SecurityCertified

  • Subscribe to our RSS feed.
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Facebook
  • Digg

Saturday, November 19, 2011

SEC Guidance Emphasizes Materiality for Cyber Incidents

Posted on 1:02 PM by Unknown
Senator Jay Rockefeller and Secretary Michael Chertoff wrote the best article I've seen yet on the CF Disclosure Guidance: Topic No. 2, Cybersecurity issued by the SEC last month in their article A new line of defense in cybersecurity, with help from the SEC:

Managing cybersecurity risk has always been, and always will be, in large part a private sector responsibility...

Until recently, this responsibility may have been unclear — or unknown — to the directors and officers of publicly traded companies. But on Oct. 13, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued groundbreaking guidance to clarify companies’ disclosure obligations about material cybersecurity risks and events.

Federal securities law has long required publicly traded companies to report “material” risks and events — that is, information that the average investor would want to know before making an investment decision. But before the SEC’s action, many companies were not aware how — or perhaps even if — this duty applied to cybersecurity information. In fact, a Senate Commerce Committee review of past corporate disclosures suggested that a significant number of companies have not reported these risks for years.

This SEC guidance is critical because it allows market participants to weigh cybersecurity as an investment factor. It is generally understood that disclosing material breaches — such as the significant loss of a company’s intellectual property — will affect the value of a company, because existing or potential investors will reconsider their investment decisions. Without detailed public information about these events, investors are unaware of the risks to which companies are exposed. And without pressure from investors, corporate officers are less likely to change their risk-management practices.

The SEC guidance will fundamentally alter this equation by raising questions that historically have not been asked at many U.S. companies. Businesses will now have to consider, among other things, what constitutes a material cybersecurity breach and how to disclose such events to investors; how the value of intellectual property is measured; whether appropriate defenses are in place around that property; and whether risks are being appropriately mitigated, through defensive technologies or appropriate insurance coverage.
(emphasis added)

Make no mistake: this is a big deal. Until now "disclosure" laws have aimed at protecting consumers by making their PII the important aspect of a digital incident.

With the SEC guidance, we have a new audience for "disclosure" -- shareholders. The SEC is telling publicly traded companies that they have to disclose material cyber security incidents. Now the battle to define materiality will begin.

Tweet
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Posted in | No comments
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Popular Posts

  • DojoCon Videos Online
    Props to Marcus Carey for live streaming talks from DojoCon . I appeared in my keynote , plus panels on incident response and cloud secur...
  • Bejtlich Speaking at TechTarget Emerging Threats Events in Seattle and New York
    I will be speaking at two events organized by TechTarget , for whom I used to write my Snort Report and Traffic Talk articles. The one-da...
  • SANS WhatWorks Summit in Forensics and Incident Response
    I wanted to remind everyone about the SANS WhatWorks Summit in Forensics and Incident Response in DC, 8-9 July 2010. The Agenda looks gre...
  • A Book for the Korean Cyber Armies
    I've got a book for the Korean cyber armies, North and South. That's right, it's my first book , The Tao of Network Security Mo...
  • Sguil 0.7.0 on Ubuntu 9.10
    Today I installed a Sguil client on a fresh installation of Ubuntu 9.10. It was really easy with the exception of one issue I had to troubl...
  • Microsoft Updates MS09-048 to Show XP Vulnerable to 2 of 3 CVEs
    Microsoft published a Major Revision of MS09-048 to show that Windows XP Service Pack 2 and Windows XP Service Pack 3* are now Affected So...
  • Understanding Responsible Disclosure of Threat Intelligence
    Imagine you're hiking in the woods one day. While stopping for a break you happen to find a mysterious package off to the side of the t...
  • Embedded Hardware and Software Pen Tester Positions in GE Smart Grid
    I was asked to help locate two candidates for positions in the GE Smart Grid initiative. We're looking for an Embedded Hardware Penetr...
  • BeyondTrust Report on Removing Administrator: Correct?
    Last week BeyondTrust published a report titled BeyondTrust 2009 Microsoft Vulnerability Analysis . The report offers several interesting ...
  • Human Language as the New Programming Language
    If you've read the blog for a while you know I promote threat-centric security in addition to vulnerability-centric security. I think ...

Categories

  • afcert
  • Air Force
  • analysis
  • announcement
  • apt
  • attribution
  • bestbook
  • blackhat
  • books
  • breakers
  • bro
  • bruins
  • certification
  • china
  • cisco
  • cissp
  • cloud
  • clowns
  • commodore
  • conferences
  • controls
  • correlation
  • counterintelligence
  • cybercommand
  • cyberwar
  • dfm
  • education
  • engineering
  • feds
  • fisma
  • freebsd
  • GE
  • ge-cirt
  • hakin9
  • history
  • impressions
  • information warfare
  • ipv6
  • law
  • leadership
  • malware
  • mandiant
  • microsoft
  • mssp
  • nsm
  • offense
  • oisf
  • packetstash
  • philosophy
  • pirates
  • powerpoint
  • press
  • psirt
  • reading
  • redteam
  • reviews
  • russia
  • sans
  • sec
  • sguil
  • snorby
  • spying
  • threat model
  • threats
  • Traffic Talk
  • training
  • tufte
  • tv
  • ubuntu
  • usenix
  • verizon
  • vulnerabilities
  • wisdom
  • writing

Blog Archive

  • ►  2013 (16)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (6)
  • ►  2012 (60)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (5)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (10)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (6)
    • ►  June (6)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (9)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (3)
  • ▼  2011 (108)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ▼  November (7)
      • National Public Radio Talks Chinese Digital Espionage
      • Dustin Webber Creates Network Security Monitoring ...
      • Trying NetworkMiner Professional 1.2
      • Thoughts on 2011 ONCIX Report
      • Tao of Network Security Monitoring, Kindle Edition
      • Why DIARMF, "Continuous Monitoring," and other FIS...
      • SEC Guidance Emphasizes Materiality for Cyber Inci...
    • ►  October (11)
    • ►  September (9)
    • ►  August (18)
    • ►  July (10)
    • ►  June (5)
    • ►  May (4)
    • ►  April (13)
    • ►  March (17)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (9)
  • ►  2010 (193)
    • ►  December (14)
    • ►  November (11)
    • ►  October (6)
    • ►  September (16)
    • ►  August (15)
    • ►  July (26)
    • ►  June (15)
    • ►  May (15)
    • ►  April (15)
    • ►  March (16)
    • ►  February (19)
    • ►  January (25)
  • ►  2009 (123)
    • ►  December (10)
    • ►  November (17)
    • ►  October (21)
    • ►  September (13)
    • ►  August (20)
    • ►  July (21)
    • ►  June (21)
Powered by Blogger.

About Me

Unknown
View my complete profile