advertorial
cybersecurityeurope PAGE 52
EFFECTIVE PROTECTION AGAINST CYBER ATTACKS
A B2B ‘Cyber-Threat-Platform’ would allow real-time exchange of information between companies and IT security providers, explains DWF’s Klaus Brisch.
CYBER ATTACKS NOW CAUSE CONSIDERABLE ECONOMIC DAMAGE: ACCORDING TO A STUDY, WORLDWIDE LOSSES of approximately $600bn were incurred in 2017 alone. In Germany, for instance, damages are estimated at €43.4bn. Even though it has become normal to regularly install updates to IT systems, and to regularly change passwords, it is clear that this alone does not provide adequate protection against cyber attacks. It is equally important to be immediately informed about security gaps that have been discovered - in order to react accordingly. This, however, is exactly what has not yet been
organised in Germany on a national level. There is the country’s Federal Offi ce for Information Security (BSI): an authority whose tasks include, for instance, the provision of information on current IT threats. A specifi c law (BSIG) even regulates specifi c communication and information paths for security- relevant topics and events in IT. Under current legislation, however, only operators of so-called critical
infrastructures report their IT
failures to the BSI without delay. The BSI also informs only selected economic players about IT threats. There is no nationwide warning system.
COMPANY INFO DWF
We are a global legal business, transforming legal services through our people for our clients. Led by Managing Partner and CEO Andrew Leaitherland, we have over 27 key locations and more than 3,100 people delivering
services and solutions that go beyond expectations. Klaus Brisch (pictured) is Partner and Global Head of Technology at DWF.
DETAILS Further information contacts: |
dwf.law |
klaus.brisch@
dwf.law
The so-called IT Security Act 2.0 is now being
prepared. Among other things, the current draft provides an extension of the obligation to report IT attacks. This means that the legally standardised exchange of information would then also include the defence, automotive and chemical industries, the media and some other addressees. This can certainly be seen as a step in the right direction. The current draft, however, does not address all the weaknesses
A ‘Cyber-Threat-Platform’ would clearly have legal implications for cyber security companies involved.
that exist, in particular from the point of view of the business community. In the future, the BSI’s information fl ow – for example, on existing security threats – would remain restricted to certain segments of the economy. This would not be a comprehensive solution. In addition, not all economic players would be obliged to report cyber attacks. Further, the BSI lacks networking or regulated co-operation with authorities and offi ces in other countries.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74
