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.

Comments
How Cookie-Cutter Cyber Insurance Falls Short
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
DavidL814
50%
50%
DavidL814,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/15/2014 | 4:39:07 PM
Re: not too surprising, really...
In some product lines, insurance companies have been known to be quick to collect premiums and stingy on the coverage.  The modern day cyberliability insurance policy is the exception.  If you bought coverage when there were limited insurers 5-10 years ago, you might have had some coverage gaps as highlighted in this article.  There were very recognizable insurance companies offering substandard coverage.  At the same time, there were lesser known insurers giving very real and broad coverage at a great price.  Most policies (from 50 insurers now) will cover paper records, regulatory actions, regulatory fines and penalties, a whole host of risk management services, hotlines, call centers, forensics work, penetration testing and more.  Failure to encrypt exclusions are very rare.  The insurers that didn't clean up their act were quickly replaced by new entrants.  I wouldn't be too cynical about this product anymore.  It's cheaper than ever and more broad than you could have imagined 5-6 years ago.  The exception might be if you are a major retailer, the insurers are rightfully very cautious about that class right now.
soozyg
50%
50%
soozyg,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/6/2014 | 8:27:33 PM
Re: that much trouble?
@Marilyn, I supposed a main reason why the clause would be there is that IF one of those agencies take legal action against a company, the amount of time and money spent to fight the charges is so scary, and brings such bad publicity, that it behooves a company to protect itself against that action.
Sara Peters
50%
50%
Sara Peters,
User Rank: Author
10/6/2014 | 4:24:54 PM
Re: Cookie-Cutter Cyber Insurance Falls Short
@MercyK29  Thanks for the offer! And you make a point I hadn't even thought of: It isn't just the people buying insurance that need education, it's the people selling the insurance too. Compared to other forms of insurance, cyber-liability insurance is new, different, and covering the kinds of incidents that most people don't even think about. There's got to be a learning curve for agents as well as would-be policy-holders.
MercyK249
50%
50%
MercyK249,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/6/2014 | 4:06:51 PM
Cookie-Cutter Cyber Insurance Falls Short
There are some really good policies that provide the coverages and rather competitively.  But you do need an agent who has really looked at a lot of them and tracked the coverages.  Some are very bad for retailers and health care.  If anyone needs to know about specific coverages from specific companies, let me know and I will be happy to get the information for you. 
Sara Peters
50%
50%
Sara Peters,
User Rank: Author
10/6/2014 | 3:36:01 PM
not too surprising, really...
They're insurance companies. Of course they're going to do their best to take a lot and pay out a little.  :)   Great post! Hopefully companies -- CISOs, CIOs, CFOs, risk officers, legal departments, etc. -- will begin to get smarter about what these policies do and don't do. And hopefully, as more players enter the market, competition between all companies will make them try harder to get business.  
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
10/6/2014 | 3:18:59 PM
Re: that much trouble?
Thanks, @MercyK249. I would assume that the same probably applies for Sarbones-Oxley and other regs...
MercyK249
50%
50%
MercyK249,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/6/2014 | 2:53:39 PM
Re: that much trouble?
HIPPA can affect all employers that have health nsurance for their employees and the States Attorney Generals can level fines in 47 states for not promptly notifying "records" that there may have been a breach.   Many policies provide coverage for fines, but you have to specifically ask to make sure.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
10/6/2014 | 2:07:43 PM
Re: that much trouble?
That's a good question @soozyg, how rigorous is the enforcement of those agencies. And does the same exclusion for legal actions stemming from breaches due to failures of security standards of, for example, HIPAA, apply?
soozyg
50%
50%
soozyg,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/6/2014 | 12:13:39 PM
that much trouble?
potential legal action brought by the Office of Civil Rights, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Office of the Attorney General,

Do that many companies have issues with these offices that the clause needs to be included?


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/10/2020
Researcher Finds New Office Macro Attacks for MacOS
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  8/7/2020
Exploiting Google Cloud Platform With Ease
Dark Reading Staff 8/6/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
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-2020-8720
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Buffer overflow in a subsystem for some Intel(R) Server Boards, Server Systems and Compute Modules before version 1.59 may allow a privileged user to potentially enable denial of service via local access.
CVE-2020-12300
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Uninitialized pointer in BIOS firmware for Intel(R) Server Board Families S2600CW, S2600KP, S2600TP, and S2600WT may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
CVE-2020-12301
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Improper initialization in BIOS firmware for Intel(R) Server Board Families S2600ST, S2600BP and S2600WF may allow a privileged user to potentially enable escalation of privilege via local access.
CVE-2020-7307
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Unprotected Storage of Credentials vulnerability in McAfee Data Loss Prevention (DLP) for Mac prior to 11.5.2 allows local users to gain access to the RiskDB username and password via unprotected log files containing plain text credentials.
CVE-2020-8679
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Out-of-bounds write in Kernel Mode Driver for some Intel(R) Graphics Drivers before version 26.20.100.7755 may allow an authenticated user to potentially enable denial of service via local access.