Category Archives: Regulatory Risk

Для тех, кто интересуется безопасным доступом к онлайн-играм, наш партнер предлагает зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые блокировки и сохранять доступ ко всем функциям казино.

How Cybersecure is Your Company?

Posted on by

cyber headlines

It should come as no surprise that security has moved from an afterthought at global organizations to a front-and-center consideration, often involving the CEO and board of directors. Headlines of the world’s largest companies involved in breaches are rampant, and will only increase as organizations accelerate their digital transformation plans and in doing so create lucrative opportunities for bad actors to steal valuable assets. Businesses are inherently interested in making money, and cybersecurity crimes have a significant impact on their bottom line. In fact, it is estimated that cybercrime will cost $2.1 trillion by 2019, according to Juniper Research.

For C-level execs and board members alike, their real understanding of cyber-exposure is too often binary: Are we on the front page of the Wall St. Journal or Not? While this may be an unfair over-generalization for tech-savvy board members, it is clear that cybersecurity is now included in their “fiduciary duties.” With increasing investments going to security software, consultants, and now cyber-insurance, executives and officers must know the risk profile of their digital systems and security service level agreements (SSLAs).

Organizations looking to maintain their competitive edge will take a new approach to security from the first line defenders in the IT department to the boardroom. The quickest and simplest step in moving the right direction must be to answer “How secure are we as an organization?”

The Best Defense is a Good Offense

Forward thinking organizations are appointing board members that have recognized this security paradigm shift and are moving from a defensive to an offensive mindset when it comes to protecting their assets. Some companies, like AIG, Blackberry, General Motors and Wells Fargo are even going so far as to appoint board members with cybersecurity expertise. While it isn’t mandatory that organizations have cybersecurity experts on their boards, the reality is that no board can escape responsibility, and digital threats will only become more a part of daily business life.

Ask the Right Questions

Beyond asking “How secure are we?” board members should ask their CISOs and security professionals whether their resources and budgets are appropriate. While CISOs will likely always ask for more, they need to be able to demonstrate specific holes and needs or anticipate pending regulatory changes specific to their industries. It would also be wise to regularly ask what internal changes have been made in light of developments in the industry. Additional questions that should be asked include:

  • How are you designing a security posture that does not slow down business operations?
  • How do we know that data/IP systems not in our control are safe and secure, such as internet of things (IoT) and cloud?
  • How do we ensure that we are ahead of new regulatory requirements coming down the pike?
  • Who is responsible for security—CISO, CIO or risk & compliance officer?
  • What is our risk score matrix?

Establish a Seat at the Table

For CISOs, this new attention can be a double-edged sword; while the increased visibility of their position could be beneficial to their own importance to the company, their performance will be scrutinized by the highest levels of management.

CISOs and their security equivalents presenting to the board require a persistent seat at the table. Bringing them in just for an annual report will leave many questions unanswered and does not paint an accurate picture of the organization’s risk profile. Continual updates should include both positive and negative developments, which will make budget increase requests more likely when needed.

These experts should also be expected to provide detailed analytics and a tailored executive dashboard that demonstrates the progress made against goals and benchmarks. The sophistication of these dashboards will depend on the board’s expertise but educating these members should be included in any presentation.

Put a Price on it

When taking these steps and bringing security to the forefront of business planning, each board presentation will allow organizations to make security a marketable attribute. Consumers are becoming increasingly fickle about doing business with organizations that have been breached and as a result are looking for assurance that they and their data will be secured. Promoting your organization’s commitment to security can be a valuable asset to the company’s bottom line. Board members can play a significant role in shifting perception and reality in the marketplace and would be wise to ask more questions to get closer to answering “How secure are we?”

Top Board and C-Suite Risks for 2016

Posted on by

Regulatory changes, economic conditions and cyberthreats are the top concerns of board members and company executives this year, according to a new enterprise risk management survey.

U.S.-based companies listed several operational risks as top concerns, while non-U.S. companies listed only one, cyberthreat, as a major concern, according to the report, Executive Perspectives on Top Risks for 2016, by North Carolina State’s ERM Initiative and Protiviti.

Overall, companies see the current business environment as riskier than in 2015, but not as risky as 2014.

buy flexeril online cphia2023.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/jpg/flexeril.html no prescription pharmacy

With increased inquiries and added concerns about risk from boards of directors and company executives, respondents indicated they will be investing more in risk management this year. “More organizations are realizing that additional risk management sophistication is warranted given the fast pace in which complex risks are emerging,” the study found.

Boards of directors rated only one strategic risk among their top five concerns, with the remaining falling into macroeconomic and operational risk categories.

buy zofran online cphia2023.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/jpg/zofran.html no prescription pharmacy

CEOs, on the other hand, saw strategic risks as three out of their top five issues.

buy elavil online cphia2023.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/jpg/elavil.html no prescription pharmacy

According to the study:

“This disparity in the viewpoints emphasizes the critical importance of both the board and management team engaging in risk discussions, given their unique perspectives may be contributing to an apparent lack of consensus about the organization’s most significant emerging risks.”

