Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Attacks/Breaches

12/16/2015
10:30 AM
James Bindseil
James Bindseil
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

An Ill ‘Wynd’ Blowing But No Safe Harbor

What will state-of-the-art for cybersecurity look like in 2016? The regulatory headwinds on both sides of the Atlantic portend big changes.

One of the biggest regulatory issues facing U.S. businesses in 2016 is the impact of the European Court of Justice’s invalidation of Safe Harbor—the legal provision under which the cross-border transfer of personal data from the EU to the U.S. was deemed compliant with European privacy law.

The loss of Safe Harbor is a major headache for companies that do business overseas requiring the movement of data to and from the U.S. and Europe. It’s worth noting that such transfers can still take place while a new framework is being negotiated (assuming one is); however, individual companies must make provisions through a Model Contract clause or Binding Corporate Rules with each country’s data protection authority, or figure out workarounds that keep data from crossing international borders. 

While the loss of Safe Harbor raised a number of questions regarding the best approach for businesses in the interim, this new change will mean more work for international privacy and compliance lawyers.

At the same time that all eyes are on Safe Harbor, there is another significant regulatory concern that U.S. companies may be overlooking, and one with more ominous implications—fallout from the Federal Trade Commission’s win in its case against Wyndham Worldwide Corporation, the hotel and resort management company.

By ruling in favor of the FTC, which sued Wyndham under its regulatory authority for conducting unfair and deceptive business practices, the courts set a precedent that gives greater enforcement power to the FTC in cases where consumers’ personally identifiable information (PII) is compromised. The FTC’s action came after a series of data breaches that the commission argued affected Wyndham as a result of the company’s failure to provide proper protection and management of sensitive customer data. 

The court’s decision gives the FTC greater authority to punish companies that it finds are negligent in their responsibility to properly secure data. That means, despite what does or does not happen with pending data privacy or cybersecurity legislation at the state or federal level, we are likely to start seeing more action from the FTC against companies that the commission believes have not made sufficient investments in systems, policies, and processes for securing data. 

Most observers believe that the Wyndham decision will result in an emboldened FTC taking a more activist posture with regard to cybersecurity. If that’s the case—and it would be surprising if it didn’t happen—enterprises would be wise to try to get ahead of the curve where it comes to state-of-the-art data protection, including technology investments and governance policies. 

What does state-of-the-art for cybersecurity look like? What we know is that it looks different today than it did yesterday, and it will look different tomorrow. State-of-the-art means an ever-evolving program that is founded on the principles of the PPT model: People, Process and Technologies. PPT involves constant review and update of best practices weighed against changes to regulatory compliance. A good example of this model would be the programs established under the requirements of Massachusetts’ data protection law 201 CMR 17, which went beyond the California model of notification after a data breach to establishes a baseline for protecting that data in order to mitigate the chance of a data breach in the first place.

Thomas Jefferson said, “Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.” Thanks to the decision in FTC vs. Wyndham, eternal vigilance is now the price of cybersecurity.

James Bindseil is President and Chief Executive Officer of Globalscape, a leading developer of secure information exchange solutions. He has more than 20 years of experience in the technology industry, including senior leadership roles at Fujitsu, Symantec, and Axent ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-8033
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Textpattern 4.5.7, the password-reset feature does not securely tether a hash to a user account.
CVE-2020-15692
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Nim 1.2.4, the standard library browsers mishandles the URL argument to browsers.openDefaultBrowser. This argument can be a local file path that will be opened in the default explorer. An attacker can pass one argument to the underlying open command to execute arbitrary registered system commands...
CVE-2020-15693
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Nim 1.2.4, the standard library httpClient is vulnerable to a CR-LF injection in the target URL. An injection is possible if the attacker controls any part of the URL provided in a call (such as httpClient.get or httpClient.post), the User-Agent header value, or custom HTTP header names or values...
CVE-2020-15694
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Nim 1.2.4, the standard library httpClient fails to properly validate the server response. For example, httpClient.get().contentLength() does not raise any error if a malicious server provides a negative Content-Length.
CVE-2015-8032
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
In Textpattern 4.5.7, an unprivileged author can change an article's markup setting.