A 24/7 Approach to Breach Response Is Not for the Faint of Heart
Lewis Brisbois' data privacy and cybersecurity division recently launched an app that will give users 24/7 access to its breach response team. Providing that level of service requires a strong infrastructure and some occasional late nights.
November 02, 2018 at 09:30 AM
4 minute read
Much like your friendly-neighborhood Walmart, responding to data security breaches is now a 24-hour business. A new app from Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith's data privacy and cybersecurity division will give users around-the-clock access to the firm's Data Breach Rapid Response team. This means that when the worst happens at 2 a.m., victims will able to take immediate action that doesn't involve trying to calm their nerves in front of a “Happy Days” rerun.
Since hackers and other bad actors have demonstrated a reluctance to adhere to traditional business hours, the late nights, early mornings and everything in-between approach just might have to become the new model for firms looking to stand out in a marketplace where “response time” is a crucial variable.
“I think in this digital environment, let's just say that victims need responses immediately. So whatever infrastructure you want to create, if you want to be successful, you need to be responsive,” Sean Hoar, chair of Lewis Brisbois' data breach and cybersecurity department, said.
Speaking of infrastructure, the Lewis Brisbois model is built on a team of 20 attorneys spread across each time zone. Working that way has its disadvantages—Hoar can't just poke his head out the door and get a status update from a co-worker—but there are advantages too, some more obvious than others.
Even though the firm's home base is Los Angeles, they have potential clients located in different regions across the country who want someone nearby on the ground. It can also help to have attorneys who speak the same dialect as the people they're advising.
“I know that may sound silly but it's true. When somebody is in crisis they want somebody who they appear to share some commonality with, whatever that might be, and sometimes language is a starter,” Hoar said.
Team members rotate through a duty roster broken down into seven-day shifts consisting of a primary and secondary attorney. The cycle commences at 12 a.m. Monday and concludes at 11:59 p.m. the following Sunday, and what happens in the middle is often difficult to predict.
Should a call roll in during the pre-dawn hours, it is immediately screened through a conflict checker to make sure that there's not a pre-existing interest at odds with moving forward. The lawyers on duty could find themselves on the phone with a client minutes later, with the rest of the evening's itinerary eaten up by conversations with in-house compliance managers and a deployment of forensics experts, navigating consumer reporting regulations and mapping the scope of the breach.
The hours are long and the decisions can be stressful. Hoar acknowledges it's not for everybody.
“The evaluation of who's going to be on the team involves that too. I'm looking not just for people who are really smart with the strength to have a tech background if at all possible and a litigation background so you can assess third-party liability, but you also need what I call an 'attitude of contribution,'” Hoar said.
Fortunately, there's also the team itself to fall back upon. Throughout the breach response process, a matter tracking application helps organize budgets, time frames and task assignments. Even if the initial call is fielded at 3 a.m. by an attorney on-call in New York City, by daybreak the onus could be transferred to teammates working in closer proximity to a client's physical location.
“I want to make sure that we've always got enough depth to handle anything that comes through the door, regardless of the type of day,” Hoar 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
© 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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Who Is Nicholas J. Ganjei? His Rise to Top Lawyer
- 2Delaware Supreme Court Names Civil Litigator to Serve as New Chief Disciplinary Counsel
- 3Inside Track: Why Relentless Self-Promoters Need Not Apply for GC Posts
- 4Fresh lawsuit hits Oregon city at the heart of Supreme Court ruling on homeless encampments
- 5Ex-Kline & Specter Associate Drops Lawsuit Against the Firm
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