
Ransomware attacks are on the increase, putting the target organizations in the uncomfortable position of having to decide whether or not to pay the demanded ransom. As if that were not tough enough, an October 1, 2020 advisory statement by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) warns that companies paying ransoms under these circumstances may risk violating OFAC regulations and could be subject to penalties. In the following guest post, Bill Boeck takes a look at the OFAC advisory and its implications. Bill is Lockton’s Global Cyber Product and Claims leader and U.S. Financial Lines Claims Practice Leader. A version of this article previously was published as a Lockton client alert. I would like to thank Bill for allowing me to publish his article as a guest post on this site. I welcome guest post submissions from responsible authors on topics of interest to this blog’s readers. Please contact me directly if you would like to submit a guest post. Here is Bill’s article.
Continue Reading Guest Post: OFAC Warns Against Paying Cyber Ransoms to Sanctioned Entities







One of the areas of
One of the hot topics for mainstream P&C insurers these days is dealing with “silent cyber” – that is, the coverage for cyber-related losses in traditional property and casualty insurance policies. There are a number of initiatives underway in the insurance underwriting community as insurers try to address silent cyber. However, as noted in an interesting January 14, 2020 memo from the Covington law firm entitled “The Noise About ‘Silent Cyber’ Insurance Coverage” (
Plaintiffs seeking to pursue negligence claims for the disclosure of their personal information in a data breach often face hurdles in pleading a sufficient injury. The claimants’ failure to plead a sufficient injury frequently is the basis for dismissal. However, in a very interesting recent decision, the Georgia Supreme Court reversed the intermediate appellate court’s affirmance of the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ data breach claims, finding that the claimants had sufficient standing to assert their claims where they alleged that the disclosure of their personal information left them at an “imminent and substantial risk of identity theft.” As discussed below, the Court’s holding arguably makes data breach claims under Georgia law less susceptible to dismissal. However, as also discussed below, there are important limitations to the Court’s holding.