Group items tagged

The more things change, the more they stay the same. Such is the case for information security management, which has been voted - for the seventh consecutive year - the most important issue affecting IT strategy, investment and implementation over the coming 12 to 18 months, according to the American Institute of CPAs' 20th Annual Top Technology Initiatives Survey. Employing a new strategy this year, the institute's 10-member tech task force distributed surveys to approximately 50,000 of the institute's members and then advertised the survey in an electronic newsletter. "We changed the voting audience," said David Cieslak, CPA, CITP and co-chair of the task force, noting that they sought responses from all institute members, without feedback from outside technology groups, as in past years. "It's a big year - our 20th - we wanted to make sure it was reflective of our membership." This year's survey received more than 700 responses, which ranked 33 technology initiatives that they perceived as having the most impact over the next 12-to-18 months. The most pressing initiative, according to respondents - information security management - is an integrated, systematic approach that co-ordinates people, policies, standards, processes and controls used to safeguard critical systems and information from internal and external security threats. "Integrity, confidentiality and the relationship that CPAs have with their clients is something that has always been important to accountants," said Mary MacBain, CPA, CITP and a task force co-chair. "Security is going to continue to be important." Jim Bourke, a member of the task force and partner-in-charge of technology at CPA and business advisory firm Withum Smith+Brown in Red Bank, N.J., said that it's no surprise to see information security management make the top slot yet again: "Look at the top three - what's the theme? Security and the concern about the privacy issues involving data. For the past few years, many CPAs ha

Financial fraud last year caused 7.5 percent of all adults in the United States to lose money, largely because of data breaches. That's the finding of a survey conducted by Stamford, Conn. research firm Gartner. The survey polled 5,000 U.S. adults and also found that when compared with average consumers, nearly twice as many people who lost money to fraud changed their shopping, payment, and e-commerce behavior. In particular, victims of electronic checking and/or savings account transfer fraud were nearly five times more likely to change banks because of security concerns. "Fraud victims are also more cautious about which brick-and-mortar stores they shop at and how they pay for goods when they get there, demonstrating more awareness of the risk of data breaches," said Avivah Litan, vice president and distinguished analyst at Gartner, in a news release. High-tech crimes, such as data breaches (which typically involve hacking into enterprise systems) and phishing attacks against consumers, are the most prevalent causes of payment card fraud. Gartner found that financial losses were highest with new-account, credit card and brokerage fraud, with average losses per incident totaling $1,097, $929 and $900, respectively. However, victims of brokerage, credit card and debit/ATM card fraud find it easiest to recover their losses, receiving an average of 100 percent, 86 percent, and 77 percent of the funds stolen, respectively.

Monster.com is advising its users to change their passwords after data including e-mail addresses, names and phone numbers were stolen from its database. The break-in comes just as the swelling ranks of the unemployed are turning to sites like Monster.com to look for work. The company disclosed on its Web site that it recently learned its database had been illegally accessed. Monster.com user IDs and passwords were stolen, along with names, e-mail addresses, birth dates, gender, ethnicity, and in some cases, users' states of residence. The information does not include Social Security numbers, which Monster.com said it doesn't collect, or resumes. Monster.com posted the warning about the breach on Friday morning and does not plan to send e-mails to users about the issue, said Nikki Richardson, a Monster.com spokeswoman. The SANS Internet Storm Center also posted a note about the break-in on Friday. USAJobs.com, the U.S. government Web site for federal jobs, is hosted by Monster.com and was also subject to the data theft. USAJobs.com also posted a warning about the breach. Monster.com has been checking for misuse of the stolen information but hasn't yet found any, it said. It has made changes since discovering the break-in but won't discuss them because it doesn't discuss security procedures publicly and because it is still investigating the incident, Richardson said. She also would not disclose the volume of data stolen, but said the company decided it would be prudent to alert all of its users via its Web site.

