Top 6 Risks of U.S. Companies Working Globally
Disclaimer: The events depicted in this scenario are fictitious. Any similarity to any corporation or person, living or dead, is merely coincidental.
The October 2015 cover of the trade publication Retailer’s World featured a picture of Paul Vitez, general counsel for cloud host Va-Voom!, which rewrote the book on online shopping, making a billionaire of its founder, Teddy Houck.
In glowing prose, the author of the Retailer’s World cover story related Vitez’ impressive academic record at Haverford College, his background in finance and his role in earning for Va-Voom! the nickname of “The Citadel” for its innovative, committed approach to cyber security.
Employing the “prison, not a castle” approach to cyber security, Vitez and Va-Voom! created “honey- pots” within the Va-Voom! system, decoys which looked like they contained important data but were not actually part of the internal network.
Moving much more swiftly than its competitors, Va-Voom! also spent millions to implement chip and pin credit card technology on its credit cards, a much more secure way to store sensitive financial and personal information than the traditional magnetic strip.
Again with an eye toward short-term investment in operations and a goal of long-term success, Vitez was given carte blanche by Teddy Houck and the Va-Voom! board of directors to spend top dollar for information technology talent that had honed their skills in the high-stakes environments of the CIA and the Department of Defense.
From an information technology policy perspective, Va-Voom! was a demanding place to work. Under Vitez’ direction, the use of data encryption was heavily enforced. It also had a strict company policy barring employees from connecting personal devices to any computer equipment owned by Va-Voom! or to its network.
In 2014 and 2015, one by one, major retailers — even banking institutions — were hit by cyber attacks that undermined the public’s faith in those companies, doing serious mid- to long-term damage to their reputations. Retailers that learned only too well the degree to which they were vulnerable to attack found in Va-Voom! a business partner they felt they could trust.
Rather than being dampened by cyber fears, the trend of cyber attacks in 2014 and early 2015 actually increased the number of retailers that wanted to do business with Va-Voom!
The company’s insurance program was something of an anomaly, considering its position in the industry. Starting with a substantial retention, Va-Voom! carried property and professional liability coverage for its employees.
The company considered but never purchased coverage that would substantially indemnify the hundreds of retailers and other service providers that used its services, were Va-Voom! to be the victim of a cyber-security incident. It carried third-party liability insurance, but not as much as you would think a company of its size would carry.
“Really?” Vitez memorably said during a meeting with Steve Francis, the company’s chief risk officer and company CFO Maribel Kelly, when the subject of cyber security indemnification was broached by Va-Voom!’s broker, himself no slouch when it came to these matters.
With an eye to the merciless whims of stock market investors, Vitez and Kelly sided against Steve Francis when he argued that the cost of the premium, though it would put a slight dent in the company’s bottom line on a quarterly basis, was well worth the expense.
“Nobody manages this risk better than we do,” Vitez said, crossing his arms across his chest.
“We can and do own this risk,” he said.
Steve Francis looked at Vitez across the table but didn’t say what he was thinking. What he was thinking was, “You just bit off way more than you can chew, Mr. Haverford.”
Just before midnight on Nov. 30, 2015, the Monday after Thanksgiving, known in retailing as Cyber Monday, a highly sophisticated and well-coordinated cyber-attack began, erasing Va-Voom!’s considerable credibility in a matter of minutes.
Here’s how it unfolded.
At five minutes to midnight, the websites of 10 of the largest retailers that sold on the Va-Voom! site went down. The retailers were so in the dark about what had happened to them that it took hours to put together that the source of the attack was coming from within Va-Voom!’s vaunted information technology system.
Precisely at midnight, unidentified hackers used the stolen e-mail addresses of the 10 retailers’ customers to send Trojan Horses to the personal computers of millions of online shoppers.
The customers didn’t need to click on the e-mails or download attachments to empower the Trojan Horses. After a mere half hour in their inboxes, the e-mails activated a cyber-locking mechanism that shut the users out of their own computers. The only visible content on their screen was the logo of the retailer whose customer information was stolen.
Angry consumers, shut out of their personal computers, pick up their handheld devices to vent their frustration in instant messages and Tweets aimed at the retailers whose logos were frozen on their now-useless computer screens.
Several of the affected companies went public within hours with their conviction that the Trojan Horses that caused so much havoc emanated from the Va-Voom! network.
“Are you seeing this?” said David Cohen, the equally miffed general counsel for one of the retailers, on a phone call with his law school buddy Paul Vitez, as they tried to sort out the hell that had broken loose.
“Yes I’m seeing it,” said Vitez.
Vitez, normally a man of action, but temporarily flummoxed, became as passive as any teenager with a handheld device in their hand as he sat, scrolling through the Tweets and Facebook posts that were savaging the retailers and Va-Voom!
“What are you doing?” Cohen said impatiently when Vitez fell silent.
“Are you playing with your iPhone? We have a serious situation here, Paul!” Cohen said.
“I’m not playing with my iPhone!” Vitez shouted back before putting down his mobile device and trying to regain control of his emotions.
“I know we have a problem David, I know we do,” Vitez said.
