Category Archives: Uncategorized

Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

The New Reality of Weather Risk

Posted on by

What do you do when you are responsible for the safety of town, county or state residents and forecasts call for drastic weather conditions? Risk professionals can come under criticism if they are overly cautious, yet under-reacting can mean lives are at stake.

Take the current situation here in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. Predictions called for one- to three-feet of snow and blizzard conditions over a wide swath of the tri-state area and states of emergency were declared. Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York yesterday called for a full travel ban in 13 counties, beginning at 11:00 p.m. Those breaking the ban were subject to fines of up to $300, he said.

“With forecasts showing a potentially historic blizzard for Long Island, New York City, and parts of the Hudson Valley, we are preparing for the worst and I urge all New Yorkers to do the same – take this storm seriously and put safety first,” Gov. Cuomo said.

In actuality, however, the storm moved east and north, driving the brunt of the heavy snow and blizzard conditions through Long Island, New York and north through Connecticut and towards Boston.

Today at 7:30 a.m. the travel ban was lifted in most areas of New York and it was announced that public transportation would resume on a weekend schedule. Travel is also permitted in New Jersey and parts of Connecticut. But with snowfall much less than anticipated in many areas, some are questioning the travel ban. Connecticut Gov. Daniel Malloy, however, credited the travel ban and people’s cooperation, for the low number of automobile accidents during the storm—only 15 in the entire state.

“I would rather lean towards safety, because I have seen the consequences the other way, and it gets very frightening very quickly,” Cuomo told the media this morning. He noted, “Recently in New York we weren’t prepared in Buffalo.” In November, more than six feet of snow was dumped on Buffalo, claiming four lives. He also pointed out that the impacts of Hurricane Irene were underestimated. The belief was that most damage would occur in coastal areas, when the reality was that most destruction happened upstate.

This dilemma is widespread, from hurricanes to thunderstorms to wildfires. How far does a state’s governor go when preparing for an emergency? As Cuomo and many others have said, the responsible action is to put safety first.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio defended the decision to shut down the city in a press conference today. “We prepare for the worst and hope for the best,” he said, adding that the good news is that “the people of the city understood how serious this was.” The travel ban kept people safe and allowed the sanitation department—2,400 workers—to more easily clear the roads and deal with the storm’s aftermath, he said.

Asked if he is concerned that New Yorkers won’t take precautions next time, as was the case with Superstorm Sandy, de Blasio said he is not. “The world has changed a lot in the last few years. Point one: we are going to be very forceful in our messages to people when we sense danger. This is what you saw in the last 48 hours—there is no guarantee what you will get with the weather.”

In the future, he said, “I guarantee, if we ever get to the point in any crisis where we say the word ‘evacuate’ it’s going to be very forceful. It’s going to be constantly reiterated and we are going to put a lot of muscle into that.”

Another reality, he said, is that “Extreme weather is becoming much more common” as we have seen extreme weather events “over and over again, in a kind of progression that was unimaginable just a few years ago. People understand it. They understand that global warming is one of the causes and they understand the vulnerability and that we have to look at things differently. That is one of the reasons they took last night so seriously and acted accordingly.”

 

What Proposed Changes to U.K. Counter-Terror Laws Mean for Your K&R Policy

Posted on by

With insurers facing increased scrutiny over indemnity payments from the U.K. government, there could be consequences for companies who regularly put their employees into harm’s way.

When she announced plans for new laws in the Counter Terrorism and Security Bill, Home Secretary Theresa May cited UN estimates that ransom payments have raised up to £28 million ($42 million) for militant group ISIS in the past 12 months.

Observers often ask if the existence of kidnap and ransom (K&R) insurance itself encourages kidnapping for ransom. But for corporate risk managers, the debate is immaterial. They must protect employees and ensure that jobs in danger zones remain attractive to new recruits.

May’s bill amendments, which will be inserted into the Terrorism Act 2000 if passed, do present a potential challenge to the established order and highlight the pivotal role of response consultants (AKA hostage negotiators).

How does K&R actually work?

K&R insurance typically covers against losses related to kidnap incidents, particularly ransoms, lost earnings and the costs for an outsourced expert agency whose job is to handle the case and advise the policyholder on the negotiations. However, the indemnification is only paid out to the policyholders retrospectively, after the hostage situation is over. With such an approach, insurers on the one hand prevent ransom payments spiraling out of control and, on the other hand, remain in the grey area of section 17 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

The new amendments

Under May’s new section 17A, it is now clear that the insurer commits an offense if “it knows or has reasonable cause to suspect” that payments will be handed over in response to a demand made for the benefit of a proscribed organization.