In Deloitte's sixth annual Global Security Survey, people are the problem. "[P]eople continue to be an organization's greatest asset as well as its greatest worry," Adel Melek, global leader of security and privacy services at Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, said in the report. "That has not changed from 2007. What has changed is the environment. The economic meltdown was not at its peak when respondents took this survey. If there was ever an environment more likely to facilitate an organization's people being distracted, nervous, fearful, or disgruntled, this is it. To state that security vigilance is even more important at a time like this is an understatement." On one level, that couldn't be more obvious: It's not as if anyone worries about squirrels hacking servers; security has always been about people. (Robots, the report says, are unlikely to replace the human workforce during the lifetime of anyone reading the report. Finally, some good employment news.) Yet despite the obviousness of the problem, the obvious solution -- complete denial of access -- doesn't work. People use computers and computers are more useful when connected and it just gets worse from there. That may explain why identity and access management remained top of mind for survey respondents. Deloitte's survey, drawn from major financial companies around the globe, focuses on governance, investment, risk, use of security technologies, quality of operations, and privacy. It includes some good news -- external breaches have declined sharply over the past year -- and troublesome news -- fewer companies say they have the commitment and funding to address regulatory compliance. In terms of risk, specifically information systems failure, people are identified as the most significant vulnerability. "Human error is overwhelmingly stated as the greatest weakness this year (86%), followed by technology (a distant 63%)," the report states. It attributes the rising risk to increased adoption of new techno

Federal regulators on Tuesday met to hear about whether the benefits of cloud computing justify increased regulation, as privacy activists claim, or whether such an approach would do more harm than good. "We need to be smarter about dealing with technology, and cloud computing is posing (a) risk for us," said Hugh Stephenson, deputy director for international consumer protection at the Federal Trade Commission's Office of International Affairs. The FTC convened the two-day meeting in its offices here, which follows a series of similar workshops held in previous years on topics like spam, privacy, and behavioral advertising. The agency may file lawsuits to halt "unfair or deceptive acts or practices," meaning that if cloud computing is not unfair or deceptive, the FTC would likely not have jurisdiction. To secure personal information on the cloud, regulators may have to answer questions such as which entities have jurisdiction over data as it flows across borders, whether governments can access that information as it changes jurisdiction, and whether there is more risk in storing personal information in data centers that belong to a single entity rather than multiple data centers. The current panoply of laws at the state, national, and international level have had insufficient results; FTC Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour cited a 2008 PricewaterhouseCoopers information security survey (PDF) in which 71 percent of organizations queried said they did not have an accurate inventory of where personal data for employees and customers is stored. With data management practices that are not always clear and are subject to change, companies that offer cloud-computing services are steering consumers into dangerous territory, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Already, problems of identity theft are skyrocketing, he said, and without more regulation, data management services may experience a collapse analogous to that

Traditionally, we trust doctors with confidential information about our health in the knowledge that it�s in our own interests. Similarly, few patients object to the idea that such information may be used in some form for medical research. But what happens when this process is subject to scrutiny?How explicit does our consent have to be? Since the introduction of the Data Protection Act 1998 medical researchers have raised concerns over the increasing barriers they face to accessing patient data.These concerns have heightened amongst some researchers since the passing of the Human Tissue Act 2004 introduced in the wake of the Alder Hey and Bristol Royal Infirmary scandals. When scientific advances are unraveling the secrets of DNA and the decoding of the human genome has opened up substantial new research opportunities.Clinical scientists and epidemiologists argue that the requirements being placed upon them are disproportionate to the use they are making of either datasets or tissues samples and, besides, their work is in the public interest.At the heart of the debate lie key questions over trust and consent and how these can best be resolved.To complicate things, it is no longer just medical researchers, but also public health bureaucrats who are keen to have access to our data.Quasi-official bodies have been charged with persuading individuals to change their behaviour and lifestyles in connection with all manner of issues such as diet, exercise, smoking and alcohol consumption.Social Marketing � the borrowing of commercial marketing techniques in the pursuit of 'public goods' � is in vogue amongst public health officials. Empowered by advanced data collection and computing techniques, armed with the latest epidemiological research, and emboldened by a mission to change unhealthy behaviour, public health officials are keen to target their messages to specific 'market segments' in most need of advice.Are government researchers abusing patients' trust? Can an

