Technology


If you know someone who leads an active lifestyle, you may already know what a Fitbit is. For everyone else, a Fitbit is a wearable device that tracks steps, calories, distance and even sleep.

Now it appears data from wearable devices may be admissible in court.

Forbes.com reports that a law firm in Calgary is working on the first known personal injury case that will use activity data from a Fitbit to help show the effects of an accident on their client.

According to the report, the young woman in question, who used to be a personal trainer, was injured in an accident four years ago. While Fitbits weren’t on the market back then, her lawyers believe they can use data from her Fitbit to show that her activity level has significantly decreased and is now below where it should be for someone of her age and profession.

The article suggests that “cases like this could open the door to wearable device data being used not just in personal injury claims, but in prosecutions.”

The young woman’s lawyer is also quoted saying that such data could be useful to insurers assessing questionable claims and that just as courts requisitioned Facebook for information several years ago a court order could compel disclosure of that data.

Sounds like another case where digital information has an unintended use in the courtroom.

Despite regulatory challenges, privacy concerns and a lack of capabilities that could stall their widespread use, drones could have a significant impact on the property/casualty industry.

recent report from IT firm Cognizant suggests that commercial and personal lines insurers that cover property risks are likely to be early adopters of drone technology. Hat tip to Claims Journal which reports on this story here.

For example, a property adjuster or risk engineer could use a drone to capture details of a location or building, and obtain useful insights during claims processing or risk assessments, Cognizant says.

Drones could also be deployed to enable faster and more effective resolution of claims during catastrophes.

Crop insurance is another area where drones could be used – not only to determine the actual cultivatable land, but also during the claims process to understand the extent of loss and the actual yield, reducing the potential for fraudulent claims.

The findings come amid recent reports that several home and auto insurers are considering the use of UAVs.

The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International predicts that within 10 years (2015 to 2025) drones will create approximately 100,000 new jobs and around $82 billion in economic activity, the report notes.

DronesProjectedSales

Cognizant believes now is the time for insurers to consider the opportunity that drone technology presents, especially in the areas of claims adjudication, risk engineering and catastrophe claims management:

With drones poised for commercial use, insurers could use them specifically to help reduce operational costs and gather better-quality information. This could help improve the productivity, efficiency and effectiveness of field staff (e.g. claims adjusters and risk engineers), and improve the customer experience by resolving claims faster, especially during catastrophic events.”

Cognizant goes on to note that drone enhancements such as artificial intelligence, augmented reality and integrating audio, text and video already exist in some shape or form. Insurance carriers should expect to see the adoption of drones increase significantly as these features are integrated into standard drones, and as regulations for commercial use of drones are defined.

It concludes:

As insurance carriers build business and technology use cases and the necessary architecture and services, they must consider not only how and where drone technology fits into their digital roadmap but also how the operating model can be enhanced to deliver optimal benefits for the business and its customers.”

As the number of companies suffering a data breach continues to grow – with U.S. retailer Staples now reported to be investigating a breach – so do the legal developments arising out of these incidents.

While companies that have suffered a data breach look to their insurance policies for coverage to help mitigate some of the enormous costs, recent legal developments underscore the fact that reliance on traditional insurance policies is not enough, notes the I.I.I. white paper Cyber Risks: The Growing Threat.

A post in today’s Wall Street Journal Morning Risk Report, echoes this point, noting that a lawsuit between restaurant chain P.F. Chang’s and its insurance company Travelers Indemnity Co. of Connecticut could further define how much, if any, cyber liability coverage is included in a company’s CGL policy.

Collin Hite, partner and leader of the insurance recovery group at law firm Hirschler Fleischer tells the WSJ that whatever the outcome of this case, companies that want to be sure they are protected against cyber-related losses may have to purchase separate cyber liability policies—and make sure those policies are broad enough to encompass the myriad ways an attack could cost the firm money.

P.F. Chang’s confirmed in June that it had suffered a data breach in which data from credit and debit cards used at its restaurants was stolen.

An earlier post in the Hartford Courant Insurance Capital blog by Matthew Sturdevant has the details on the legal action between Travelers and P.F. Chang’s.

To-date the application of standard form commercial general liability (CGL) policies to data breach incidents has led to various legal actions and differing opinions, according to the I.I.I. paper on cyber risks.

