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

7/22/2011
04:50 PM
50%
50%

Sony Insurer Disputes Breach Insurance Claims

A cautionary tale for enterprises that think they have data breach insurance

A new court battle reported this week could potentially decide how liability is determined when organizations covered by general liability insurance get hacked and suffer a database breach.

The case at hand pits insurer Zurich American against its client Sony: Zurich has refused to cover the costs of class-action lawsuits stemming from Sony's embarrassing breaches earlier this year, and wants the courts to weigh in with a judgment to clarify the matter.

Sony says it expects the financial fallout from the breaches to add up to more than $178 million this year; the firm is currently fighting 55 class action lawsuits. According to a report from Reuters, Zurich recently stated in court papers that it had received claims from Sony to cover costs related to these lawsuits under a general liability insurance policy written by Zurich.

The insurer says it shouldn't have to pay the claim since the policy is for "bodily injury, property damage, or personal and advertising injury," and none of those apply within the class-action suits.

Given the rising prevalence of data breaches and the increasing storm of litigation companies face from customers furious about their loss of privacy, this case is a must-follow precedence-setter for professionals in IT security and enterprise risk management. Ty Sagalow, an insurance consultant and founder of Innovation Insurance Group, says there are still many within the industry who are under the mistaken assumption that general liability policies will help them out in the event of a data breach.

"There are probably still some risk managers out there that think that their comprehensive general liability policy cover breaches," says Sagalow, who was one of the main experts in charge of first drafting cyberinsurance policies for Zurich when he worked for the company prior to starting his own consulting shop. "These types of cyberevents are not covered in the typical standard forms of insurance."

Sagalow says that as cyber-risks increase in sophistication and pervasiveness, organizations need to think about adding additional coverage that can hold up to court scrutiny when everything hits the fan. But because cyberinsurance is such a new phenomenon, it's a buyer-beware situation.

"Unlike many insurance policies that companies buy, there is no standard form -- it's not like comprehensive general liability or workman's comp or fleet auto -- cyber is not standard," Sagalow says. "Plus, it is in an area which is called surplus insurance, meaning that they're not subject to state filing regulations for state approval, which allows freedom of an insurance carrier to set terms and conditions."

This means that organizations considering cyberpolicies have to read very carefully before signing on the dotted line, says Rick Kam, president and founder of consultancy ID Experts, a firm that helps with pre- and post-breach strategy. He says that companies often buy cyberinsurance expecting it to cover breaches, only to discover after an event that the insurance is primarily for instances such as denial-of-service attacks.

"Insurance has to be very specific to cover those issues related to a data breach," Kam says. "One of the major tips I would suggest is to have their enterprise risk manager -- the person responsible for their insurance policies -- meet with their insurers to validate what's covered and what's not when it comes to a breach."

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
97% of Americans Can't Ace a Basic Security Test
Steve Zurier, Contributing Writer,  5/20/2019
TeamViewer Admits Breach from 2016
Dark Reading Staff 5/20/2019
How a Manufacturing Firm Recovered from a Devastating Ransomware Attack
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  5/20/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-5798
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Lack of correct bounds checking in Skia in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform an out of bounds memory read via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5799
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect inheritance of a new document's policy in Content Security Policy in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5800
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Insufficient policy enforcement in Blink in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5801
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect eliding of URLs in Omnibox in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5802
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect handling of download origins in Navigation in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page.