The question for their response consultants will therefore be how much notice they can give their assureds as to whom they are dealing with. Historically, negotiations for release could be made without resorting to identifying the culprit, but now the insurer will have to make sure that they are not engaging with a terrorist on Whitehall’s blacklist.

As of Nov. 28, 2014, there were 74 international terrorist organizations listed under the Terrorism Act 2000. However, a large number of organizations associated with kidnappings are not on the list, which, with a few exceptions, focuses on organizations from Northern Ireland and those operating in the MENASA Region (Middle East, North Africa and South Asia). Of course, kidnappings have increased in the Middle East in recent years, but most kidnappings worldwide are still taking place in Central and South America and Central and Southern Africa. Although the new law only targets proscribed organizations from the MENASA region, insurers have to remain attentive since the home secretary may add organizations to the list at any time.

One thing which hopefully will remain protected are the fees and costs that hostage negotiators charge; this is a critical part of the industry’s service to a market believed to include at least 80% of the Fortune 500 as its clientele.

K&R still valid

From a company’s perspective, K&R is certainly still a valid class of business. There should not be any effect on pricing as the underlying risk has not changed.

However, if your policy is led by insurers domiciled in the U.K., those insurers may be less likely to indemnify kidnappings where the culprits may be loosely associated with a proscribed group. Equivalent insurers in other territories may be less restrained, so some insureds may elect to have their business placed outside the U.K., particularly if they have workers who are frequently operating in the MENASA region.

It is important to understand that corporations are also not allowed to fund payments. From a risk management perspective, where companies do wish to ensure they are able to lawfully pay ransom demands to release their employees, they need to consider in which jurisdictions they should be located so as to lawfully pay ransoms. On a practical level, they need to review with their response companies what protocols they use to identify or qualify the identity of kidnappers who allege, possibly incorrectly, that they are affiliated to terror groups.

The proposed offence aimed at insurers provides:

17A Insurance against payments made in response to terrorist demands

(1) The insurer under an insurance contract commits an offence if –

(A) the insurer makes a payment under the contract or purportedly under it,

(B) the payment is made in respect of any money or other property that has been or is to be, handed over in response to a demand made wholly or partly for the purposes of terrorism, and

(C) the insurer or the person authorising the payment on the insurer’s behalf knows or has reasonably cause to suspect that the money or other property has been, or is to be, handed over in response to such a demand.

This article was originally posted at Airmic.com

New Year Resolutions for Better Enterprise Security

Posted on by

Forecasting what the IT security landscape will look like in the year ahead has become an annual technology tradition, and following 2014 as the Year of the Data Breach, I think anyone could make a fairly accurate guess as to what the major trend of the New Year will be: more data breaches.

Forty-three percent of organizations reported a data breach in the past year, a figure that Forrester predicts will rise up to 60% in 2015. And it’s not just the frequency of breaches that we will see escalate in the year ahead, but also that malware will be increasingly difficult to dismantle. P2P, darknet and tor communications will become more prevalent, and forums selling malware and stolen data will retreat further into hidden corners of the Internet in an attempt to avoid infiltration.

By now, it is no longer a matter of if your business is going to be breached, but when. The last thing any organization needs as we enter another year of risk, is a blind side. The good news, though, is that there are ways to prevent them if we act immediately.

We know that an increase in cyber-attacks by stealthier hackers and more sophisticated malware is a sensible prediction – more important, now, is thinking about our resolutions, and how to prepare against what may be lurking ahead.

Here are my top New Year Resolutions for better enterprise security in 2015:

Layer Proactive Defenses

In 2014, many businesses were bitten by data breaches despite spending millions on state-of-the-art, next-generation solutions. In 2015, organizations will have to think smarter and build security from the ground up, layering defenses rather than relying on next-gen panaceas.

Furthermore, this kind of multi-layered approach should encompass more proactive measures – reactive “detective” tactics no longer cut it. Malware has always been hard to detect, and yet I see company after company relying too closely on detection technologies like antivirus (which, believe it or not, works only 50% of the time at best).

Lock Down Data

Following widespread data losses in 2014, businesses should resolve to lock down access to corporate systems and data. This starts with implementing greater control over user accounts and administrative privileges. Employees should always be logging onto systems as a standard user, and even then, businesses need to continue to control and monitor access to files and databases with active anomaly detection. Regular reviews of user roles and their access requirements should become a standard practice.

