To 'Hack Back' or Not?
Attorneys David Navetta, Ron Raether on Active Defense
In the wake of damaging cyberattacks, organizations are looking not just to repel the attacks, but to strike back and shut down the attackers. This "hack-back" strategy - or "active defense," as it's come to be known - is controversial because of its legal implications.
See Also: Corelight's Brian Dye on NDR's Role in Defeating Ransomware
In this video interview, two noted security/privacy attorneys discuss:
- The argument for active defense tactics;
- Potential consequences from collateral damage;
- When is a 'hack-back' approach appropriate?
Navetta is co-founder of the Information Law Group and co-chairman of the American Bar Association's Information Security Committee. He has been a keen observer of information security-related litigation, including financial fraud and state privacy laws.
Raether is partner at Faruki Ireland & Cox in Dayton, Ohio. His experience with technology-related issues spans an array of legal areas, including patent; antitrust; licensing and contracts; employment; trademark; domain name disputes; and federal and state privacy statutes.
Additional Summit Insight:
Hear from more industry influencers, earn CPE credits, and network with leaders of technology at our global events. Learn more at our Fraud & Breach Prevention Events site.