One recent high profile – and oft-cited case – followed the April 2011 data breach at Sony Corp. in which hackers stole personal information from tens of millions of Sony PlayStation Network users.

A New York trial court ruled that Zurich American Insurance Co. owed no defense coverage to Sony Corp. or Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC.

In his ruling, New York Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey K. Oing said acts by third-party hackers do not constitute “oral or written publication in any manner of the material that violates a person’s right of privacy” in the Coverage B (personal and advertising injury coverage) under the CGL policy issued by Zurich.

Further expertise and analysis on cyber risks and insurance is available from the I.I.I.

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV), otherwise known as drones, appear to be moving closer to commercial application, and property/casualty insurers are getting involved.

On the one hand, insurers are looking at ways to use this emerging technology to improve the services they provide to personal policyholders, at the same time they are assessing the potential risks of commercial drone use for the businesses they insure.

The Chicago Tribune this week reported that several home and auto insurers are considering the use of UAVs, and at least one has sought permission from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to research the use of drones in processing disaster claims.

According to Sam Friedman, research team leader at Deloitte, drone aircraft could be the next mobile tech tool in claims management.

In a post on PC360.com, Friedman says that sending a drone into a disaster area would enable insurers to deliver more timely settlements to policyholders and spare adjusters from being exposed to the hazards of inspecting catastrophe claims in disaster areas.

Commercial insurers also have a huge stake in the drone business. In a recent post on WillisWire, Steve Doyle of Willis Aerospace, says businesses need to consider UAV risk issues such as liability and privacy:

Risk managers for organizations that could potentially gain considerable competitive advantage from eyes in the sky should consider the risk issues now so they are ready to advise their organizations as UAV options broaden.”

Insurance is not the only industry eyeing commercial applications. Agriculture, real estate, oil and gas, electric utilities, freight delivery, motion pictures, to name a few are seen as major potential markets for UAVs.

A recent report by IGI Consulting predicts that U.S. sales of UAVs could triple to $15 billion in 2020 from $5 billion in 2013.

However, the broader commercial use of drones in the U.S. will depend on federal regulators developing appropriate rules. In September the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) gave the go-ahead for six TV and movie production companies to use drones for filming.

In his WillisWire post, Doyle notes that regulation is a key element to the successful widespread development of the drone industry in the U.S. given the complexities of the liability environment, the crowded skies over metropolitan areas, and the variety of UAVs and their uses.

One thing’s for sure, when UAV use takes off in the U.S., insurers are ready to support this emerging technology both as risk takers and risk protectors.

A second annual survey from Experian and the Ponemon Institute appears to show that more companies are prepared for a data breach, and that cyber insurance policies are becoming a more important part of those preparedness plans.

The study, which surveyed 567 executives in the United States, found that 73 percent of companies now have data breach response plans in place, up from 61 percent in 2013. Similarly, 72 percent of companies now have a data breach response team, up from 67 percent last year.

In the last year the purchase of cyber insurance by those companies has more than doubled, with 26 percent now saying they have a data breach or cyber policy, up from just 10 percent in 2013.

However, this means that two-thirds of respondents – 68 percent – are still not buying cyber policies. (Six percent of respondents are also unsure whether their company has cyber insurance.)

Interestingly, the fact that more companies have data breach response plans in place does not appear to instill greater confidence that they are effective.

Despite the existence of plans, only 30 percent of respondents say their companies are effective or very effective in developing and executing a data breach plan, the survey found.

Why are the plans not effective?

The survey indicates that in many cases a breach response plan is largely ignored after being prepared.

Some 41 percent of respondents say there is no set time for reviewing and updating the plan, while 37 percent say they have not reviewed or updated the plan since it was put in place.

All of this comes as the frequency of data breaches is accelerating. Some 60 percent of respondents say their company experienced more than one data breach in the past two years, up from 52 percent in 2013. And 43 percent say their company had a data breach in the last year, up from 33 percent in 2013.

Check out the latest I.I.I. white paper on this topic Cyber Risks: The Growing Threat.

More on this story from the Wall Street Journal’s Risk & Compliance Report.

The recent disclosure of a major data breach at retailer Home Depot has once again put the spotlight on the increasing vulnerability of businesses to cyber threats and the need for cyber insurance.

But companies are uncertain of how much insurance coverage to acquire and whether their current policies provide them with protection, according to a new report by Guy Carpenter.