Ask More Questions

Heartbleed, Shellshock and recently, SChannel attacks have all shaken our confidence in common protocols that underpin much of the internet. Organizations need to practice greater scrutiny in evaluating what is offered by their selected vendors to ensure patching is swift and targeted. Far more questions should be asked around vendors’ processes for code auditing and testing.

Look to Two-Factor Authentication

Many of the attacks of 2014 could have been prevented by two-factor authentication, from the iCloud breach to the eBay compromise. Organizations should be looking to implement two-factor authentication as a way to prevent stolen or shared credentials being used against them. While this method is not a comprehensive solution to address all the security threats we’ll likely face, it does introduce a much needed layer of security.

Don’t Let Security Get in the Way

Stringent security practices are absolutely essential, but they can become a double-edged sword. Locking down system access for instance, although it significantly boosts the organization’s overall security posture, can strike a serious blow to end user productivity. Security must always be top of mind for IT organizations, but you’d be surprised at how quickly appetite to risk changes when its implementation reduces employees’ freedom and flexibility. Here is where deploying strategies like least privilege and sandboxing can have a significant impact by creating a productive and positive working experience for users, without compromising security.

In 2015, businesses should resolve to think smarter about their approach to security. It’s easy to become enamored by the latest glitzy perimeter solutions and invest heavily in next-gen antivirus and firewalls. But, making the most of those investments means thinking more strategically about how they can be layered with more proactive measures and additional safety nets to create a truly defense-in-depth framework. Most of all, we must strive to act on the greatest good principle. After all, IT isn’t the only business stakeholder, and finding a security solution that allows for a seamless user experience is what will most effectively drive adoption – and greater security success.

TRIA Signed into Law by President Obama

Posted on by

The insurance industry breathed a sigh of relief this week after President Obama signed legislation reauthorizing the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA), which had been allowed to expire on Dec. 31, 2014.

The Terrorism Risk Reauthorization Act of 2015, H.R. 26, was passed by the House on Jan. 7 by a vote of 416 to 5 and the Senate, 93 to 4.

“After several years of delivering testimony, lobbying and developing initiatives that allow RIMS members to voice their concerns regarding TRIA’s expiration, our hard work was finally rewarded,” said Rick Roberts, 2015 president of RIMS. “We are thrilled that Congress and President Barack Obama finally realized that this federal backstop is more than just an insurance issue.

buy zestril online orthomich.com/img/blog/jpg/zestril.html no prescription pharmacy

 TRIA offers all organizations that do business in the U.S. financial protections to cope with the very real and unsettling devastation caused by terrorism, as well as the confidence to remain focused on their objectives.”

“A well-functioning private terrorism insurance marketplace has been preserved because Congress and the Administration made TRIA’s reauthorization an immediate priority,” said Leigh Ann Pusey, president and chief executive officer of the American Insurance Association (AIA). “The program, which has overwhelming bipartisan support, will continue to protect our nation’s economy against major acts of terrorism.  AIA thanks Congressional leadership and the Administration for moving so quickly to reauthorize TRIA.”

TRIA was first signed into law in 2002 by President George W. Bush. It was later extended as the Terrorism Risk Insurance Extension Act of 2005 and in 2007 the president signed into law the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (TRIPRA).

buy clomid online orthomich.com/img/blog/jpg/clomid.html no prescription pharmacy

The law, which is administered by the U.

buy prevacid online orthomich.com/img/blog/jpg/prevacid.html no prescription pharmacy

S. Department of the Treasury created a “temporary federal program that provides for a transparent system of shared public and private compensation for certain insured losses resulting from a certified act of terror,” according to the Department of Treasury.

The final version reauthorizes the program for six years with the following changes:

  • An increase from $100 million to $200 million is phased in to the program’s trigger by 2020.
  • Decreases federal share of losses from 85% to 80% by 2020
  • Increases the government’s mandatory recoupment amount from $27.5 billion to $37.5 billion by 2020
  • Increases recoupment percentage amount from 133% to 140%
  • Streamlines the certification process for an act of terror by removing the Secretary of State and Attorney General from the formal process
  • Instructs the Secretary of Treasury to issue a certification timeline to Congress

The National Association of Professional Surplus Lines Offices (NAPSLO) said it continues to gather information on the impact of TRIA’s reauthorization.

NAPSLO issued a side-by-side comparison of the expired TRIA program and H.R. 26: