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.

Endpoint //

Privacy

8/23/2018
02:30 PM
Tim Critchley
Tim Critchley
Commentary
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
100%
0%

The GDPR Ripple Effect

Will we ever see a truly global data security and privacy mandate?

The race to comply with the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) by the May 25 deadline is over, but data security and privacy is a marathon, not a sprint. If the ever-evolving regulatory compliance landscape is any indication, GDPR is just the first of many mandates to come.

Although it certainly has been a headache for many organizations — with large firms allocating an average of $20 million to $25 million to become GDPR compliant — the GDPR is the catalyst for a much-needed global, all-encompassing data security and privacy law. This is something we need sooner rather than later.

Here's the challenge: Companies around the world have long been relying on a patchwork of laws and standards to secure customer data and keep their trust. Every day, security and compliance professionals deal with an alphabet soup of regulatory acronyms made up of industry, federal, state, and local mandates and standards. For example, a financial services organization that handles cardholder data must comply with the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard. If that organization operates in the US, it must also abide by the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, which protects consumers when they manage their finances electronically. Should that entity conduct business with an EU citizen, it is also beholden to the GDPR, even though these three regulations each have different requirements, some of which complicate or even outright contradict each other. You can see how compliance can become muddled — quickly.

The GDPR is a breath of fresh air. Its guidelines represent a better way of working toward keeping customer data safe. We have already seen some of its ripple effects, sparking conversations about how companies must handle, share, and secure personally identifiable information (PII), and putting pressure on brands to instill trust in their constituents. To this point, a recent Forrester Research survey shows that 61% of US adults expressed concern about the sharing of their data or online behaviors between companies.

In addition, the GDPR is sparking updated and new legislation. For example, Canada is considering amending the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act — its federal privacy law for private-sector firms — to include GDPR compliance. And the state of California just passed the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018. Coming into effect in 2020, it is believed to be the strictest privacy law in the US.

Although these mandates are steps in the right direction, it will still be years before we have a truly global regulation. In the meantime, the compliance landscape will only become more complex, with no single silver-bullet solution. However, there are a few steps you can take today to prepare for the regulations of tomorrow.

1. Define your data. Step back and understand where your customers' data is stored and map out the path it takes from the second it enters your system. Where does it go? How much do you have? How long are you storing it? Conduct a data discovery exercise that leverages artificial intelligence and machine learning to classify your information. Should a customer approach you to remove his or her data from a system (per GDPR's "right to be forgotten"), you can do so swiftly.

2. Assume your organization will be breached. It's no longer a matter of will we be breached, but when. For every customer record you hold, ask why you have it. If this data were stolen, could you provide a sound reason for storing it? For instance, if you are not a medical practice, can you justify holding a customer's healthcare data? If you're doubting whether you should hold a record, then don't!

3. Don't forget your team. Regularly train employees on basic security procedures, such as changing passwords regularly and looking out for phishing attacks. Clearly define your company's security policies and hold employees accountable. The crux of the matter is that insider threats (whether a malicious staff member stealing data or an innocent employee clicking on an email attachment containing malware) account for nearly half of all security incidents. To mitigate these risks, limit data access and apply the principle of "least privilege" — if someone doesn't need access to a record, he or she shouldn't have the ability to access it.

4. Remove as much PII as possible from your business environment. When viable, remove as much sensitive data as possible from the IT infrastructure. This could mean off-loading it to a compliant third party or simply and securely purging your database. For PII you can't remove, tokenize it and separate it from all other data so cybercriminals cannot obtain complete records. If you want to keep customer data past its shelf life, solely for statistical and research purposes, strip it of any personal identifiers such as names and addresses. As we like to say, "No one can hack the data you don't hold."

Related Content:

Learn from the industry's most knowledgeable CISOs and IT security experts in a setting that is conducive to interaction and conversation. Early-bird rate ends August 31. Click for more info

Tim Critchley has been the CEO of Semafone since 2009 and has led the company from a UK startup to an international business that spans five continents. He has helped secure Series A and Series B rounds of funding from various investor groups, including the BGF and Octopus. ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
Sodinokibi Ransomware: Where Attackers' Money Goes
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  10/15/2019
Data Privacy Protections for the Most Vulnerable -- Children
Dimitri Sirota, Founder & CEO of BigID,  10/17/2019
State of SMB Insecurity by the Numbers
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer,  10/17/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
New Best Practices for Secure App Development
New Best Practices for Secure App Development
The transition from DevOps to SecDevOps is combining with the move toward cloud computing to create new challenges - and new opportunities - for the information security team. Download this report, to learn about the new best practices for secure application development.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-8087
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-22
Information Leakage in PPPoE Packet Padding in AVM Fritz!Box 7490 with Firmware versions Fritz!OS 6.80 and 6.83 allows physically proximate attackers to view slices of previously transmitted packets or portions of memory via via unspecified vectors.
CVE-2019-10079
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-22
Apache Traffic Server is vulnerable to HTTP/2 setting flood attacks. Earlier versions of Apache Traffic Server didn't limit the number of setting frames sent from the client using the HTTP/2 protocol. Users should upgrade to Apache Traffic Server 7.1.7, 8.0.4, or later versions.
CVE-2019-12147
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-22
The Sangoma Session Border Controller (SBC) 2.3.23-119 GA web interface is vulnerable to Argument Injection via special characters in the username field. Upon successful exploitation, a remote unauthenticated user can create a local system user with sudo privileges, and use that user to login to the...
CVE-2019-12148
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-22
The Sangoma Session Border Controller (SBC) 2.3.23-119 GA web interface is vulnerable to an authentication bypass via an argument injection vulnerability involving special characters in the username field. Upon successful exploitation, a remote unauthenticated user can login into the device's admin ...
CVE-2019-12290
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-22
GNU libidn2 before 2.2.0 fails to perform the roundtrip checks specified in RFC3490 Section 4.2 when converting A-labels to U-labels. This makes it possible in some circumstances for one domain to impersonate another. By creating a malicious domain that matches a target domain except for the inclusi...