How the Internet of Things Benefits Risk Management

IoT cities
An increasingly digital world is resulting in companies across all industries reassessing how they approach risk management. Thanks to the connectedness of devices brought about by the Internet of Things (IoT), executives have much more information at their disposal for assessing risk than before.

IoT is a network of devices that collect and exchange data—think back to the classic example of your fridge ordering fresh milk before it runs out. This is quickly becoming a fact for businesses that rely more and more on being connected to remote devices for competitive advantage.

For risk managers, IoT boils down to introducing a layer of technology on top of the business. Operations do not have to be reinvented. This provides organizations that are reliant on managing risks with an indispensable tool.

Increased, relevant real-time data

In the insurance industry, this promises much more than just monitoring the location of a vehicle, the temperature of its load, and the performance of a driver. By equipping a company with more sensors and devices linked to the internet, organizations are able to gather significantly more real-time data to drive business value. This also has a big impact on managing risks.

For example, when a contractor’s portable toilets get dropped off, there is often no physical address to use. This creates complications when another driver or team has to locate the units a few days later for cleaning and maintenance. Using internet-linked sensors, however, the provider can easily find the toilets and quickly improve operational efficiencies. Another example is using IoT to assist in tagging assets with Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tags. This assists with monitoring everything from the service intervals on equipment like cranes to ensuring that generators have the correct fuel levels.

The growth of IoT is also seeing a massive uptake in interest from startups to look at exploiting demand with innovative solutions. Wearable devices for e-health monitoring, for example, presents an opportunity for consumers to take more control towards preventative care and gives healthcare professionals richer, real-time insight on patient behavior during treatments.

IoT gives decision-makers the ability to spot trends, adapt to changing market conditions and improve their strategies. What’s more, an IoT-led approach can be applied to any business—whether a retailer, medical practice, startup, or even a construction company.

Managing IoT risks

Despite the advantages, companies need to be mindful of how to protect against IoT risks, such as gaining access to information being fed from devices back to the head office. Security, as with any new piece of technology, has to be an integral part of utilizing IoT in the company. Scanning for vulnerabilities now extends beyond the network and devices such as smartphones, tablets, and laptops. IT departments need to ensure the security of machine-to-machine units, RFID tags, and so on. Fortunately, none of this is insurmountable. Taking due diligence and evaluating the cyber security strategy on an on-going basis should be a matter of course in a digital world. Again, IoT is providing the impetus to do so.

Relying on IoT as an enabling technology means risk managers are committing to the digital age. The payoff is that technology can give organizations greater flexibility in their approaches to efficiency, cost reduction and risk mitigation than in previous years.

Cyber Insurance Purchasing Up, But Breaches Felt in Prices and Limits

NEW YORK—At yesterday’s Advisen Cyber Insights Conference, Zurich and Advisen released the fifth annual Advisen Cyber Survey of U.S. risk managers, finding a 9% acceleration in cyber liability insurance purchasing from 2014 to 2015. The firm has seen a 26% increase in the number of respondents who have coverage since the first survey in 2011.

Companies are taking cyberliability more seriously, Zurich reports, with the number of organizations developing data breach response plans up 10% from last year. What’s more, companies appear to be better recognizing the sheer amount of value at risk, with two-thirds of respondents saying they have either increased their policy limits or are considering doing so. While Zurich found that more organizations view information security as an organizational challenge rather than the purview of the IT department alone, and respondents said that boards and executive management are taking cyberrisk more seriously, those who have not yet obtained cyber coverage say it is because their superiors still do not see the need. There is also still a considerable difference in take-up rates among large corporations and small and mid-sized businesses, with Catherine Mulligan, senior vice president and national underwriting manager of specialty E&O, telling the audience there is an approximate 20-point spread between the groups.

“This year’s cyber survey shows that demand for coverage and higher limits has increased tremendously and we at Zurich have seen double digit growth year over year,” said Bryan Salvatore, president of specialty products for Zurich North America. “That is why we are heavily invested in identifying risks and delivering solutions and why we are committed to staying at the forefront of this issue.”

