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

08:55 AM
Joe Stanganelli
Joe Stanganelli
News Analysis-Security Now

My Cybersecurity Predictions for 2018, Part 2: GDPR Hype Is Hype

GDPR is the biggest thing in IT privacy and security in a decade. Or its not. Joe Stanganelli on what 2018 will hold in GDPR-driven privacy.

Cybersecurity predictions rely on hype -- and GDPR is full of it.

Despite occasionally finding a decent one, I generally don't like the batches of annual InfoSec predictions that infiltrate the Internet en masse this time of year. It seems that most blog posts, reports, and articles bearing cybersecurity predictions are either so broadly stated or so reliant on the obvious that they can't go wrong. In trying to be thought leadership, such pieces wind up being thought followership.

In this series of cybersecurity predictions for 2018, I am attempting to be an InfoSec "anti-prognosticator" of sorts. I have strived to make my own predictions sufficiently wild and sufficiently specific such that there is a genuinely strong chance that they are wrong -- yet grounded in reality enough such that they could come true. I've also tied in some detailed explanations of my reasoning so it doesn't seem too much like I'm just sitting here making stuff up that sounds good as I go along.

In my first prediction, I looked towards Washington bureaucrats -- the FTC in particular -- and what will likely be their overeager approach to cybersecurity in 2018. Now, in Part 2 of this series, I focus the signals of my crystal e-ball on Washington's counterparts in Europe -- but coming up with a vision very different from my last one. (See My Cybersecurity Predictions for 2018, Part 1: Following Trends & the FTC.)

2018 Prediction No. 2: GDPR will be a big, fat nothing.

The EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) takes effect on May 25, 2018 -- impacting all organizations around the world that collect and/or share data on EU citizens and residents. Those who run afoul of the regulatory scheme, regardless of where they are situated globally, risk fines of up to four percent of their annual revenues or €20,000,000 -- whichever is greater. For companies in the data business (and what company isn't, these days?), May 25, 2018, represents a doomsday countdown similar to that of Y2K.

And, similar to Y2K, nothing will happen.

Indeed, many enterprises in the data-freewheeling US tend to fall into either of two categories when it comes to approaches to GDPR:

  1. Completely losing their minds as they struggle with gearing up for compliance.
  2. Completely not giving a fig.

I mean, sure, right up until the very end there will be policy restructuring and audits galore to ensure compliance. But once GDPR Day gets here, we will find out that Global Datapocalypse by Regulation has been postponed.

GDPR is a long-in-the-making substitute for the Safe Harbor provisions that the European Court of Justice struck down in October 2015 pursuant to a case an Austrian student brought against Facebook after Edward Snowden brought the NSA's high-tech surveillance practices (and Facebook and other tech companies' cooperation with some of those practices) to light. EU regulators raced to promulgate a patchwork regulatory framework a few months later known as Privacy Shield. In the meantime, lawyers and consulting firms began doing a brisk business in drafting oodles of country-specific BCRs (a.k.a. Binding Corporate Rules), pursuant to the EU's 1995 Data Protection Directive, as ad hoc data-transfer agreements that would keep the flow of global commerce running.

It was messy, but the world did not end.

Of course, GDPR looks to be the furthest reaching and most complex data-stewardship regulatory scheme the world has ever seen. But, again, regulation is political. GDPR is the "this is why we can't have nice things" of data stewardship that will be inflicted on the world because a handful of tech companies and the US government intelligence apparatus took things way too far. (See GDPR: Broad, Complex & Coming Soon.)

That handful of tech companies -- the likes of Facebook, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, etc. -- has a giant target on its back that EU politicos are itching to fire at. This year, Google was hit with a nearly $3 billion fine for unrelated antitrust violations in the EU -- and had to scramble to make prompt concessions to avoid additional fines of up to five percent of parent company Alphabet's annual revenues. When it comes to Big Tech (at least, Big American Tech), EU regulators are out for blood.

But a ten-figure fine for companies of Google's ilk is rather like a parking ticket -- hardly bank-breaking, but obnoxious enough to try to avoid. Consequently, you can expect bigtime Silicon Valley to do its best to dot its compliance i's and regulatory t's -- but even if they do run slightly afoul of GDPR, they'll be fine.

Meanwhile, smaller organizations are unlikely to bring the full governmental might and fury of the EU down upon them so long as they don't do anything outrageous. There may be nips here and there, but -- as with just about every other major regulatory scheme in the world -- everybody will have enough worried trouble figuring it out such that the punishment for most mistakes will mean more paperwork than fines.

Midsize marketing and martech firms will probably be the worst off -- partly because the way they will get things wrong will be just significant enough to garner political antipathy in the joint name of privacy and consumer protection, and partly because (sorry, but it's true) there are a lot of dumb marketers.

But that's how it is stateside, too, with the FTC. GDPR is the EU's FTC Act -- broad, far-reaching consumer-protection regulation that's designed to get some skeezy marketers and the occasional high-profile target into a lot of trouble.

I'm over-simplifying all of this, of course, but one kind of has to when it comes to the intricacies of GDPR. Besides, these are new-year predictions. I'm just making stuff up that sounds good as I go along.

Related posts:

Joe Stanganelli, principal of Beacon Hill Law, is a Boston-based attorney, corporate-communications and data-privacy consultant, writer, and speaker. Follow him on Twitter at @JoeStanganelli.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 7/9/2020
4 Security Tips as the July 15 Tax-Day Extension Draws Near
Shane Buckley, President & Chief Operating Officer, Gigamon,  7/10/2020
Russian Cyber Gang 'Cosmic Lynx' Focuses on Email Fraud
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/7/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
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 Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
This report describes some of the latest attacks and threats emanating from the Internet, as well as advice and tips on how your organization can mitigate those threats before they affect your business. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-10
Django Two-Factor Authentication before 1.12, stores the user's password in clear text in the user session (base64-encoded). The password is stored in the session when the user submits their username and password, and is removed once they complete authentication by entering a two-factor authenticati...
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-10
In Bareos Director less than or equal to 16.2.10, 17.2.9, 18.2.8, and 19.2.7, a heap overflow allows a malicious client to corrupt the director's memory via oversized digest strings sent during initialization of a verify job. Disabling verify jobs mitigates the problem. This issue is also patched in...
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-10
Bareos before version 19.2.8 and earlier allows a malicious client to communicate with the director without knowledge of the shared secret if the director allows client initiated connection and connects to the client itself. The malicious client can replay the Bareos director's cram-md5 challenge to...
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-10
osquery before version 4.4.0 enables a priviledge escalation vulnerability. If a Window system is configured with a PATH that contains a user-writable directory then a local user may write a zlib1.dll DLL, which osquery will attempt to load. Since osquery runs with elevated privileges this enables l...
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-10
An exploitable SQL injection vulnerability exists in the Admin Reports functionality of Glacies IceHRM v26.6.0.OS (Commit bb274de1751ffb9d09482fd2538f9950a94c510a) . A specially crafted HTTP request can cause SQL injection. An attacker can make an authenticated HTTP request to trigger this vulnerabi...