It speculates that one of the roots of the uncertainty stems from the difficulty in quantifying potential losses because of the dearth of historical data for actuaries and underwriters to model cyber-related losses.

Furthermore, traditional general liability policies do not always cover cyber risk, Guy Carpenter says.

It notes that in the United States, ISO’s revisions to its general liability policy form consist primarily of a mandatory exclusion of coverage for personal and advertising injury claims arising from the access or disclosure of confidential information.

Though still in its infancy the cyber insurance market potential is vast, Guy Carpenter reports. It cites Marsh statistics estimating that the U.S. cyber insurance market was worth $1 billion in gross written premiums in 2013 and could reach as much as $2 billion this year.

The European market is currently a fraction of that, at approximately $150 million, but could reach as high as EUR900 million by 2018, according to some estimates.

Guy Carpenter also warns that cyber attacks are now top of mind for governments, utilities, individuals, medical and academic institutions and companies of all sizes, noting:

Because of increasing global interconnectedness and explosive use of mobile devices and social media, the risk of cyber attacks and data breaches have increased exponentially.”

Cyber attacks also present a set of aggregations/accumulations of risk that spread beyond the corporation to affiliates, counterparties and supply chains, it adds.

Check out the I.I.I. paper on this topic: Cyber Threats: The Growing Risk.

Companies large and small appear to have been targeted in what is being described as the largest known data breach to date.

As first reported by The New York Times, a Russian crime ring amassed billions of stolen Internet credentials, including 1.2 billion user name and password combinations and more than 500 million email addresses.

The NYT said it had a security expert not affiliated with Hold Security analyze the database of stolen credentials and confirm its authenticity.

The records, discovered by security experts Hold Security, include confidential material gathered from 420,000 websites, ranging from household names to small Internet sites.

According to Hold Security’s own report, the hackers didn’t just target large companies. They targeted every site that their victims visited:

With hundreds of thousands of sites affected, the list includes many leaders in virtually all industries across the world, as well as a multitude of small or even personal websites.”

The NYT said so far the criminals have not sold many of the records online, but appear to be using it to send spam on social networks.

If ever there was a reason to research – and buy – cyber insurance, this would be it.

In its recently published paper Cyber Risks: The Growing Threat, the Insurance Information Institute (I.I.I.) notes that reliance on traditional insurance policies is not enough, as companies face growing liabilities in this fast-evolving area.

Following the Target data breach and other high profile breaches, the I.I.I. said the number of specialist cyber insurance policies is increasing, and that insurance has a key role to play as companies and individuals look to better manage and reduce their potential financial losses from cyber risks.

It cited data from broker Marsh showing a 21 percent increase in the number of clients purchasing cyber insurance from 2012 to 2013. That growth is accelerating in 2014.

Meanwhile, a new report from PwC US and the Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute (IRRCi) indicates that while companies must disclose significant cyber risks, those disclosures rarely provide differentiated or actionable information.

According to the report’s authors:

The consequences of poor security include lost revenue, compromised intellectual property, increases in costs, impact to customer retention, and can even contribute to C-level executives leaving companies.”

It suggests that investors focus on corporate preparedness for cyber attacks, and then engage with highly-likely targets to better understand corporate preparedness and to demand better and more actionable disclosures (though not at a level that would provide a cyber-attacker a roadmap to make those attacks).

No industry sector is immune from cyber threats, and a round-up of recent headlines and reports underscores the increasing risk and cost businesses face.

Just this week, U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew urged financial institutions and firms to redouble their efforts against cyber threats and said information-sharing and collaboration among businesses and with government is key.

Speaking at a conference in New York, Secretary Lew noted that the consequences of cyber incidents are serious and our cyber defenses are not yet where they need to be:

Far too many hedge funds, asset managers, insurance providers, exchanges, financial market utilities, and banks should and could be doing more. In particular, it is imperative that firms collaborate with government agencies and with other firms. Disclosing security breaches is often perceived as something that could harm a firm’s reputation. This has made many businesses reluctant to reveal information about cyber incidents. But this reluctance has to be put aside.”

Secretary Lew noted that some banks are already spending as much as $250 million a year to strengthen their cyber security. (Note: this is a cost borne by businesses).

Meanwhile, a new report from the New York attorney general’s office revealed that the number of reported data security breaches in the state more than tripled between 2006 and 2013, with some 22.8 million personal records of New Yorkers exposed in nearly 5,000 data breaches.