But all Vitez could do beyond that was run his hands through his hair, temporarily at a loss as to exactly what to do next.
On the afternoon of December 1, the New York Times published an online story, featuring quotes attributed to Wall Street analysts from the technology and retail sectors, estimating that damage to home computers and lost online retail sales from the coordinated and ongoing cyber attack could potentially exceed $1 billion.
Black Monday and Beyond
In the aftermath of what history and newspaper editors and writers would record as “Black Monday,” Vitez and the rest of the Va-Voom! team tried to take stock of their losses and rally themselves into a recovery. They had a very hard and very expensive road ahead of them.
Paul Vitez had used the millions accorded to him to create Va-Voom’s “prison, not a castle” approach to cyber defense and he had employed that money in an admirable and innovative fashion.
But it was in a meeting with chief risk officer Steve Francis, CFO Marabel Kelly and Va-Voom!’s technology and general liability broker Brandon Fikes that Paul Vitez came to a better, albeit painful understanding about the best allocation of capital in the quest to manage risk.
The most immediate pain that Va-Voom! was feeling were notices from five attorneys general that investigations into the Black Monday breach were underway.
‘Well, the good news is that your regulatory defense is covered, as is your first party business interruption,” Fikes said.
“Great,” Vitez said. “What else?”
Steve Francis glanced at Vitez out of one corner of his eye. He felt the pain of the losses to the company as badly as anyone, but he couldn’t help but take a bit of perverse pleasure in the discomfort of Vitez, whose arrogance, in Francis’ estimation, was going to have significant consequences, consequences that could be measured in millions of dollars.
“The rest is somewhat of a mixed bag, unfortunately,” Fikes said.
“Go on,” said Vitez who shot Francis a quick sharp look, causing Francis to turn away quickly, lest his inner thoughts become outwardly visible.
“You had some third party liability coverage, but I don’t think it’s going to be enough to cover the losses of your business partners, not to mention the shoppers whose personal computers were damaged by this event,” Fikes said.
“How much …” Vitez managed to get out before Steve Francis stepped in.
“We could have multiples of millions in exposure here, Paul,” Francis said.
Vitez shot Francis another look but Francis diplomatically kept his mouth shut.
“I don’t think we’re ever going to get to the bottom of where this attack came from and who launched it,” said the CFO, Marabel Kelly.
“What’s your advice, Brandon, about spending money on forensics?” she asked.
“I think you spend it for a couple of reasons,” Fikes said.
“One, the cost is covered by insurance. But that’s not the best reason. The best reason is that you can use forensics to learn from the event and hopefully prevent anything else as bad as this going forward,” he said.
“All right,” Kelly said. “What else?”
“There’s reputation,” Steve Francis offered.
“Some say you can put a price on it, some say you can’t,” said Fikes.
“But one thing is for sure,” he said. “You had no coverage in place for that in any event.”
There was a pause, as the significance of that statement sunk in. In the extended, painfully awkward silence, Marabel Kelly shuffled the paperwork in front of her and shifted in her seat, visibly perturbed.
Within two weeks of that difficult conversation, the pain intensified for Paul Vitez and Va-Voom! Class action lawsuits were filed on behalf of the millions of home-computer owners who alleged pain and suffering in connection with the hassle of credit card replacement and property loss from their now-useless computers.
The 10 retailers affected, now known colloquially and to their ongoing irritation as the Black Monday Ten, also filed suit.
With Va-Voom!’s uninsured losses building from the millions to the tens of millions, Paul Vitez, once a magazine cover boy, resigned his position.
Risk & Insurance® partnered with XL Group to produce this scenario. Below are XL Group’s recommendations on how to prevent the losses presented in the scenario. These “Lessons Learned” are not the editorial opinion of Risk & Insurance®.
1. Have a crisis management response plan in place – The consequences of a cyber-attack are too expensive and too damaging for companies not to have a clear idea how they are going to respond in the event their services, or the services of their business partners are interrupted.
2. Understand your risk profile – Different companies have different cyber-risk profiles depending on their industry. Understanding your cyber-risk profile and working in conjunction with an agent and underwriter to map out the best coverage is a crucial step in avoiding being underinsured or paying too much for coverage you don’t need.
3. You are next – The realm of cyber-security and cyber-attacks is one area where an “it can’t happen here” mentality could be catastrophic. The chilling fact of the matter is that the most well-financed companies with the most sophisticated cyber defenses are vulnerable.
4. Get help – Whether it be through your insurance coverage or some other funding mechanism, find and connect with the consultants you need to help you understand the threat and how you can protect yourself. This risk environment is changing day by day and no one can afford to be content with the status quo.
5. Enforce your IT policies – Having sensible IT policies in place to minimize the potential for an attack is not enough. Companies must be proactive in seeing that employees take seriously company rules and standards on data encryption, and the use of personal devices in the workplace or in connection with company networks.
Additional Partner Resources
John Coletti, Underwriting Manager of Cyber Liability, discusses cyber coverage options.
From Coast to Coast
The 3,920-ton Left Coast Lifter, originally built by Fluor Construction to help build the new Bay Bridge in San Francisco, will be integral in rebuilding the Tappan Zee Bridge by 2018.
