Lawyers and compliance professionals constantly tout the importance of internal information security policies, particularly in light of data privacy problems that are reported almost daily in the media. Admittedly, drafting such policies as a proactive measure can be a pain because there is always a tendency to worry that, unless you’ve suffered a data breach, you are the proverbial “solution in search of a problem.”
But it’s not. In fact, in some cases, it’s actually required. HIPAA (for protected health information), Gramm-Leach-Bliley (for financial information) and Regulation S-P (for broker-dealers and investment advisors) have specific federal rules related to information security practices and policies. However, it would be unwise for a company that isn’t covered by these industry-specific rules to think a security policy isn’t needed.
It’s nearly inevitable that your company will suffer some sort of data incident in its corporate life cycle. Even if not required, an information security policy can provide companies with important real-world benefits when responding to a data security incident.
First, the information security policy can be used as a benchmark for training employees on data security and, just as importantly, data breach response. A good security policy will include, at a minimum, information about (i) how personally identifiable information will be collected, stored and shared, (ii) how to report a possible data security incident, (iii) how users/customers will be notified of an incident, and (iv) the appropriate “point” persons in the company responsible for handling data privacy incidents.
Second, your company’s insurers, auditors, clients or customers may well require that you have an information security policy in order to demonstrate a competence in data privacy. Being able to report affirmatively that you have a policy – as opposed to saying you “will prepare one” – showcases that your company is a privacy-forward company. In the event of a breach, regulators or litigants could potentially raise questions about your data security practices. The fact that you have an information security policy that you implemented both before, during, and after the breach helps show that your company took commercially reasonably steps to secure the information breached.
Speaking of data breaches, an information security policy also has a back-end benefit both to the company and its users. For companies that provide products or services online, a user’s e-mail address is often the one and only way to communicate with the user in the event of a data breach. Yet many state laws do not allow for e-mail notification unless the company has obtained the prior consents required under the federal E-Sign Act (which few online companies likely can achieve a as a practical matter). But many states have provisions that allow companies with existing information security policies to follow the data breach notification procedures contained within their IT security policy. If applicable, these provisions can allow companies to notify their users electronically. This provides a more cost-effective approach to notice in large breaches and often reflects the most practical method of communicating with the company’s users or customers.
Of course, an effective IT security policy must be put into practice – a “living” document that is part of your company’s privacy culture. The mere exercise of preparing an information security policy will bring your key employees together to thoughtfully consider your current practices and revise them to become best practices on both the front end and the back end of a data breach.
Add a comment
Archives
- January 2022
- June 2021
- March 2020
- August 2019
- March 2019
- October 2018
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- February 2016
- November 2015
- September 2015
- July 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- July 2014
- March 2014
- July 2013
- June 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- November 2011
- September 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2006
- February 2006
Recent Posts
- Rethinking Your Cyber Insurance Needs as Your Workplace Evolves
- Data Breach Defense for Educational Institutions
- COVID-19 and the Increased Cybersecurity Risk in a Work-From-Home World
- Like Incorporating Facebook into your Website? EU Decision Raises New Issues
- Lessons Learned: Key Takeaways for Every Business from the Capital One Data Breach
- Will Quick Talks to WRAL About Privacy Issues Related to Doorbell Cameras
- About Us
- Not in My House - California to Regulate IoT Device Security
- Ninth Circuit Says You’re Going to Jail for Visiting That Website without Permission
- Ninth Circuit Interprets “Without Authorization” under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act
Topics
- Data Security
- Data Breach
- Privacy
- Defamation
- Public Records
- Cyberattack
- FCC Matters
- Reporters Privilege
- Political Advertising
- Newsroom Subpoenas
- Shield Laws
- Internet
- Miscellaneous
- Digital Media and Data Privacy Law
- Indecency
- First Amendment
- Anti-SLAPP Statutes
- Fair Report Privilege
- Prior Restraints
- Wiretapping
- Access to Courtrooms
- Education
- FOIA
- HIPAA
- Drone Law
- Access to Court Dockets
- Access to Search Warrants
- Intrusion
- First Amendment Retaliation
- Mobile Privacy
- Newsroom Search Warrants
- About This Blog
- Disclaimer
- Services