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is planning to regulate online viral marketing that uses blogs and social networking sites. Marketers are spending billions worldwide to get the endorsements of key bloggers and groups on social networking sites. One tactic, used by Microsoft and others, is to send products to bloggers on 'long-term loans' on the understanding that they will comment about them on their sites. AdvertisementUnder the new regulations being proposed, such bloggers would be legally liable if they make untrue statements about the products or services. The companies too would face sanctions. "This impacts every industry and almost every single brand in our economy, and that trickles down into social media," Anthony DiResta, an attorney representing several advertising associations, told The Financial Times. This is the first revision of the rules on this kind of advertising by the FTC since 1980 and is needed, according to the organisation, because new forms of communication have opened up new fields to marketing. "The guides needed to be updated to address not only the changes in technology, but the consequences of new marketing practices," said Richard Cleland, assistant director for the FTC's division of advertising practices. " Word-of-mouth marketing is not exempt from the laws of truthful advertising." Advertisers are resisting the changes, however, which threaten a highly effective form of marketing new products and services. "Regulating these developing media too soon may have a chilling effect on blogs and other forms of viral marketing, as bloggers and other viral marketers will be discouraged from publishing content for fear of being held liable for any potentially misleading claim," Richard O'Brien, vice president of the American Association of Advertising Agencies, said in an advisory to the FTC.

Privacy rights are accepted and, generally, honored in Europe. The wealth - literally and figuratively - of personal information made available through the internet staggers the imagination. Staggering, too, is the prospect of privacy rights being trampled. EC Consumer Protection Commissioner Meglena Kuneva has a bone to pick with internet snooping. And she's launching an investigation into deep data mining. In an official statement (to be released March 31) she will outline concerns of vague and misleading 'term of use' for access to Web sites that can breach EC privacy rules. Commissioner Kuneva was born and raised in Bulgaria during a time when snooping on people was common, legal and nasty. The European Parliament (EuroParl) voted (March 27) overwhelmingly for recommendations in a report linking data surveillance, advertising and cybercrime. The report recommends safeguards for the privacy rights of internet users. The EuroParl called for "making use of existing national, regional, and international law." The MEPs raised the "imbalance of negotiating power between (internet) users and institutions." Internet users, said the MEPs, have the right to "permanently delete" personal details. Facebook's recent change in 'terms of use' allowing it to retain personal information brought a firestorm of criticism and the social networking portal backtracked. And the EC was watching. "It wasn't regulators who spotted the proposed change of terms at Facebook, it was one of the 175 million users," said Commissioner Kuneva's spokesperson Helen Kearns. Collecting and analyzing profile data is big business. It is "the new petroleum of the Internet world," said Ms Kearns, quoted in PC World (March 30). "If you are happy trading your data that's fine, but you should at least know how valuable it is." As Google and Microsoft have learned European Commission rules, unlike American rules, tend to set a low bar for compliance. The former pr

In belt-tightening times, making the case for security investment is more difficult than ever. Security Catalyst founder Michael Santarcangelo details five steps risk professionals can use to communicate value effectively. The biggest challenge security teams face in their organization is one of perception, according to Michael Santarcangelo, founder of Security Catalyst, a New York-based consultancy focused on changing the way people protect information. Santarcangelo, who was recently a keynote speaker at the CSO Perspectives conference, said professionals focused on security are practiced at looking at risks and reducing them. Unfortunately, the rest of society often doesn't see risks the same way, making communication difficult (See also: Security and Business: Communication 101). "They lack relevant context," said Santarcangelo. "So security people get wrapped up in thinking: 'The CFO wants an ROI. We better work on ROI.' But what the CFO is really saying is:' I don't understand what you do. So you have to justify it to me.' Santarcangelo outlined his strategies for making the case for security investments at the three-day event held in Clearwater, Florida. He gave an audience of security professionals the details of his five step process for getting executives and boards to understand, and even approve, spending decisions in tough economic times. Create Santarcangelo believes one of the most effective ways to communicate value is to place focus back on the person to whom you are trying to make your pitch (See also: A CEO and CSO Who Actually Communicate). "The reason why someone changes a behavior or takes an action is because there is an inherent benefit to the person," said Santarcangelo. "But when many people start to create, they forget that. They tend to fall into the trap of thinking: 'I'm really smart and I know a lot of stuff. So I'm just going to say it and hope they will understand the value of it.'" Instead, Santarcangelo recommends creating

