Despite COVID-19, Here Are 4 Easy Steps for Data Privacy, Security Compliance
Data privacy and security requirements also remain. For example, many organizations have contractual data security requirements with clients and business partners, some accompanied by substantial indemnity liabilities.
May 29, 2020 at 01:56 PM
6 minute read
The world has changed. Yet, while the COVID-19 outbreak has resulted in a Great Pause for onsite operations, it has not suspended the need for data privacy and security. In fact, it has heightened the necessity of basic and reasonable cybersecurity safeguards both because of the necessary transition to a remote work environment and because of the anticipated collection and tracking of sensitive COVID-19-related data once employees and consumers return onsite. These changes implicate a variety of laws, including employment and consumer laws.
Data privacy and security requirements also remain. For example, many organizations have contractual data security requirements with clients and business partners, some accompanied by substantial indemnity liabilities. As of March 21, the New York SHIELD ACT requires all organizations handling private information of New York residents to have a written and comprehensive data security program. As efforts to delay the legislation have been rejected, enforcement of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) begins in little over a month.
Yet, data privacy and security need not be viewed as a burden. Nor need it be costly. There are steps an organization may take to harness a data privacy and security (i.e., cybersecurity) program in an efficient and effective manner. A cybersecurity program need not break the bank; nor should it overwhelm a company by diverting valuable resources from a central business mission. An efficient and effective cybersecurity program also may be used to help an organization acquire a valuable competitive edge. The common mistake is to create a complicated process that a company has difficulty supporting or adhering to. Here are four easy steps an organization can take to address the new work and IT environment, albeit guidance from experienced cyber counsel makes these steps even easier:
- Establish a data privacy and security team.
- Assess and identify the new work environment.
- Start adjusting and tweaking your policies and procedures to mitigate the risks and comply with the requirements you identify.
- Your employees, vendors, and clients (consumers) – communicate with them. Don't forget employee training.
Establish a data privacy and security team. A central characteristic of any reasonable cybersecurity program is that the organization appoints competent personnel to oversee the program. That person may be in-house, or an organization may look to outside help. Either way, implementing and maintaining a cybersecurity program should not be a one-person job. A best practice is to assemble a team representing a cross-section of the organization's business, IT, legal and other operation departments to identify, address, and remediate risks on a regularly scheduled basis. This team should have the support and involvement of senior management.
Assess and identify the new work environment. COVID-19 has brought changes to the workforce and IT environment that were almost unimagined just a few short months ago. Everyone's work environment has changed, and those changes will persist in the months and perhaps years to come. Just as IT personnel knew their organization's network pre-COVID-19, another "inventory" should be undertaken. Consider the five steps of the NIST Cybersecurity Framework (CSF): Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover. Are new devices, especially personal devices, being used? Are servers properly configured? Does your organization need to expand the availability of VPNs or other remote logins? Does your organization need to incorporate multifactor authentication? Are employees using devices, software or platforms that have not been approved by the company? What about your vendor's employees?
Start adjusting and tweaking your policies and procedures to mitigate the risks and comply with the requirements you identify. Data privacy and security is never static. A company should build new procedures or strategies to address any discovered or increased risks, and to correct any errors. After undertaking steps one and two, an organization may identify needed modifications. Consider modeling the program based on the NIST CSF, which is deemed an industry-recognized standard under some data security legislation and regulations. Does the expanded remote workforce require implementation of a data loss prevention (DLP) policy? Has the organization identified employee "work-arounds" that need to be addressed? Do new patching procedures need to be adopted? Is your incident response plan predicated upon a central, onsite presence and need to be adjusted accordingly? Are there security or technical measures that will increase efficiency, business continuity or simply make it easier for personnel to accomplish their work? Remember, if you try to address everything at once, it may be overwhelming and little or nothing will get done. Adjust and tweak within your organization's capabilities. Get help where you need it. Data security is business continuity.
Your employees, vendors, and clients (consumers)—communicate with them. Don't forget employee training. Employee training is essential. Critically, it need not be difficult to accomplish. Make data privacy and security, as well as any IT-related questions or concerns, an agenda item for team meetings. Discuss data requirements—whether legal or contractual—that are required of the company and their own actions. Explain expectations and consequences. Implementation of technical and administrative safeguards can be done inexpensively and with broad effect to tighten data security. Implement requirements for password maturity and strength. Phishing and business email compromise attacks present heightened risks, so ramp up education and testing around them, including through the use of managed service providers. Follow-up on lapses with additional training. Be helpful, not punitive. Stress causes people to make mistakes. Training helps reduce those mistakes.
With changes in privacy laws, consumers are entitled to greater disclosures of the collection and use of their information. Ensure that any changes in business operations do not require updates to outward facing privacy notices. Communicate with your vendors and service providers. Ensure that they have appropriate cybersecurity measures in place. Be sure to track your own contractual cybersecurity obligations with any changes in operations.
A final step. A cybersecurity program must evolve and adapt as new risks and threats emerge. So, plan for next month and next year. An organization's data security and privacy team should meet regularly to help with the program's maintenance and growth. It should plan for incident response exercises and schedule annual assessments, which are required by many contracts and data security laws. Policies and procedures should be examined and amended (if needed) on an annual basis. Personnel should review and acknowledge them. Looking forward and planning ahead enables an organization to better detect, identify, and remediate an incident. Taking the time to review and plan appropriately will reduce the time and costs later. And that sure beats looking back at the things that should have been done once an incident occurs.
Joshua A. Mooney is a partner at White and Williams where he serves as chair of the firm's cyber law and data protection group. Richard M. Borden and Linda D. Perkins are counsel at the firm. They both focus their practices on cybersecurity and privacy laws.
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 AllThird Circuit Predicts Pa. High Court's Application of 'Gallagher' and 'Donovan' in 'Mid-Century Insurance v. Werley'
12 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 3Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5Data-Driven Legal Strategies
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