), alternative methodologies such as an external scan also can assist in obtaining a better understanding of the target’s security posture.
- Evaluate the results: The information collected educates decision-makers on the state of the selling company’s risk management strategy and exposures. These results uncover everything from indicators of poor security hygiene to employee email credentials. The worst thing that a test could reveal is that there is already a malicious actor in the selling company’s network. The test could also reveal weaknesses caused by internet-exposed systems created to support remote workers or third-party vendors. A significant finding could affect the deal size, change the escrow amount, or create a need for a contingency clause on the deal.
- Protect assets accordingly: The buyer should also consider taking out a cyber insurance policy that covers the combined exposure of the parent company and selling company. If a buyer goes forward with a deal, it is important that they have the right cyber insurance policy in place to cover a breach. When creating a policy, insurance companies evaluate the selling business using an outside-in approach. Unlike a penetration test in which IT specialists are often given access to a company’s internal system, an outside-in assessment consists of a team collecting data from the outside by simulating cyber adversaries’ tradecraft and techniques used to gain information about a target. Key weaknesses that insurance companies notice when underwriting a policy for an M&A are often easily corrected or mitigated with existing security controls. Brokers must work with tech-forward insurance companies to provide businesses with an accurate policy on a very short time frame — “deal time,” which moves at the breakneck pace of a few hours, rather than a few weeks.
As cyber breaches become more impactful and frequent, decision-makers must incorporate a cyber review into their M&A plan. Buyers need to ensure that they approach a deal with an equal understanding of the seller’s financial and cyber risk.
Related: Cyber insurance market update 2019
Shawn Ram ([email protected]) is the head of insurance at Coalition, a company founded at the intersection of the insurance and cybersecurity industries by a team of insurance, technology and intelligence community veterans. The views expressed here are the author’s own.
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 AllBusiness Breakups: Why Business and Commercial Cases Are Well-Suited to Mediation
5 minute readIn RE: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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