Can Posting Lawyers' Email Addresses Online Pose a Cyber Risk?
Cybersecurity professionals said the benefits of publicly listing attorneys' law firm email addresses outweigh the risks, so long as lawyers are equipped with appropriate cyber training.
December 13, 2018 at 10:45 AM
3 minute read
It's customary for law firms to list their lawyers' email addresses online to allow prospective clients to contact an attorney. But do these public listings also lead to a heightened risk of cyberattacks?
Some cybersecurity professionals have argued that the benefits of placing lawyers' email addresses online can outweigh potential risks—if lawyers are equipped with the proper training.
“Once a threat actor has targets in mind, they will often send malicious emails to attorneys with lures related to new or existing client matters,” explained Charles Carmakal, vice president of cybersecurity platform FireEye. “The emails typically contain links to websites that attempt to collect credentials or malicious attachments that deploy backdoors on victim computers.”
Carmakal said removing email addresses from a law firm's website to prevent targeted attacks may “possibly slow down the attacker by a little bit … [but] it's easy to guess an email address,” because many organizations follow a consistent format.
Indeed, the benefits of posting lawyers' email addresses online outweigh the risks, Carmakal and others said.
“I don't know how lawyers can function without their email addresses being publicly available,” said Chicago-based Hinshaw & Culbertson partner and security officer Steven Puiszis.
Instead of removing their email addresses, Puiszis recommended that lawyers not post too much information on social media.
“One of the things I tell people is, the more information you post about yourself or family members on social media, the easier it is for a hacker to craft an email that seems to come from someone you know or trust,” Puiszis said.
Some also suggested cybersecurity exercises and training to protect lawyers' data. “[It's] not dangerous or inappropriate to put your name out there, but you have to train your employees to look out for certain things,” said David Lipscomb, an IT professional and president of BDPA Philadelphia, an organization seeking to connect diverse IT and science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) professionals to development programs.
“I think what happens is most people need to be educated by their IT team or general counsel,” Lipscomb said.
Lipscomb cited the American Bar Association's technology competency rule that states, in part, “to maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology.” Ongoing cybersecurity training and assistance may fulfill that requirement, Lipscomb said.
Since the ABA added that rule of professional conduct in 2012, many state bars have adopted it with mixed competency results. Alaska and Montana were the most recent states to add such a requirement, according to LawSites.
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 AllTrending Stories
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