theDocumentId => 740799 Equifax, Intel Help Spur SEC to Update ...

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.

Operational Security //

Law

2/23/2018
09:35 AM
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
Larry Loeb
50%
50%

Equifax, Intel Help Spur SEC to Update Cybersecurity Regulations

The Equifax data breach, along with problems at Intel, has spurred the Securities and Exchange Commission to update its rules about the disclosing of cybersecurity incidents that now puts greater responsibility on CEOs and other company officers.

An outcry from investors about the recent breaches of Equifax, as well as the problems happening at Intel, have caused the US Securities and Exchange Commission to update its 2011-era guidelines on how public companies should be handling any cybersecurity incidents.

Released this week, the updated SEC guidance actually emphasizes what sort of incidents should be treated as insider information.

The new rules state that security flaws and incidents are to be considered as non-public insider information, if they are not announced to the public. This means that information may not be used in management decisions about buying or selling stock in the company.

(Source: iStock)
(Source: iStock)

The SEC put it this way in a statement:

Directors, officers, and other corporate insiders must not trade a public company's securities while in possession of material nonpublic information, which may include knowledge regarding a significant cybersecurity incident experienced by the company … In addition, we believe that companies are well served by considering the ramifications of directors, officers, and other corporate insiders trading in advance of disclosures regarding cyber incidents that prove to be material. We recognize that many companies have adopted preventative measures to address the appearance of improper trading and we encourage companies to consider such preventative measures in the context of a cyber event.

This takes all the wiggle room out of what the C-level or company officers can do if they know something the public does not. They can't sell company stock while they think the price will be elevated.

This was exactly what the CEO of Intel Corp. (Nasdaq: INTC) was accused of doing when he sold $39 million of stock before the recent security problems were announced to the public. (See Intel Offering New Microcode to Fix Spectre & Meltdown.)

Additionally, four Equifax executives sold $1.8 million in stock just after their own breach, and months before the public was informed. The Justice Department has an ongoing investigation on that sale. (See Equifax Hacked: Profit Before Protection?)

Not only that, the SEC says they will be watching this with an attentive eye: "The Commission, and the staff through its filing review process, continues to monitor cybersecurity disclosures carefully," according to the agency.

This differs from the SEC guidance of 2011, which totally ducked the question of cybersecurity incident effects and how it related to inside trading. But more than that, they also make sure companies understand that they are required to establish and maintain "appropriate and effective disclosure controls and procedures," which will result in the accurate and timely disclosures of material events, including those related to cybersecurity.


The fundamentals of network security are being redefined -- don't get left in the dark by a DDoS attack! Join us in Austin from May 14-16 at the fifth-annual Big Communications Event. There's still time to register and communications service providers get in free!

The SEC hammered home the point that these robust disclosure controls and procedures assist companies in satisfying their disclosure obligations under the federal securities laws. This means that if they have not been implemented by a company, they may find themselves afoul of these same laws.

Omitting information in the regulatory filings a company makes will be a real problem as well.

The SEC considers omitted information to be material if the omitted information would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the total mix of information available. That's a pretty wide criteria to be applied and really closes the barn door shut.

The commission goes on to state that the materiality of cybersecurity risks and incidents will depend on the range of harm that an incident could cause. That includes the harm to a company's reputation, financial performance, and customer and vendor relationships, not to mention the possibility of litigation or regulatory investigations or action.

The SEC did it for real, this time.

It has made it very clear just what companies will have to do to avoid being hammered by them in the future. The SEC may have been forced into this by the vagueness of their guidance in the past, but with this document has made up for that.

Related posts:

— Larry Loeb has written for many of the last century's major "dead tree" computer magazines, having been, among other things, a consulting editor for BYTE magazine and senior editor for the launch of WebWeek.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-32788
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-27
Discourse is an open source discussion platform. In versions prior to 2.7.7 there are two bugs which led to the post creator of a whisper post being revealed to non-staff users. 1: Staff users that creates a whisper post in a personal message is revealed to non-staff participants of the personal mes...
CVE-2021-32796
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-27
xmldom is an open source pure JavaScript W3C standard-based (XML DOM Level 2 Core) DOMParser and XMLSerializer module. xmldom versions 0.6.0 and older do not correctly escape special characters when serializing elements removed from their ancestor. This may lead to unexpected syntactic changes durin...
CVE-2021-32748
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-27
Nextcloud Richdocuments in an open source self hosted online office. Nextcloud uses the WOPI ("Web Application Open Platform Interface") protocol to communicate with the Collabora Editor, the communication between these two services was not protected by a credentials or IP check. Whilst th...
CVE-2021-34432
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-27
In Eclipse Mosquitto versions 2.07 and earlier, the server will crash if the client tries to send a PUBLISH packet with topic length = 0.
CVE-2021-20399
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-27
IBM Qradar SIEM 7.3.0 to 7.3.3 Patch 8 and 7.4.0 to 7.4.3 GA is vulnerable to an XML External Entity Injection (XXE) attack when processing XML data. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to expose sensitive information or consume memory resources. IBM X-Force ID: 196073.