cybersecurity attacks

Subscribe to cybersecurity attacks

As investigators, we can’t always get exactly to the evidence we want to prove. Sometimes it merely doesn’t exist. Often, ethical and legal constraints keep us from being able to obtain the facts we definitively need to prove what we are investigating.

It’s easy to get lost searching for the unsearchable, pining for that one nugget that will help everything fall into place. But investigators don’t have that luxury.

So, we sometimes have to do what the computer scientists have done by pinpointing a font as a sign of trouble: We have to take a step back and look for clues elsewhere. We may not have direct evidence of wrongdoing, but we can scour the evidence in order to detect patterns that suggest wrongdoing. Alternatively, we can review the facts to see if we can find any that correlate with what it is we’ve been asked to help prove or disprove.

This is not about making assumptions–we never say that because x exists, therefore y. Instead, it is about being able to look for solutions that advance our clients’ knowledge, even if they fall short of the ideal solution.
Continue Reading Direct and Indirect Evidence: Learning from Computer Scientists

Recently proposed changes to attorney ethical rules by the American Bar Association (ABA) suggest that the profession sees technical breaches as a serious problem in need of immediate remedies. Earlier this week the ABA Commission on Ethics released a summary of proposed changes to the Model Rules, including a new rule requiring lawyers to take proactive measures to protect their client’s information when using new technologies. The proposed rule suggests that lawyers have to be more aware of both “inadvertent and unauthorized” disclosures–in other words, leaks from inside and hacks from outside a firm. The proposed rule warns technophobes that they need to change their Luddite ways. Lawyers now have a “duty to keep abreast of changes in relevant technology, including the benefits and risks associated with its use.” In other words, claiming ignorance is simply not an excuse.

By putting the onus on lawyers, the ABA is acknowledging what those of us who study and track security breaches have been shouting from the rooftops for years: preventing security breaches is not just about technology; it’s about changing human behavior. As the Wall Street Journal article makes clear, “the weakest link at law firms of any size are often their own employees.”

Other industries face similar problems. For example, a recent article on data breaches in the health care industry suggests that the epidemic of breaches of confidential health care information has more to do with human error than it does with IT shortcomings. As Larry Clinton, president and CEO of the trade association Internet Security Alliance succinctly points out “[p]eople are the biggest problem.” Consequently, Collins predicts that data breaches in hospitals and health care systems will only be prevented if these organizations approach these breaches as a “human-resource management issue and not an IT issue.”…
Continue Reading Lawyers and Cybersecurity: Preventing Breaches of Confidential Information