Technology: Are there clouds on your board’s radar?
A recent cloud adoption and risk report reveals organizations are flying blind as they embrace cloud services
October 25, 2013 at 04:00 AM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.com
Directors are responsible for ensuring the long-term viability and health of companies they serve and have an important role in overseeing enterprise risk management. Directors have a duty to exercise care and to make reasonable inquiry about important matters that impact the business-such as the outsourcing of business processes to the cloud.
Although the use of cloud services continues to grow, with Gartner reporting that 38 percent of organizations surveyed are using cloud services today and 80 percent of organizations indicating that they intend to use some form of cloud services in the next 12 months, many boards are not sufficiently engaged in understanding and supervising the company's strategy for cloud technologies.
According a recent report, businesses lack the information to understand and mitigate a broader set of risks posed by the use of cloud services. “What we are seeing from this report is that there are no consistent policies in place to manage the security, compliance, governance, and legal risks of cloud services,” said Rajiv Gupta, founder and CEO at Skyhigh Networks. “Our cloud usage analytics suggest that enterprises are taking action on the popular cloud services they know of and not on the cloud services that pose the greatest risk to their organization. Lack of visibility into the use and risk seem to be crux of the problem.”
Boards need to make certain that management implements systems and controls necessary to identify and manage risks in a reasonable manner. At a minimum, directors need to be aware of any business critical services that have been outsourced to a cloud services provider (CSP). Ideally, the level of board attention to overseeing cloud services is commensurate with the relative importance of the business operations deployed in the cloud. Both management and the board need to ensure that adequate controls are in place to avoid significant risk to the business.
Evaluate and plan: Board considerations
Evaluation and planning are essential to effectively deploying cloud services. It is essential for directors to understand the significance of cloud services to the company's success and operations in order for the board to develop an appropriate strategy and plan for oversight. Boards need to ensure that there is a cloud plan and strategy that supports the company's mission and considers value and opportunity costs. A company's board and management are responsible for considering a number of important strategic issues in determining whether to use a cloud service:
- Ask about extent of the company's use of cloud services and cloud strategy.
- Ask whether management has sufficient expertise to manage a cloud provider.
- Discuss security, privacy and compliance risks associated with the cloud.
- Ask how use of the cloud impacts compliance obligations.
- Discuss the costs and potential volatility of adopting a cloud service.
- Determine who from the board is responsible for monitoring ongoing risks to company from use of cloud services.
- How will risk/return from cloud services be measured and tracked?
The board and senior management should also establish and approve enterprise-wide risk-based policies to govern use of cloud services. Cloud service policies should address the risk to the business from use of cloud services and be appropriate to the size and complexity of the business and provide the framework for management to identify, measure, monitor, and control the risks associated with the use of the CSP from an end-to-end perspective, including establishing servicing requirements and strategies; selecting a provider; negotiating the contract; and monitoring, changing, and discontinuing the relationship with the CSP. Cloud service policies should establish expectations for employees when using cloud services in connection with institutional data and systems. Cloud service policies provide a framework for required behaviors, rules and responsibilities, and information classification and handling.
Risk-based supervision
Boards need to ensure that management has an appropriate risk-based supervision plan which identifies existing or potential risks that could adversely affect the business, assigns appropriate risk ranking and evaluates the overall integrity and effectiveness of risk management practices. The plan should include policies and practices to ensure that the CSP complies with applicable laws, rules, regulations and guidance in providing the cloud services, and monitor significant changes in CSP products, services or risk management practices that could adversely affect risk profiles of CSPs or those of the business. It is essential for the plan to include ongoing communication to the board about any significant findings, recommendations, or corrective actions concerning CSPs or cloud services.
Protecting the board and management from unwanted liability
As part of a board's risk management oversight function, directors should carefully assess how cloud services are used and whether cloud services are used in business critical functions in the companies they serve. There are increased fiduciary risks to boards of directors that are unaware or ignore their responsibility to oversee business critical operations, such as those outsourced to the cloud. Company counsel should consider these fiduciary risks and potential and work with management to provide appropriate education and information to the board about the use of cloud services in business operations to ensure that board members meet their duties of care.
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 AllFrom Reluctant Lawyer to Legal Trailblazer: Agiloft's GC on Redefining In-House Counsel With Innovation and Tech
7 minute readLegal Tech's Predictions for Legal Ops & In-House in 2025
Lawyers Drowning in Cases Are Embracing AI Fastest—and Say It's Yielding Better Outcomes for Clients
Trending Stories
- 1Some Thoughts on What It Takes to Connect With Millennial Jurors
- 2Artificial Wisdom or Automated Folly? Practical Considerations for Arbitration Practitioners to Address the AI Conundrum
- 3The New Global M&A Kings All Have Something in Common
- 4Big Law Aims to Make DEI Less Divisive in Trump's Second Term
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
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