ERM Risks

NFL Admits Game’s Link to Concussion Risk

Posted on by

football

After years of denying that the game of football could have caused degenerative brain disease in some players, the National Football League has finally admitted there is a link connecting the game to chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE). According to the New York Times:

Representative Jan Schakowsky, Democrat of Illinois, asked during a round-table discussion about concussions whether “there is a link between football and degenerative brain disorders like CTE,”

Jeff Miller, the NFL’s senior vice president for health and safety policy, said, “The answer to that is certainly, yes.” His response signaled a stunning about-face for the league, which has been accused by former players and independent experts of hiding the dangers of head injuries for decades.

Miller’s comments were backed the next day by league spokesperson Brian McCarthy. Miller’s answer may actually help the NFL, as “It could make it harder in the future for a player to accuse the league of concealing the dangers of the sport,” the Times said.

“Strategically, the NFL’s admission makes a world of sense,” Jeffrey A. Standen, dean of the Chase College of Law at Northern Kentucky University, told the Times. “The league has paid a settlement to close all the claims previous to 2015. For future sufferers, the NFL has now effectively put them on notice that their decision to play professional football comes with the acknowledged risk of degenerative brain disease.”

While CTE has been found in former players, the NFL has for decades denied the danger, even after researchers with Boston University announced in 2014 that, in autopsies of 79 brains of former NFL players, 76 tested positive for CTE. A report in 2003 by the Center for the Study of Retired Athletes at the University of North Carolina found a connection between concussions and depression among former professional football players.

According to a 2007 UNC study, Recurrent Concussion and Risk of Depression in Retired Professional Football Players:

Our observed threefold prevalence ratio for retired players with three or more concussions is daunting, given that depression is typically characterized by sadness, loss of interest in activities, decreased energy, and loss of confidence and self-esteem. These findings call into question how effectively retired professional football players with a history of three or more concussions are able to meet the mental and physical demands of life after playing professional football.

The NFL has directed millions of dollars to research of CTE and head trauma and it gave $45 million to USA Football to promote safe tackling and reassure parents that football’s risks can be mitigated through on-field techniques and awareness, the Times said.

Why You Need a Vendor Management Policy Right Now

Posted on by

In recent years, more and more cybersecurity incidents have taken place as a result of insecure third-party vendors, business associates and contractors. For example, the repercussions of the notorious Target breach from a vulnerable HVAC vendor continue to plague the company today. With sensitive data, trade secrets and intellectual property at risk, hackers can easily leverage a third party’s direct access into a company’s network to break in.

While such incidents may cause significant financial and reputational harm to the first-party business, there is hope.

buy addyi online www.dino-dds.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/addyi.html no prescription pharmacy

Regulators are instating a growing number of legal requirements that an organization must meet with respect to third-party vendor riskcybersecurity management. As liability and regulations take shape, it is important to assess whether your company currently employs a vendor risk management policy, and, if not, understand how a lack of due diligence poses significant risk on your organization’s overall cybersecurity preparedness.

A vendor management policy is put in place so an organization can tier its vendors based on risk. A policy like this identifies which vendors put the organization most at risk and then expresses which controls the company will implement to lessen this risk. These controls might include rewriting all contracts to ensure vendors meet a certain level of security or implementing an annual inspection.

All this probably sounds pretty good, but you may still be wondering why you really need a vendor management policy—and why it’s urgent.

Here are four explanations to give you a better idea:

  1. Legal Liability

There are a growing number of legal requirements in a variety of sectors—from finance, to retail, to health care, to energy—on how companies should manage their third-party risk. Regulators have recognized that data breaches through third parties can present significant and sometimes catastrophic consequences to an organization. To deal with this risk, they have created various legal requirements in an effort to have organizations manage their third-party cyber risks more carefully. If you are in a regulated industry and do not currently have a vendor management policy, you could be out of compliance (and in a lot of trouble).

buy reglan online www.dino-dds.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/reglan.html no prescription pharmacy

  1. Well-Known Risks

An organization should be concerned about third parties that have either access to their most sensitive data or direct access into their corporate network. So if you work with a lot of third parties, you are naturally creating more targets that hackers and criminals can exploit. This is becoming more common, as organizations are outsourcing to vendors more frequently in an effort to either save costs or capitalize on vendor expertise. While that is all well and good, the more vendors you have, the larger risk landscape you create. This is a well-known risk—but all too many companies don’t give it enough thought.

  1. Unknown Risks

Not all risks are easily understandable. Many organizations today have entered into business relationships with third parties, not fully understanding the risk to their data. What’s more, the first party may not have set requirements for how their vendors should secure their data.

buy flagyl online www.dino-dds.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/flagyl.html no prescription pharmacy

A number of organizations struggle to even know who has access to their sensitive data, how much access they have, where it resides, and more. These unknowns give plenty of companies a valid reason for concern.

  1. Significant Consequences

To see how very real the consequences of not managing vendor policy are, simply read some of the latest cybersecurity headlines. An example that demonstrates the significant impact of a third-party breach is the recent Experian breach, which exposed the personally identifiable information of over 15 million consumers. In this case, Experian was holding loads of sensitive T-Mobile customer data, which hackers were able to access. The T-Mobile CEO John Legere expressed how furious he was at Experian for being the source of this compromise. Nothing has been stated yet, but we’re certain that this business partnership will be reevaluated after this experience.

The truth is that if you don’t have a vendor management policy in place today, your company is falling behind the times. Unfortunately, not having such a policy in place also means there is a good chance that your organization’s sensitive data is being handled by someone who shouldn’t have access to it. This puts the health of your entire company on the line.