The Data Protection Directive is old-fashioned and out of date, a report published by the UK's privacy regulator the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has said. Commissioner Richard Thomas said that the European Union must change its legislation. The ICO commissioned RAND Europe to investigate whether or not 1995's EU Data Protection Directive was a good basis for Europe-wide data protection law. The research concluded that the law was flawed and needed to be updated. It found that the law must be clearer about what it seeks to achieve, that it should be better at forcing organisations to protect personal data in their charge, that it should encourage a more strategic approach to enforcement and that it does not deal well enough with the export of personal data outside the EU. Thomas said that the Directive, on which the UK's Data Protection Act is based, is outmoded. "The Directive is showing its age. Modern approaches to regulation mean that laws must concentrate on the real risks that people face in the modern world, must avoid unnecessary burdens, and must work well in practice," he said. "Organisations must embed privacy by design and data protection must become a top level corporate governance issue." RAND said that the Directive would be improved by its fundamental approach to ensuring data privacy being changed. It said that the law should focus on the protection of individuals and the security of their data, and not on the processes that lead to that. "The stronger, results oriented approach described in this report aims to protect data subjects against personal harm resulting from the unlawful processing of any data, rather than making personal data the building block of data protection regulations," said the report. "It would move away from a regulatory framework that measures the adequacy of data processing by measuring compliance with certain formalities, towards a framework that instead requires certain fundamental principles to be respected

More than 6 million current and former customers of online brokerage TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. will be able to benefit from the settlement of a class-action lawsuit filed over the theft of client contact information. Formal notice of a settlement agreement will be sent to people who used TD Ameritrade's services before mid-September 2007. U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco approved a revised version of the settlement agreement earlier this month despite some misgivings about it. Last summer, Walker rejected an earlier version of the deal. Anyone who held an Ameritrade account or provided an e-mail address to the company before Sept. 14, 2007, could benefit from the lawsuit. The database that was breached included information on 6.2 million people. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit said they received unwanted e-mail ads about certain stocks. The ads appeared to be designed to manipulate the value of thinly traded stocks. Ameritrade officials and one of the lead plaintiff's attorneys, Scott Kamber, have said the data theft has not been linked to cases of identity theft. As part of the proposed settlement, the Omaha-based company will pay nearly $1.9 million in legal fees and cover the cost of one year of anti-spam service for the victims. Ameritrade also promised to better protect customer data. Those terms have not changed from the original proposed settlement. But the new agreement will more clearly state that Ameritrade customers were at risk of identity theft, and it will preserve customers' ability to pursue identity theft claims against Ameritrade. Most of the changes to the agreement happened because the Texas Attorney General's Office and a former named plaintiff objected to the previous deal. In his order, the judge questioned whether the settlement does enough to benefit Ameritrade clients whose information was stolen. "The court is particularly concerned that TD Ameritrade has agreed to pay the class counsel $1.87 million and yet the

Six federal agencies issued a set of frequently asked questions (FAQs) today to help financial institutions, creditors, users of consumer reports, and issuers of credit cards and debit cards comply with federal regulations on identity theft and discrepancies in changes of address. The "Red Flags and Address Discrepancy Rules," which implement sections of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (FACT Act), were issued jointly on November 9, 2007, by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The rules require financial institutions and creditors to develop and implement written Identity Theft Prevention Programs and require issuers of credit cards and debit cards to assess the validity of notifications of changes of address. The rules also provide guidance for users of consumer reports regarding reasonable policies and procedures to employ when consumer reporting agencies send them notices of address discrepancy. The agencies' staff have jointly developed answers to these FAQs to provide guidance on numerous aspects of the rules, including which types of entities and accounts are covered; establishment and administration of an Identity Theft Prevention Program; address validation requirements applicable to card issuers; and the obligations of users of consumer reports upon receiving a notice of address discrepancy.

As if banks didn't have enough on their plates with compliance and regulation on the federal front, come May 1, they will have to be mindful of strict new rules coming from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts around data security. The Massachusetts Data Security Regulations are perhaps like no other in terms of their depth and scope. During a teleconference, attorneys from the privacy and data security practice of the law firm Goodwin Procter (Boston) described this very detailed, all-encompassing set of rules designed to keep consumers' personal data safe. They go beyond the rules of other states and the federal government that simply require companies to notify their customers of theft of their personal information. "Personal information," for the purposes of the regulation, is described as someone's first and last name or first initial and last name, in combination with Social Security Number, driver's license number or financial account number. At its core, the regulation states that companies, including banks, that handle the personal data of a Massachusetts resident must show they have in place a comprehensive, written information security program with heightened security procedures around how this information is handled. The rules also extend to entities' service providers and the degree to which they too much show they comply with the Massachusetts rules of handling data on residents. Companies have until May 1 to amend their vendor contracts to reflect this and until Jan. 1, 2010 to certify their vendors comply. Furthermore, companies must comply with these rules even if they do not have a single office in the Bay State or if they are in an already heavily regulated industry, like financial services. As long as customers in businesses' databases reside in Massachusetts, those companies are affected by the rules. According to partner Deborah Birnbach, this is some of the most intrusive legislation as it relates to the operation of businesses. "It requires

Perhaps Mark Z is surprised that people actually read terms of service. Arrogant twit. He's a multi-millionaire who cares about the little people (stage direction: Mark Z looks sincerely into web cam as he wipes away tear with hundred dollar bill). Perhaps the Tweens don't understand what social networking sites really sell; looks like some grown ups started asking where all their personal information is going and when it might inconveniently show up in some ad campaign.