The cost to the public and private sectors in New York? In 2013 alone, upward of $1.37 billion, according to the report’s findings.

The Insurance Information Institute’s (I.I.I.) newly updated report Cyber Risks: The Growing Threat (of which I am a co-author) sheds light on the specialist cyber insurance policies developed by insurers to help businesses and individuals protect themselves from the cyber threat.

Market intelligence suggests that the types of specialized cyber coverage being offered by insurers are expanding rapidly in response to this fast-growing market need.

I.I.I. facts and stats on identity theft and cyber security are available here.

U.S. businesses are losing more financially from cybercrime, compared to their global peers, but are generally less aware of the cost, according to PWC’s 2014 Global Economic Crime Survey.

As cybercrime continues to increase in volume, frequency and sophistication, PWC’s findings suggest that U.S. organizations are more at risk of suffering financial losses in excess of $1 million due to cybercrime.

According to the study, some 7 percent of U.S. companies lost $1 million or more, compared to just 3 percent of global organizations.

In addition, 19 percent of U.S. organizations lost $50,000 to $1 million, compared to 8 percent of global respondents.

PWC doesn’t elaborate on the reasons for this discrepancy, but other studies have noted that the types and frequencies of attacks vary from country to country.

U.S. companies are also more likely to experience the most expensive types of cyber attacks, such as malicious insiders, malicious code, and web-based incidents, the research suggests.

Despite having more to lose, some 42 percent of U.S. companies were unaware of cybercrime’s cost to their organizations, compared to 33 percent of global respondents, according to PWC.

Yet, overall U.S. companies appear to have a greater understanding of the risk of cybercrime than their global peers.

PWC notes that U.S. organizations’ perception of the risks of cybercrime exceeded the global average by 23 percent.

Also, 71 percent of U.S. respondents indicated their perception of the risks of cybercrime increased over the past 24 months, rising 10 percent since 2011.

Hat tip to CNBC.com which reports on this story here.

Some 5,128 executives from 99 countries responded to the survey, of which 50 percent were senior executives of their respective companies. Some 35 percent represented listed companies and 54 percent represented organizations with more than 1,000 employees.

Cyber security and data breaches remain front and center on the Congressional radar as the Senate Commerce Committee today holds a hearing on protecting consumers from data breaches.

The witness list includes John Mulligan, vice president and chief financial officer at Target, and Dr. Wallace Loh, president, University of Maryland. There’s an insurance industry witness too, with Peter Beshar, executive vice president and general counsel, Marsh & McLennan giving testimony.

Recent data breaches at Target and the University of Maryland highlight the fact that organizations across many different business sectors are vulnerable to cyber attacks.

The February 18, 2014 UMD data breach compromised an estimated 309,079 student, faculty and staff records, including names, birth dates, university ID numbers and social security numbers.

The massive 2013 data breach at Target during the holiday season exposed the financial and personal information of as many as 110 million consumers.

A report released yesterday by the U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee suggests that Target missed a number of opportunities to prevent the massive data breach. Hat tip to Reuters via Huffington Post which reports on the findings here.

The Senate staffers report, titled “A Kill Chain Analysis of the 2013 Target Data Breach” says key points at which Target apparently failed to detect and stop the attack include:

● Target gave network access to a third-party vendor, a small Pennsylvania HVAC company, which did not appear to follow broadly accepted information security practices. The vendor’s weak security allowed the attackers to gain a foothold in Target’s network.

● Target appears to have failed to respond to multiple automated warnings from the company’s anti-intrusion software that the attackers were installing malware on Target’s systems.

● Attackers who infiltrated Target’s network with a vendor credential appear to have successfully moved from less sensitive areas of Target’s network to areas storing consumer data, suggesting Target failed to properly isolate its most sensitive network assets.

● Target appears to have failed to respond to multiple warnings from the company’s anti-intrusion software regarding the escape routes the attackers planned to use to exfiltrate data from Target’s network.

The report analyzes what has been reported to date about the Target data breach, using the “intrusion kill chain” framework, an analytical tool introduced by Lockheed Martin security researchers in 2011, and widely used by information security professionals today.

This analysis suggests that Target missed a number of opportunities along the kill chain to stop the attackers and prevent the massive data breach.”

Check out an I.I.I. whitepaper on cyber risks and insurance here.

Next Page »