Call us now:
Following on from the Uber cyber trial and the announcement that the former CSO has been charged. The enclosed article raises appropriate questions over the broader role of the board in the case and whether Federal Government had the opportunity to put Corporate Governance on trial, and why it did not?
The role of the CEO and General Counsel (GC) in the case has not been publicly discussed. Yet the CEO and GC are responsible for directing the organisation in the case of a cyber incident, and the decisions associated with incident management and reporting to regulators (the FTC were already on site) and shareholders.
One wonders if the case was being tried under ‘old rules’, as new cybersecurity risk management regulations have not been formalized. Proposed regulations that under current proposals make boards accountable for cyber risk management, governance and incident reporting.
There is no Governance model whereby the CSO should report to markets or regulators on a market moving event such as a cyber incident. In my own experience the security officer does not have the independent authority to go to a regulator in any circumstances, until a senior responsible officer of the organisation has been fully briefed, informed all appropriate officers agreed the message. The outcome of the case does not explain the role of the board given the FTC were already on site investigating Uber.
Ted Dziekanowski
#cybersecurity #cyberlaw #governance #securitiesandexchangecommission #eucyberlaw #theaugustagroup
View Original Post
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Ashare%3A6985168938988896257