Small, Midsized Firms Could Have One Large Problem With Office 365 Security
Medium and smaller-sized firms may lack the resources, institutional knowledge and outside pressure necessary to drive the use of multifactor authentication. However, regulatory mandates could force those firms to correct course sooner rather than later.
May 13, 2020 at 11:30 AM
4 minute read
Office 365 is a staple in many law firms, but it may also be a popular target for hackers looking to exploit contact lists for phishing schemes or sell account access to other bad actors online. While multifactor authentication security protocols can help to effectively—and somewhat easily—mitigate those risks, it's possible that some smaller and midsized firms may still lack the motivation or assistance required to erect those safeguards.
A 2020 Data Security and Incident Report released last month by law firm Baker & Hostetler indicated that in 31% of the 950 cyber incidents featured, bad actors initiated an Office 365 account takeover following the initial breach.
"[Bad actors] run searches to look for invoices so they can trick people into wiring money out, and they are very effective at doing that. And then they sometimes sell off access to the account. … There are about 15 different flavors of what people do when they get access to your account," Craig Hoffman, editor of the report and leader of Baker & Hostetler's digital risk advisory and cybersecurity team, told LTN in early May.
He also mentioned that multifactor authentication (MFA) is often an effective deterrent against hackers since it requires users to verify their identify using multiple pieces of evidence. For example, an attorney may enter their username or password and then receive a separate PIN number sent to a phone or secondary device meant to unlock access. But are law firms initiating those security protocols?
Christopher Ballod, a vice chairman of the data privacy and cybersecurity practice at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, said that the firm doesn't use Office 365, but he pointed out that law firms are frequently targeted for cyber attacks—and are often unprepared. "In my experience as breach counsel to law firms, most who do use [Office] 365 do not have MFA enabled."
Still, while helpful, he noted that MFA is no sure bet against a breach. "Those that do still frequently get socially engineered into giving up the second factor code anyway," Ballod said.
Still, many large firms have taken very deliberate steps with regards to their Office 365 security. Fish & Richardson, for example, has MFA in place for its entire tenancy, meaning that both firm employees and visitors are unable to access any Office 365 functions without first engaging in the multifactor process.
Beau Mersereau, chief legal technology solutions officer at Fish & Richardson, said MFA is both an effective way to protect against unwanted access and relatively easy to set up inside Office 365 itself. "It took us about 10 minutes to turn on multifactor authentication," Mersereau said.
Lawyers at Parsons, Behle & Latimer also use MFA to access Office 365. As an added layer of security, computers have also been configured to forget sign-on credentials after each use and the software detects when employees sign in from an unfamiliar location.
Tomu Johnson, of counsel at Parsons Behle, indicated that larger firms may face more pressure to adopt MFA provisions due to their client roster, which can skew toward security-conscious industries such as the banking, health care, securities, or telecom sectors. Meanwhile, smaller law offices could be a different story altogether.
"I think smaller to medium-sized firms would have difficulties using these security features, not because they are difficult to setup, but simply because they don't have the staff to help them set up those features. Moreover, small law firms may not have client pressure forcing them to adopt enhanced security measures," Johnson said.
But as laws such as the General Data Protection Regulation and California Consumer Privacy Act continue to raise the financial stakes for businesses hit by a data breach, law firm MFA holdouts could in turn find themselves either having to adapt or risk losing out on business.
According to Gulam Zade, CEO of the legal-centric IT consultancy Logicforce, some firms may already be feeling the pressure, with more client-mandated security audits or questionnaires specifically dictating the use of MFA.
"I think [clients] are going to take away the option of whether you're going to use multifactor authentication or not. You have to do it," Zade 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 AllLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 2Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 3Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 4Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
- 5Zoom Faces Intellectual Property Suit Over AI-Based Augmented Video Conferencing
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