Marsh has also seen considerable growth in cyber liability insurance purchasing among its clients. According to the insurer’s new midyear cyber benchmarking report, the number of U.S.-based Marsh clients purchasing standalone cyber insurance increased 32% in the first half of 2015, up from 26% growth during this period in 2014. By sector, members of the education industry made up the biggest growth, with 155% more clients purchasing the coverage, followed by power and utilities with a 100% increase and manufacturing with a 76% increase. The healthcare sector remains Marsh’s largest buyer of cyber coverage, with 41% of all clients in this industry purchasing it by the end of the first half of 2015.

Cyber liability insurance growth rates

Sessions throughout the conference made clear that insurers—and the industry at large—are still struggling with what is also risk managers’ biggest challenge: data. Completely evaluating the true value at risk with cyber liability continues to elude both sides, although many new approaches and consultancy services are emerging. Further, the dearth of actuarial data not only compounds the challenges of the cyberrisk assessment process, but make it hard for the industry to set pricing and limits with confidence.

“It is hard for insurers to be prudent with cyber as risk managers often do not fully understand how to measure their exposure,” Mulligan said.

“Actuarial data is the Holy Grail of the cyberinsurance market: we’re all searching for it and it’s just not there,” said Bob Parisi, cyber product leader at Marsh, who moderated a session on the struggle to quantify and model cyberrisk.

In addition to the actuarial uncertainty, the considerable number of large losses over the past few years is continuing to push up the cost of cyber, forming what Willis executive vice president Peter Foster described as a “hot” market that will have to cool and solidify with time. Parisi chose to describe the market as “brittle” after absorbing several hundred million dollars in losses, and a range of insurers and brokers reported that premiums have increased dramatically as a result. The Marsh study found that price increases across industries averaged 19%, with 32% increases among retailers, the most frequently breached sector over the past few years.

cyber insurance limits purchased

While these breaches and better estimates of the real cost of cyber incidents have helped many companies realize they may be underinsuring for cyber liability, the move to correct this is getting more difficult. Insurers have said repeatedly that there is plenty of capacity in the cyberinsurance market and many buyers have increased the limits purchased, but higher limits of liability are increasingly hard to come by, and none really exist in excess of $100 million. Particularly for businesses that have yet to implement serious efforts to address information security, rate increases appear sure to continue, and simply buying more coverage will not only be unsustainable, but may not even be possible as insurers give more thought to the capacity they are willing to commit to these risks.

“There is just not enough capacity to extend $50 to $100 million limits to every account,” said Greg Vernaci, AIG’s head of cyber in the United States and Canada. “We are looking to reward those companies with a robust information security posture who go beyond and take a multifaceted approach to managing cyberrisk.”

Cyberbreach and Reputation Woes Hack Away at Bottom Line for 44% of Financial Firms

According to the 2015 Makovsky Wall Street Reputation Study, released Thursday, 42% of U.S. consumers believe that failure to protect personal and financial information is the biggest threat to the reputation of the financial firms they use. What’s more, three-quarters of respondents said that the unauthorized access of their personal and financial information would likely lead them to take their business elsewhere. In fact, security of personal and financial information is much more important to customers compared to a financial services firm’s ethical responsibility to customers and the community (23%).

Executives from financial services firms seem to know this already: 83% agree that the ability to combat cyber threats and protect personal data will be one of the biggest issues in building reputation in the next year.

The study found that this trend is already having a very real impact: 44% of financial services companies report losing 20% or more of their business in the past year due to reputation and customer satisfaction issues. When asked to rank the issues that negatively affected their company’s reputation over the last 12 months, the top three “strongly agree” responses in 2015 from communications, marketing and investor relations executives at financial services firms were:

  • Financial performance (47%), up from 27% in 2014
  • Corporate governance (45%), up from 24% in 2014
  • Data breaches (42%), up from 24% in 2014

Earning consumer trust will take some extraordinary effort, as a seemingly constant stream of breaches in the news and personal experiences have clearly made customers more skeptical of data security across a range of industries. When asked which institution they trust more with their personal information and safeguarding privacy, today’s consumers ranked traditional financial institutions—including insurers—higher by a wide margin over new online providers, but a larger percentage of consumers do not trust any organization to be able to protect their data:

