Business Interruption RIsk

Severed Communications

Businesses face risks from undersea data cable vulnerabilities.
By: | August 3, 2016 • 7 min read

Crisscrossing the ocean floor, undersea optical fiber data cables are an essential component of an increasingly interconnected world, quietly carrying massive amounts of data communications between the Earth’s landmasses.

Advertisement




But they are not invulnerable. Individual cables are severed or damaged dozens of times each year, most commonly by fishing boat anchors, but also by storms, scrap collectors and even shark bites.

The U.S. and other major markets, like Europe and Japan, are served by numerous cables, providing enough redundancy that traffic from a single damaged cable is rerouted before end users even notice. Wider outages, however, can have more far-reaching effects.


VIDEO: IDG.TV follows along as undersea data cables are manufactured and then loaded aboard a ship to place them in the ocean.

That’s why in October 2015, when Russian ships were observed lurking near undersea data cables, U.S. military and intelligence officials were concerned about possible sabotage.

Some experts, however, see that as unlikely.

“Cables during peacetime are protected by law under the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,” said Keith Schofield, general manager of the International Cable Protection Committee, representing the submarine cable community of interest.

Attempted sabotage, he said, would likely be detectable and stopped before any significant harm could be done to trunk cable routes.

“Before 10 or 20 percent of them were affected, owners would realize that something pretty serious was happening and could respond appropriately.”

Sean Donahue, assistant vice president and underwriter, XL Catlin

Sean Donahue, assistant vice president and underwriter, XL Catlin

Sean Donahue, an assistant vice president and underwriter specializing in cyber and technology at XL Catlin, agreed.

“These commercial cables have too much intrinsic value,” Donahue said. “Anybody who may have that sort of capability, such as Russia … would be hurting their own self-interest.”

Seismic activity, however, has been known to damage enough cables to cause wide service interruptions and service degradation, even in areas with ample cable connections.

A 2006 earthquake in Taiwan severed several undersea cables, causing major disruptions in Asia and ripple effects that interrupted phone service to Europe. Smaller incidents can have far reaching impacts, as well.

In 2013, a string of separate cable cuts in Egypt caused widespread data slowdowns in large portions of Africa and Asia.

And a single cut off of Northern Ireland in 2015 sparked headlines claiming it had “sent broadband into meltdown.”

When cables are cut, rerouted data can overwhelm unaffected networks, causing slowdowns even for those not directly affected. Smaller countries with less redundancy — and the companies doing business with them — can suffer substantial repercussions from such events.

Advertisement




Even in the U.S., outages involving multiple cables could cause data traffic to be rerouted to undersea cables on the opposite side of the country, potentially triggering domestic slowdowns along the way.

As businesses become increasingly dependent on fast data communications, even minor slowdowns can impede business. For web-centric and cloud-based companies, as well as content providers, such slowdowns could be a serious problem.

According to TeleGeography, a data cable industry research firm, Google and Bing report that minor lags lead to decreased click-throughs and search result views, and “Amazon has claimed that every 100 milliseconds of latency reduces its sales by 1 percent.”

High-frequency trading companies sometimes own dedicated data cables, but others are dependent on the same networks as the rest of us, and if those networks slow down, it hampers performance and costs them money.

Built with Redundancy

The undersea cable industry goes to great lengths to ensure uninterrupted service.

Peter Jamieson, chair, European Subsea Cable Association

Peter Jamieson, chair, European Subsea Cable Association

“The systems are built with redundancy in mind,” said Peter Jamieson, chair of the industry group European Subsea Cable Association.

“You should always aim to have at least two cables from each operator so that if you lose one cable … you automatically switch onto the other one. The redundancy is built into the network on the global network as well.”

Excess capacity is also built into the system. Most cables were originally built to handle optical data traffic in a single wavelength, but they now use a technique called Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM), which handles many wavelengths.

“We are now getting potentially 400 times the capacity on one optical fiber than what you probably got 15 to 20 years ago,” Jamieson said.

Routing protocols ensure that in the case of a service interruption, data instantaneously finds alternate routes.  And the different cable owners work together in various consortia to operate roughly 60 cable-repair ships throughout the world, which are on call to ensure that any damage is repaired quickly. Repairs generally take a minimum of four days to complete.

R8-16p47-48_8Cables.indd

But according to Helen Thompson, director of commercial marketing at Esri, a software company specializing in geographic information systems, it is not inconceivable that the individual smart systems meant to ensure seamless rerouting could have unexpected results — much the way automated trading programs can produce dramatic and unexplained lows or highs in financial markets.

