Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Practice Makes Almost Perfect: Test Your Incident Response Plan With Simulated Cyber Tabletop Games

By Brandon Hollinder
October 01, 2023

Many organizations are still relying on the "wait and hope" or "it won't happen to me" approach to cyber incidents. With cyberattacks increasing in frequency and level of harm caused, the stakes are too high to avoid the inevitable.

As a result, the cost of cyber insurance is on the rise and regulatory requirements are increasing globally. Data privacy regulations are becoming increasingly complex and as the latest SEC rulings show, companies will be held increasingly accountable for not only reporting breaches sooner but ensuring company leadership has knowledge and insight into cyber risk. In addition, more businesses are facing legal actions alleging improper preparation to avoid and/or respond to a breach event. Arguably one of the best tools to assist in preparing for and avoiding some of the negative consequences of a cyber event is a tabletop simulation exercise.

What Are Tabletop Exercises?

Tabletop exercises, commonly referred to as "tabletops," are mock or simulated breach exercises. In their simplest form they involve reviewing your incident response plan, but the most effective tabletops are interactive and involve all stakeholders walking through each step and action you would take to respond to an actual breach. They are a low-risk method to test the organizational and human factors that come into play in a real cyber incident. Tabletops help ensure there are no gaps or ambiguities in your plan, or how it's understood by parties involved in enforcing it. Their game-like simulation makes them particularly engaging for participants. They can involve one small group or team or multiple teams and departments. In the most complex tabletops, the participants may not even know it's a simulation and are put through an elaborate and scripted scenario where they need to act and respond as if it is a real incident only to find out later that it was not.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • 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

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.