This Blog

Syndication

News

Enterprise Storage Strategies

Deploying enterprise storage has never been more confusing, with a wide variety of technology choices available. On this blog, Nirvanix Director of Consulting, Stephen Foskett, presents proven strategies for building an internal storage service in the enterprise.

Massachusetts Says Encrypt It All!

Protecting personal data, like backup and disaster recovery, can be hard to get people excited about. Although we see the problem plainly and solutions are widely available, it can be hard to convince business management that technologies like encryption are worth the investment. But new regulations promise to change all that: Massachusetts and Nevada have enacted data protection laws that require encryption of personal information in transit.

See my follow-up article, How to Comply with Data Encryption Laws

It's about time, too. Data losses have been all over the news for a decade, and everyone in IT knows that much of the data crossing networks around the world is still unencrypted. The situation with backup tapes is even worse: The majority of corporations still don't encrypt backup data, and most have poorly-controlled procedures for handling tapes. Every day, businesses create backup tapes containing their most critical and personal data and leave them sitting in a box for a stranger to pick up at a loading dock or reception desk.

Nevada's law, NRS 597.970, took effect Oct 1, 2008. It states the encryption requirement quite plainly:

"A business in this State shall not transfer any personal information of a customer through an electronic transmission other than a facsimile to a person outside of the secure system of the business unless the business uses encryption to ensure the security of electronic transmission"

The Massachusetts law, 201 CMR 17.00, takes effect Jan 1, 2010. It's even more restrictive than the Nevada statute, including the following:

  • "All persons that own, license, store or maintain personal information about a resident of the Commonwealth," which presumably means any business anywhere that does business with Massachusetts residents
  • Paper as well as electronic records
  • Secure user user authentication protocols
  • Secure access control measures
  • Encryption on all wireless networks linked to personal information repositories
  • Monitoring and encryption for all portable devices with personal information
  • Firewall protection for any database containing PII
  • System security software must be installed and kept up to date
  • Education and training is also required

This kind of regulation tends to spread rapidly from state to state, and it is likely that the comprehensive and detailed Massachusetts wording will be the template used.

In both cases, the law calls for protection of personal information, which Massachusetts clarifies to include a person's name in combination with a social security number, driver's license number, financial account number, credit card number and related information. Most organizations were already beginning to identify and address the problem of data leaks, but these laws demand immediate action.

What does this mean for information technology pros? If you're in Nevada or Massachusetts, the time has come to act. You must immediately secure all personal information, as defined by law. At the very least you must conduct a data classification exercise and ensure that such information is protected by a firewall, that access controls are in place, and that no network transmission or tape copy leaves the premises without being encrypted first.

Even those outside Massachusetts and Nevada should adopt these controls. They're sensible, widely accepted, and appropriate tools are commonly available. One might say they're best practices already, if only more information was protected in this way!

In a recent podcast, Gerry Young CIO and David Murray of the Massachusetts Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation laid it out: If data classification has not been performed, "organizations have the option of declaring all of their data personal information and protect it across the network." You read that right: Massachusetts says you should encrypt all data if you can't be sure where your personal information lies! Are you ready for this?

Update: Read Enterprise Strategy Group's Steve Duplessie's and the Data Mobility group's takes on mandatory encryption as well.

Comments

 

Massachusetts Says Encrypt It All! - Enterprise Storage Strategies said:

Pingback from  Massachusetts Says Encrypt It All! - Enterprise Storage Strategies

July 22, 2009 7:03 PM
 

josephmartins said:

Stephen, I'll suggest the same interpretation of Nevada's law here that I used in a comment on Steve's IT Rants.

Can an attorney successfully argue that tape is not "an electronic transmission...to a person outside of the secure system of the business"? In fact, the transportation of tape off-site is not electronic, it's physical. The electronic transmission of the data to tape occurs before the tape leaves the facility. By the time it's on tape, electronic transmission is no longer a factor. And if a fax - a combination of electronic and physical transmission - is permissible, then why not tape?

Mincing words, I know, but we all know that cases are won and lost in court based on wording and semantics. Legislators will need to be more clear about that.

Right now, it seems the wording is too vague. I suspect transporting a tape off-site would not break the law as it is now worded.

July 22, 2009 7:49 PM
 

josephmartins said:

One thing I'd like to add....my previous comment was directed at NV's law, not the more restrictive MA law.  It seems that MA's "portable devices" clause covers tape.

July 22, 2009 8:10 PM
 

Rich B said:

The only reason Massachusetts (State Motto: if you can dream it, we can tax it!) did this was to pad their state budgets with a encryption tax.

July 22, 2009 8:42 PM
 

sfoskett said:

Rich: A skeptic might point out that one of the two main businesses involved in implementing encryption in general (RSA) just happens to be a division of one of Massachusetts' largest employers (EMC)!

But I'm not a tinfoil hat type. I suspect it was a reaction to one of Mass' other largest businesses (TJX) losing a huge pile of customer data!

July 24, 2009 2:14 PM
 

How to Comply with Data Encryption Laws - Enterprise Storage Strategies said:

Pingback from  How to Comply with Data Encryption Laws - Enterprise Storage Strategies

July 24, 2009 3:54 PM
 

Benjamin Wright said:

Excessive regulation like this serves no one's interest.  --Ben legal-beagle.typepad.com/.../encryption-regulation-for-data-security.html

July 28, 2009 9:50 PM
 

Enterprise Storage Strategies said:

In his latest blog post, Michael Hay of Hitachi Data Systems points out that expensive tiers of storage

July 30, 2009 12:48 PM
Thanks for sharing your feedback! If your feedback doesn't appear right away, please be patient as it may take a few minutes to publish - or longer if the blogger is moderating comments.