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
10 Costs Your Cyber Insurance Policy May Not Cover
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Volnut
50%
50%
Volnut,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/29/2018 | 8:41:17 AM
Re: 10 costs potentially covered
Thank you for your insights.
Joe Stanganelli
100%
0%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
1/25/2018 | 11:53:35 PM
Re: 10 costs not covered
I think the key word here is "May". If you think of it and you ask or negotiate, you can probably get it (albeit, perhaps, not at the price you want).

There is a complaint that smaller companies have less bargaining power than large enterprises, which may sometimes be true, but more often smaller or midsize companies are simply not thinking to ask very specifically for the things that large enterprises might consider routine.
PaulWaite
100%
0%
PaulWaite,
User Rank: Strategist
1/24/2018 | 11:18:11 PM
Cyber Cover Available
The costs that you have outlined and can be covered by one insurer. As stated you just need a broker that understands the various layers of complexity between various other businesss covers as well

We have designed a cyber product for the Australian market which is tailored to an organisationa actual risk and risk transference appetite. Simply put is is "Cyber by Design".
BrianN060
100%
0%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
1/24/2018 | 9:44:15 PM
Re: 10 costs potentially covered
@MC: I like your comment.  Don't agree with all your points; but they should be voiced - in a serious consideration of the proper role of insurance in cybersecurity corporate policy; and beyond the interests of an organization or industry.  There are macro-economic implications, and broad public and social consequences to what boils down to the responsibilities of data governance.

I don't think those can be properly enumerated and assessed in a string of comments.  Maybe it's enough that the article and comments inspire a closer look at the issues involved.  
mcavanaugh1
100%
0%
mcavanaugh1,
User Rank: Strategist
1/24/2018 | 1:59:26 PM
10 costs potentially covered
All 10 of the points provided can be covered under a Cyber Insurance policy through multiple insurance companies.  The issue should not be the problems with the policy but the problems with the agents & brokers selling the coverage.  Finding a broker or agent that understands the questions to ask, the carriers in the marketplace and the coverage to be added is the most important part of obtaining this coverage. Most of the issues we hear about claims being denied arise from an insurance agent that does not understand the coverage and simply places the insurance with the cheapest carrier on the table.  If your agent does not know how to get you a comprehensive insurance policy they should know who can get you one otherwise it is time for a new insurance agent.

Cybersecurity is a risk to be managed not solved.  Any comprehensive risk management program should incorporate IT security, Internal Policies, etc... as well as an Insurance policy to transfer the risk that cannot be removed through spending money on security. 
BrianN060
100%
0%
BrianN060,
User Rank: Ninja
1/24/2018 | 9:27:16 AM
10 costs not covered
Fine article, Kelly.  If typical, what's actually covered, they could write on a post-it note (it's the exclusions that would fill the binder).  Being flippant; but the facts presented should have many reconsidering reliance on insurance, over effective cybersecurity and data management/governance policies.   


7 Tips for Infosec Pros Considering A Lateral Career Move
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/21/2020
For Mismanaged SOCs, The Price Is Not Right
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment:   It's a PEN test of our cloud security.
Current Issue
IT 2020: A Look Ahead
Are you ready for the critical changes that will occur in 2020? We've compiled editor insights from the best of our network (Dark Reading, Data Center Knowledge, InformationWeek, ITPro Today and Network Computing) to deliver to you a look at the trends, technologies, and threats that are emerging in the coming year. Download it today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-9720
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
Tornado before 3.2.2 sends arbitrary responses that contain a fixed CSRF token and may be sent with HTTP compression, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct a BREACH attack and determine this token via a series of crafted requests.
CVE-2015-1525
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
audio/AudioPolicyManagerBase.cpp in Android before 5.1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (audio_policy application outage) via a crafted application that provides a NULL device address.
CVE-2015-1530
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
media/libmedia/IAudioPolicyService.cpp in Android before 5.1 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code with media_server privileges or cause a denial of service (integer overflow) via a crafted application that provides an invalid array size.
CVE-2015-2688
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
buf_pullup in Tor before 0.2.4.26 and 0.2.5.x before 0.2.5.11 does not properly handle unexpected arrival times of buffers with invalid layouts, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon exit) via crafted packets.
CVE-2015-2689
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
Tor before 0.2.4.26 and 0.2.5.x before 0.2.5.11 does not properly handle pending-connection resolve states during periods of high DNS load, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon exit) via crafted packets.