A couple of weeks ago, we revised our terms of use hoping to clarify some parts for our users. Over the past couple of days, we received a lot of questions and comments about the changes and what they mean for people and their information. Based on this feedback, we have decided to return to our previous terms of use while we resolve the issues that people have raised. Many of us at Facebook spent most of today discussing how best to move forward. One approach would have been to quickly amend the new terms with new language to clarify our positions further. Another approach was simply to revert to our old terms while we begin working on our next version. As we thought through this, we reached out to respected organizations to get their input. Going forward, we've decided to take a new approach towards developing our terms. We concluded that returning to our previous terms was the right thing for now. As I said yesterday, we think that a lot of the language in our terms is overly formal and protective so we don't plan to leave it there for long. More than 175 million people use Facebook. If it were a country, it would be the sixth most populated country in the world. Our terms aren't just a document that protect our rights; it's the governing document for how the service is used by everyone across the world. Given its importance, we need to make sure the terms reflect the principles and values of the people using the service. Our next version will be a substantial revision from where we are now. It will reflect the principles I described yesterday around how people share and control their information, and it will be written clearly in language everyone can understand. Since this will be the governing document that we'll all live by, Facebook users will have a lot of input in crafting these terms. You have my commitment that we'll do all of these things, but in order to do them right it will take a little bit of time. We expect to complete this in the next few we

Social networking users are more vulnerable than ever and taking more risks with their online privacy. According to the 'Bringing Social Security to the Online Community' poll by AVG, while the social networking community has serious concerns about the overall security of public spaces, few are taking the most basic of steps to protect themselves against online crimes. Participants indicated concern over growing phishing, spam and malware attacks, and nearly half of those surveyed are very concerned about their personal identity being stolen in an online community. Despite widespread use of social networks at home and/or at work, 64 per cent of users infrequently or never change their passwords on a regular basis, while 57 per cent infrequently or never adjust their privacy settings. Further, 21 per cent accept contact offerings from members they do not recognise, more than half let acquaintances or roommates access social networks on their machines, 64 per cent click on links offered by community members or contacts and 26 per cent share files within social networks. As a result of this widespread proliferation of links, files and unsolicited contacts, nearly 20 per cent have experienced identity theft, 47 per cent have been victims of malware infections and 55 per cent have seen phishing attacks.

State and federal lawmakers continue to introduce bills regulating the collection, use and security of consumer and personal information. The proposed federal bills could change the national privacy framework. At the same time, regulators and the plaintiffs' bar remain focused on privacy and security issues and continue to initiate enforcement actions and class action suits. This program will address these developments and provide tips for managing privacy concerns in an era of fast-changing privacy laws.

Last week I introduced the underlying concepts and premises for two theories of organizational change - from John Kotter and Black & Gregersen-  based on the influence and value of individual commitment to new behaviors, practices and attitudes.

To start off the week, I dive a bit deeper int

Today's post discusses the relationship between strategy, leadership, and vision, 3 processes normally associated with senior organizational members. The majority of employees in mid to large sized corporations spend their time in tactical pursuit of short-term goals set by managers. Rather than

"Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg made some big announcements Wednesday from the company's headquarters in Palo Alto about changes to how users control and organize their information on the service. Zuckerberg has been criticized in the past for not caring about privacy, making statements that worry some. He once told TechCrunch that privacy was no longer the social norm. But the 26-year-old CEO has just done an about face. He told a room full of journalists, "It is a core part of our belief that people own and have control of all the information they upload.""

Can Zuckerberg be trusted not to reverse course - again. His immaturity as a leader and abuse of user trust makes one question everything that comes out of the man's mouth.

One of the things that always surprised me while working with corporate information over the years is the lack of a data classification program in the majority of firms. Working with many well-known corporations around the world, I get to see the inner-workings of how IT is practiced.

One item I