The Lifter and the Statue of Liberty
When he got the news, Scot Burford could see it as clearly as if somebody handed him an 8 by 11 color photograph.
On January 30, the Left Coast Lifter, a massive crane originally built by Fluor Construction to help build the new Bay Bridge in San Francisco, steamed past the Statue of Liberty. Excited observers, who saw the crane entering New York Harbor, dubbed it the “The Hudson River Hoister,” honoring its new role in rebuilding the Tappan Zee Bridge over the Hudson River.
Powered by two stout-hearted tug boats, the Lauren Foss and the Iver Foss, it took more than five weeks for the huge crane to complete the 6,000 mile ocean journey from San Francisco to New York via the Panama Canal.
Scot took a deep breath and reflected on all the work needed to plan every aspect of the crane’s complicated journey.
A risk engineer at Liberty International Underwriters (LIU), Burford worked with a specialized team of marine insurance and risk management professionals which included John Phillips, LIU’s Hull Product Line Leader, Sean Dollahon, an LIU Marine underwriter, and Rick Falcinelli, LIU’s Marine Risk Engineering Manager, to complete a detailed analysis of the crane’s proposed route. Based on a multitude of factors, the LIU team confirmed the safety of the route, produced clear guidelines for the tug captains that included weather restrictions, predetermined ports of refuge in the case of bad weather as well as specifying the ballast conditions and rigging of tow gear on the tugs.
Of equal importance, the deep expertise and extensive experience of the LIU team ensured that the most knowledgeable local surveyors and tugboat captains with the best safety records were selected for the project. After all, the most careful of plans will only be as effective as the people who execute them.
The tremendous size of the Left Coast Lifter presented some unique challenges in preparing for its voyage.
The original intention was to dry tow the crane by loading and securing it on a semi-submersible vessel. However, the lack of an American-flagged vessel that could accommodate the Left Coast Lifter created many logistical complexities and it was decided that the crane would be towed on its own barge.
At first, the LIU team was concerned since the barge was not intended for ocean travel and therefore lacked towing skegs and other structural components typically found on oceangoing barges.
But a detailed review of the plan with the client and contractors gave the LIU team confidence. In this instance, the sheer weight and size of the crane provided sufficient stability, and with the addition of a second tug on the barge’s stern, the LIU team, with its knowledge of barges and tugs, was confident the configuration was seaworthy and the barge would travel in a straight line. The team approved the plan and the crane began its successful voyage.
As impressive as the crane and its voyage were, it was just one piece in hundreds that needed to be underwritten and put in place for the Tappan Zee Bridge project to come off.
The rebuilding of the Tappan Zee Bridge, due to be completed in 2018, is the largest bridge construction project in the modern history of New York. The bridge is 3.1 miles long and will cost more than $3 billion to construct. The twin-span, cable-stayed bridge will be anchored to four mid-river towers.
When veteran contractors American Bridge, Fluor Corp., Granite Construction Northeast and Traylor Bros. formed a joint venture and won the contract to rebuild the Tappan Zee, one of the first things the consortium needed to do was find an insurance partner with the right coverages and technical expertise.
The Marsh broker, Ali Rizvi, Senior Vice President, working with the consortium, was well known to the LIU underwriting and engineering teams. In addition, Burford and the broker had worked on many projects in the past and had a strong relationship. These existing relationships were vital in facilitating efficient communication and data gathering, particularly given the scope and complexity of a project like the Tappan Zee.
And the scope of the project was indeed immense – more than 200 vessels, coming from all over the United States, would be moving construction equipment up the Hudson River.
An integrated team of LIU underwriters and risk engineers (including Burford, Phillips, Dollahon and Falcinelli) got to work evaluating the risk and the proper controls that the project required. Given the global scope of the project, the team’s ability to tap into their tight-knit global network of fellow LIU marine underwriters and engineers with deep industry relationships and expertise was invaluable.
In addition to the large number of vessels, the underwriting process was further complicated by many aspects of the project still being finalized.
“Because the consortium had just won this account, they were still working on contracts and contractors to finalize the deal and were unsure as to where most of the equipment and materials would be coming from,” Burford said.
Despite the massive size of the project and large number of stakeholders, LIU quickly turned around a quote involving three lines of marine coverage, Marine Liability, Project Cargo and Marine Hull & Machinery.
How could LIU produce such a complicated quote in a short period of time? It comes down to integrating risk engineers into the underwriting process, possessing deep industry experience on a global scale and having strong relationships that facilitate communication and trust.
Photo Credit: New York State Thruway Authority
When completed in 2018, the Tappan Zee will be eight lanes, with four emergency pullover lanes. Commuters sailing across it in their sedans and SUVs might appreciate the view of the Hudson, but they might never grasp the complexity of insuring three marine lines, covering the movements of hundreds of marine vessels carrying very expensive cargo.
Not to mention ferrying a 3,920-ton crane from coast to coast without a hitch.
But that’s what insurance does, in its quiet profundity.
This article was produced by the R&I Brand Studio, a unit of the advertising department of Risk & Insurance, in collaboration with Liberty International Underwriters. The editorial staff of Risk & Insurance had no role in its preparation.