Can Law Firms Sue NSA for Data Breaches? Lawyers Say Good Luck
Hackers may have used NSA tools to execute this week's global cyberattack, but lawyers say it would be nearly impossible for the victims, which include law firms, to sue the agency.
June 28, 2017 at 05:19 PM
16 minute read
Hackers may have used NSA tools to execute this week's global cyberattack, but lawyers say it would be nearly impossible for the victims, which include law firms, to sue the agency.
The attack, which crippled operations at DLA Piper offices in Europe and across the United States, had something in common with the massive “WannaCry” attack that plagued companies and organizations last month. It appears hackers in both instances executed the attacks by exploiting flaws in Microsoft software originally exposed when tools used by the National Security Agency were hacked and dumped online. In a blog post last month, Microsoft said the leaks illustrate why “stockpiling of vulnerabilities by governments is such a problem.”
But some lawyers say it's not the type of problem DLA Piper, or any other victim, can solve in a courtroom. Between the sovereign immunity doctrine, the secretive nature of the NSA and the sheer difficulty of proving any guilt on the NSA's part, suing the agency for allowing its tools to be stolen would be a tough sell.
“One could file that lawsuit, but whether it would go anywhere is another question,” said Joe Swanson, a former assistant U.S. attorney and of counsel at the firm Carlton Fields.
The government does face lawsuits over data breaches, but the contours of those suits are clearer. For example, several class action lawsuits have been filed against the Office of Personnel Management over the massive data breach there, which exposed millions of federal workers' personal data. But in those cases, the plaintiffs allege the agency broke the 1974 Privacy Act, which requires the government to use certain safeguards to protect records kept on individuals.
In the NSA's case, records for individuals were not stolen. Rather, it was the agency's tools or methods that were leaked.
“A helpful analogy would be like if your neighbor stores a gun, negligently, and a bad guy comes into the house, steals it, and many months later, uses that gun to harm you,” Swanson said. “So it would be difficult to recover a negligence claim.”
Most claims against the government are barred by the sovereign immunity doctrine. Daniel Girard of Girard Gibbs represents government employees in the data breach lawsuit against OPM pending in a D.C. federal court. He said that in order to bring a claim against the NSA, a plaintiff would need to find a specific waiver of sovereign immunity—a specific instance in which the government gave consent to be sued.
The best option would probably be to file under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows lawsuits against government employees if they cause property damage, injury or death due to negligence or a wrongful act. Still, it would be difficult to prove the NSA's negligence caused any injury or harm, Swanson said.
Plus, the discovery involved to prove such a claim would likely be drawn out and expensive since nearly every document a plaintiff may request from the NSA is probably classified.
“[The difficulty] is made only worse by the fact that you'd be pursuing one of the most secretive agencies in the country, if not the world,” Swanson said.
Swanson added that for victims of the breach, the best option is for companies to take their own vulnerabilities seriously.
“The way in which [the malware] operates illustrates the fact that you really cannot be complacent when it comes to cybersecurity,” Swanson said.
Related Articles:
|- Your Law Firm Got Hacked. What Do You Do Now?
- Anthem Agrees to Record $115M Data Breach Settlement
- Judge OKs $10M Target Data Breach Settlement—Again
- What Companies Can Demand From Law Firms on Data Security
Hackers may have used NSA tools to execute this week's global cyberattack, but lawyers say it would be nearly impossible for the victims, which include law firms, to sue the agency.
The attack, which crippled operations at
But some lawyers say it's not the type of problem
“One could file that lawsuit, but whether it would go anywhere is another question,” said Joe Swanson, a former assistant U.S. attorney and of counsel at the firm
The government does face lawsuits over data breaches, but the contours of those suits are clearer. For example, several class action lawsuits have been filed against the Office of Personnel Management over the massive data breach there, which exposed millions of federal workers' personal data. But in those cases, the plaintiffs allege the agency broke the 1974 Privacy Act, which requires the government to use certain safeguards to protect records kept on individuals.
In the NSA's case, records for individuals were not stolen. Rather, it was the agency's tools or methods that were leaked.
“A helpful analogy would be like if your neighbor stores a gun, negligently, and a bad guy comes into the house, steals it, and many months later, uses that gun to harm you,” Swanson said. “So it would be difficult to recover a negligence claim.”
Most claims against the government are barred by the sovereign immunity doctrine. Daniel Girard of
The best option would probably be to file under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which allows lawsuits against government employees if they cause property damage, injury or death due to negligence or a wrongful act. Still, it would be difficult to prove the NSA's negligence caused any injury or harm, Swanson said.
Plus, the discovery involved to prove such a claim would likely be drawn out and expensive since nearly every document a plaintiff may request from the NSA is probably classified.
“[The difficulty] is made only worse by the fact that you'd be pursuing one of the most secretive agencies in the country, if not the world,” Swanson said.
Swanson added that for victims of the breach, the best option is for companies to take their own vulnerabilities seriously.
“The way in which [the malware] operates illustrates the fact that you really cannot be complacent when it comes to cybersecurity,” Swanson 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
© 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 AllFTC Probing Use of Browser Histories, Other Personal Info to Individualize Product Prices
4 minute readSuper-Stringent State Health Privacy Law May Spark Similar Statutes Elsewhere
5 minute readHow to Navigate Regulators' Growing Focus on Connecting Data Privacy and Web Design
Marketers Mostly Pleased With FTC Plan to Clean Up High-Stakes World of Online Reviews
6 minute readTrending 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