“Those individual response plans come together and aggregate in such a way that they themselves might have an impact,” Thompson said.

“It’s like the butterfly effect. … That’s increasingly the nature of connectivity and a consequence of the very widespread, multi-point-of-touch communications network that we rely on.”

While DWDM vastly increased capacity on data cables, demand and usage have been steadily catching up as businesses and individuals demand and depend on more and more data.

A company called Hibernia Express recently laid a pair of superfast transatlantic cables, the first new cables in 13 years. More may be on the way.

“The content people want to have their own fibers right now,” said Jamieson.

“Can you prove that you would have made X amount of dollars versus Y amount of dollars because of a degraded service?” — Sean Donahue, assistant vice president and underwriter, at XL Catlin

“So the Facebooks, Googles, Amazons and Microsofts of this world … they want to have their own fiber to control their own traffic on cable, so they are driving a lot of new systems as well.”

It is a sign of how seriously data-driven businesses take their dependence on fast, dependable transmission infrastructure.

As data usage skyrockets, Thompson cautioned against taking network resiliency and capacity for granted.

“We could be in a situation where ‘out of sight, out of mind’ [and] all these things are running at 99 percent capacity, and we’re one point … away from total failure.

“We don’t know. I’m not suggesting that is the case, but it behooves us to provide evidence that we have redundancy and resilience in the systems that we’ve become reliant on. We increasingly are engineering our future to be more dependent on them.”

Smart houses, self-driving cars, and other web-dependent gadgets and systems will not only add to data traffic, but to the list of systems that could malfunction in the case of outages and slowdowns, opening new areas of risk for homeowners, as well.

Protecting Data Flows

Traditional business interruption coverage focuses on perils like flood and fire, power outages and physical infrastructure failures.

Helen Thompson, director of commercial marketing, Esri

Helen Thompson, director of commercial marketing, Esri

“But, when we move to businesses where data is a utility, we have a different sort of business interruption, and that is going to be increasingly important to service-based economies,” said Thompson.

“We think about site liability and data breaches, but what I think we’re going to start moving to more and more is providing business interruption insurance around data.”

Cloud coverage insurance is still a rarity, but probably not for long. “Many more companies should think about cloud computing insurance,” she said.

“It will become a vital part of what’s included in business interruption insurance.”

Businesses should know their providers’ contractual obligations and dependent business interruption coverage in case of outages, as spelled out in the service level agreement, she said.

Advertisement




“More and more major businesses are expecting that as part of their service level agreement,” Thompson said.

“I think that will become an integral part of the transfer of risk and liability.  If you’re completely dependent upon the web and the cloud to do business, and you don’t protect yourself with a service agreement on the cloud provider, you’re going to be subject to claims from other people.  So, that discussion with your insurance provider should be absolutely central.”

Even with coverage, however, calculating business interruption losses, especially for traders and other market-dependent businesses, can be extremely difficult, particularly during incidents that may themselves be roiling the markets.

“Can you prove that you would have made X amount of dollars versus Y amount of dollars because of a degraded service?” Donahue asked. “There’s a lot of moving parts to that scenario.” &

Jon McGoran is a novelist and magazine editor based outside of Philadelphia. He can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Cyber Liability

Fresh Worries for Boards of Directors

New cyber security regulations increase exposure for directors and officers at financial institutions.
By: | June 1, 2017 • 6 min read

Boards of directors could face a fresh wave of directors and officers (D&O) claims following the introduction of tough new cybersecurity rules for financial institutions by The New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS).

Advertisement




Prompted by recent high profile cyber attacks on JPMorgan Chase, Sony, Target, and others, the state regulations are the first of their kind and went into effect on March 1.

The new rules require banks, insurers and other financial institutions to establish an enterprise-wide cybersecurity program and adopt a written policy that must be reviewed by the board and approved by a senior officer annually.

The regulation also requires the more than 3,000 financial services firms operating in the state to appoint a chief information security officer to oversee the program, to report possible breaches within 72 hours, and to ensure that third-party vendors meet the new standards.

Companies will have until September 1 to comply with most of the new requirements, and beginning February 15, 2018, they will have to submit an annual certification of compliance.

The responsibility for cybersecurity will now fall squarely on the board and senior management actively overseeing the entity’s overall program. Some experts fear that the D&O insurance market is far from prepared to absorb this risk.

“The new rules could raise compliance risks for financial institutions and, in turn, premiums and loss potential for D&O insurance underwriters,” warned Fitch Ratings in a statement. “If management and directors of financial institutions that experience future cyber incidents are subsequently found to be noncompliant with the New York regulations, then they will be more exposed to litigation that would be covered under professional liability policies.”