  • Bank/brokerage, insurance, or credit card company (33%)
  • U.S. Government (IRS, Social Security) or U.S. Postal Service (13%)
  • Current healthcare company (4%)
  • Online wallets (PayPal, Google Wallet, Apple Pay) (4%)
  • Retail chain or small businesses (4%)
  • All other (3%)
  • None of these organizations or companies can be trusted (39%)

 

The bebe Hack: Guarding Against Cyberbreach During the Holiday Shopping Season

bebe data breach

On Friday, retail chain bebe announced that it had identified an attack on computers that operate the in-store payment processing system. The attack may have exposed data from cards swiped in retail locations in the U.S., Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands between Nov. 8 and Nov. 26, including cardholder name, account number, expiration date and verification code. The breach did not impact customers who shopped online or in other international locations, bebe reported, and the company has hired a security firm to stop and investigate the attack.

Almost exactly a year after the massive Target hack, this latest incident comes after a steady stream of sizable breaches among retailers, including Home Depot, JPMorgan Chase and eBay. Consumers have begun to find these hacks increasingly less surprising, and stopped paying as much attention – a phenomenon many are calling “breach fatigue.”

But companies are not entirely off the hook. While Target is on the rebound and subsequent breach victims have endured less damage to consumer perception, these cybersecurity incidents still demand a notable amount of contingency planning and mitigation.

According to public relations and social media firm Affect, there are four keys to protecting brand reputation in the event of a security breach:

1) Develop a Fully Locked and Loaded Response Plan

In the digital age, it is essential to have a cyber attack plan in place as part of an organization’s crisis management strategy. Companies can get ahead of a crisis by leveraging social media to diffuse damaging situations. In order to prepare, be sure to anticipate and understand the kinds of threats that could influence your business and your industry.

“There are four phases of crisis communications: readiness, response, reassurance and recovery,” said Sandra Fathi, president of Affect. “In order to properly respond to a crisis, each stage must be ready to go at a moment’s notice — develop materials such as messages and prepared statements, prepare delivery channels like hotlines and social media platforms and train employees regarding awareness and organizational procedures.”

2) The Customer is Top Priority

Arguably the most important step in maintaining a brand’s image amid a breach is to be honest with customers and inform them about what has occurred — the sooner the better, especially if their personal information is at stake. In fact, 47 states have Security Breach Notification Laws that govern communication with customers in the face of a security breach including the timeline for those communications. Several weeks elapsed before Target released an official statement to their customers and as a result, experienced massive backlash from customers, other organizations and the media alike.

Adam Levin, chairman and founder of IDT911, a provider of data risk and identity management services, believes every company needs to demonstrate three things in the wake of a data breach. “Urgency, transparency, and empathy are all critical. I don’t think they [Target] showed enough of those three,” Levin said in an interview with ABCNews.com. Not being upfront with customers can result in a loss of confidence in the brand that can hinder not only the company’s reputation, but could lead to a loss in revenue.

3) Monitor the Situation in Real-Time

Social media can be a powerful tool but “with great power comes great responsibility.” While positive engagements boost a brand’s respect, companies must always monitor for negative interactions in real-time and be even more stringent during a security breach, as customers will turn to social media to respond to situations, regardless of their allegiance to the brand. Develop a Social Media Response Map that outlines anticipated situations and correlated standard responses to avoid any last minute shuffle. Don’t shy away from angry customers that continuously post adverse comments. Depending on the situation, it may be worthwhile to engage with these individuals in a private forum and resolve their concerns, taking the negative sentiments offline.

4) Don’t Repeat the Same Mistakes

For brands, it is especially important to not make the same mistakes twice. Customers may or may not forgive a first offense, so a second go-around is even harder to rebound from. Companies must carefully document and analyze each breach to identify how it happened, why it happened and how to prevent such an event in the future. Consider changing security vendors, deploying new software, re-training staff and amending company policies. It is also important to communicate these changes to customer to reassure them that a similar breach will not reoccur.