Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Navigating APT Intrusions
Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) intrusions are sophisticated cyber-attacks carried out by well-funded and organized cyber-criminals, nation state actors or, more recently, a combination of both. The attacks are designed to establish persistence using various tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) that are intended to avoid detection and mimic authorized activity in the environment, known as "living off the land." APTs' goals may include the acquisition of intellectual property, personal data and financial information or the compromise of infrastructure or specialized data. APT intrusions often result in the unauthorized actor achieving part or all of their objective and can lead to serious reputation and financial damage to a company.
Below is an overview of concepts that must be accounted for when navigating an APT intrusion or any sophisticated attack.
Directing the Investigation; Establishing Privilege
As soon as a potential APT intrusion is detected, it is critical to engage attorneys to direct the investigation and establish attorney-client privilege. APT intrusions may involve significant "dwell" time, which means evidence may not be available or definitive. Indeed, APT activities often relate to preexisting vulnerabilities in an environment — even ones that may have been identified by the client. Further, decisions made after the discovery of an incident with regard to containment, remediation, forensics and evidence collection may impact a company's liability down the line. Therefore, it is important to establish privilege at the outset of an investigation.
This premium content is locked for Cybersecurity Law & Strategy subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
CLE Shouldn't Be the Only Mandatory Training for Attorneys
Each stage of an attorney's career offers opportunities for a curriculum that addresses both the individual's and the firm's need to drive success.
Discovery of Claim Construction and Infringement Analysis May be Compelled Prior to a Markman Hearing
A defendant in a patent infringement suit may, during discovery and prior to a <i>Markman</i> hearing, compel the plaintiff to produce claim charts, claim constructions, and element-by-element infringement analyses.