D&O Challenge

Judy Selby, managing director in BDO Consulting’s technology advisory services practice, said that while many directors and officers rely on a CISO to deal with cybersecurity, under the new rules the buck stops with the board.

“The common refrain I hear from directors and officers is ‘we have a great IT guy or CIO,’ and while it’s important to have them in place, as the board, they are ultimately responsible for cybersecurity oversight,” she said.

William Kelly, senior vice president, underwriting, Argo Pro

William Kelly, senior vice president, underwriting at Argo Pro, said that unknown cyber threats, untested policy language and developing case laws would all make it more difficult for the D&O market to respond accurately to any such new claims.

“Insurers will need to account for the increased exposures presented by these new regulations and charge appropriately for such added exposure,” he said.

Going forward, said Larry Hamilton, partner at Mayer Brown, D&O underwriters also need to scrutinize a company’s compliance with the regulations.

“To the extent that this risk was not adequately taken into account in the first place in the underwriting of in-force D&O policies, there could be unanticipated additional exposure for the D&O insurers,” he said.

Michelle Lopilato, Hub International’s director of cyber and technology solutions, added that some carriers may offer more coverage, while others may pull back.

“How the markets react will evolve as we see how involved the department becomes in investigating and fining financial institutions for noncompliance and its result on the balance sheet and dividends,” she said.

Christopher Keegan, senior managing director at Beecher Carlson, said that by setting a benchmark, the new rules would make it easier for claimants to make a case that the company had been negligent.

“If stock prices drop, then this makes it easier for class action lawyers to make their cases in D&O situations,” he said. “As a result, D&O carriers may see an uptick in cases against their insureds and an easier path for plaintiffs to show that the company did not meet its duty of care.”

Advertisement




One area that regulators and plaintiffs might seize upon is the certification compliance requirement, according to Rob Yellen, executive vice president, D&O and fiduciary liability product leader, FINEX at Willis Towers Watson.

“A mere inaccuracy in a certification could result in criminal enforcement, in which case it would then become a boardroom issue,” he said.

A big grey area, however, said Shiraz Saeed, national practice leader for cyber risk at Starr Companies, is determining if a violation is a cyber or management liability issue in the first place.

“The complication arises when a company only has D&O coverage, but it doesn’t have a cyber policy and then they have to try and push all the claims down the D&O route, irrespective of their nature,” he said.

“Insurers, on their part, will need to account for the increased exposures presented by these new regulations and charge appropriately for such added exposure.” — William Kelly, senior vice president, underwriting, Argo Pro

Jim McCue, managing director at Aon’s financial services group, said many small and mid-size businesses may struggle to comply with the new rules in time.

“It’s going to be a steep learning curve and a lot of work in terms of preparedness and the implementation of a highly detailed cyber security program, risk assessment and response plan, all by September 2017,” he said.

The new regulation also has the potential to impact third parties including accounting, law, IT and even maintenance and repair firms who have access to a company’s information systems and personal data, said Keegan.

“That can include everyone from IT vendors to the people who maintain the building’s air conditioning,” he said.

New Models

Others have followed New York’s lead, with similar regulations being considered across federal, state and non-governmental regulators.

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ Cyber-security Taskforce has proposed an insurance data security model law that establishes exclusive standards for data security and investigation, and notification of a breach of data security for insurance providers.

Once enacted, each state would be free to adopt the new law, however, “our main concern is if regulators in different states start to adopt different standards from each other,” said Alex Hageli, director, personal lines policy at the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America.

“It would only serve to make compliance harder, increase the cost of burden on companies, and at the end of the day it doesn’t really help anybody.”

Advertisement




Richard Morris, partner at law firm Herrick, Feinstein LLP, said companies need to review their current cybersecurity program with their chief technology officer or IT provider.

“Companies should assess whether their current technology budget is adequate and consider what investments will be required in 2017 to keep up with regulatory and market expectations,” he said. “They should also review and assess the adequacy of insurance policies with respect to coverages, deductibles and other limitations.”

Adam Hamm, former NAIC chair and MD of Protiviti’s risk and compliance practice, added: “With New York’s new cyber regulation, this is a sea change from where we were a couple of years ago and it’s soon going to become the new norm for regulating cyber security.” &

Alex Wright is a U.K.-based business journalist, who previously was deputy business editor at The Royal Gazette in Bermuda. You can reach him at [email protected]