Archives for May, 2017

Here’s What the House Has In Mind For Revamping The National Flood Insurance Program

A much-anticipated House subcommittee proposal on flood insurance promises to reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) for five years beyond its September 30 expiration date.

The proposal would introduce reforms to put the NFIP on stronger financial footing; provide aid for those unable to afford coverage; improve flood mapping, mitigation efforts and claims handling; and encourage greater private insurer participation in the market.

Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.), chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance, said the draft was being released so that all stakeholders could provide “input into protecting the program integrity of the NFIP.”

The schedule for consideration of this or other flood insurance proposals has not yet been announced. The far-reaching draft incorporates ideas from Republicans and Democrats, advocates for consumers and taxpayers, as well as ideas from the insurance, banking and real estate industries.

“The ideas stemming from this open process will ensure that everyone who needs flood insurance will have access to it while ensuring that the NFIP does not fall further into debt,” Duffy said, referring to the $24.6 billion the NFIP owes the Treasury.

In late April, U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)  released their draft legislation reauthorizing the NFIP for 10 years. The Cassidy-Gillibrand legislation addresses flood insurance affordability, coverage limits and solvency issues while encouraging increased mitigation and gradual private sector involvement. It also seeks to strengthen flood mapping and claims handling.

The House measure gives the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which administers the flood insurance program, more responsibility and authority for the program’s financial stability and operations. The House blueprint incorporates several other House proposals dealing with various aspects of the flood program. Key provisions of the Duffy draft include:

Financial Issues

Independent Actuarial Study. Require FEMA to provide for an annual independent actuarial study of the NFIP to analyze the financial position of the program based on its long-term estimated losses and transmit the results to Congress. Additionally, require FEMA to submit quarterly reports to Congress on the changing policyholder composition and risk profile of the NFIP.

Risk Transfer Requirement. Require FEMA to use risk transfer tools, such as reinsurance, catastrophe bonds, collateralized reinsurance, resilience bonds, and other insurance-linked securities, to reduce direct taxpayer exposure to insurance losses. (FEMA has already begun buying reinsurance.)

Changes To Surcharges. Increase annual surcharges from $25 to $40 for all primary residences; reduce the annual surcharge from $250 to $125 for non-owner occupied residential properties that are currently subject to preferred risk premium rates; and increase the annual surcharge from $250 to $275 for all other non-primary residences.

Reserve Funding. Increase the current National Flood Insurance Reserve Fund assessment rate by 1 percent each year until the NFIP achieves its statutorily mandated reserve ratio phase-in requirement of not less than 7.5 percent.

Multiple Loss Properties. Enhance the managing and tracking of properties with a history of multiple claims by defining a new “multiple-loss property” term to cover all at-risk properties.

Properties With Excessive Lifetime Claims. Prospectively prohibit the availability of NFIP coverage of any multiple-loss property with lifetime losses so excessive that the aggregate amount in claims payments exceeds twice the amount of the replacement value of the structure.

High-Risk Properties. No longer make available NFIP coverage for certain high-risk properties after January 1, 2021, that have other available private flood insurance options. These would include any new structures added to today’s high-risk special flood hazard areas, as well 1-4 unit residential structures where the replacement cost of the building (exclusive of the real estate upon which the structure is located) exceeds $1 million.

Allowance For Write-Your-Own (WYO) Companies. The allowance paid to companies participating in WYO Program shall not be greater than 25 percent of the chargeable premium for such coverage.

Mandatory Purchase Requirements. Increase the civil money penalties on federally regulated lenders for failure to comply with the NFIP’s mandatory purchase requirements from $2,000 to $5,000.

All-Peril Policies. Provide for the satisfaction of the NFIP’s mandatory purchase requirement for those properties located in a state that adopts a state-based requirement for mandatory “all-perils” coverage that includes flood insurance.

Additionally, reiterate that nothing in the law prohibits states, localities and private lenders from requiring the purchase of flood insurance coverage for a structure that is located outside of an area designated by FEMA as a special flood hazard area.

Private Market

In terms of encouraging a private flood insurance market the draft includes provisions to clarify that a private carrier policy outside of the NFIP satisfies mandatory purchase requirements and eliminates the restriction that currently prevents insurers participating in the NFIP’s Write Your Own (WYO) Program from also selling private flood insurance policies. It would also open the government’s flood insurance rate making and loss information to insurers and the public. Private policies would be assessed to help pay for flood mapping as NFIP policies are.

It would allow refunds to policyholders who cancel during a policy term in order to obtain a private market policy — just one of the provisions designed to encourage the private insurance market.

Affordability

Rate Increase Cap. Lowers the cap on annual rate increases from 18 percent to 15 percent and limit the chargeable risk premium of any single family residential property to $10,000 per year.

State Affordability Program. Authorizes states to voluntarily create a state flood insurance affordability program for eligible owner-occupants of single family 1-4 unit residences who are unable to pay their chargeable risk premium due to family income. Assistance can be in the form of either capping the amount of chargeable risk premium paid, or limiting the amount of premium increase on an annualized basis. The program’s cost would be recouped through an equally distributed surcharge on all other policyholders within that state.

Commercial Exemption. Eliminate the NFIP’s mandatory purchase requirement for all commercial properties, while preserving the eligibility of commercial properties voluntarily to purchase NFIP coverage if they so choose.

Replacement Cost. Require the FEMA Administrator to incorporate up-to-date replacement cost, by structure, when calculating annual chargeable premium rates, as opposed to the current practice that relies upon a national average.

Coast vs. Inland. Require the FEMA, when calculating annual chargeable premium rates, to consider the differences in properties located in local coastal and inland areas.

Mitigation Credits. Authorize FEMA to provide policyholders with credits for actions to mitigate the flood risk of their property.

Flood Mapping

Community Mapping. Allow localities to elect to use their own resources to develop their own alternatives to NFIP flood maps subject to minimum standards developed by FEMA.

Beyond Mapping. Require FEMA to use other risk assessment tools, including risk assessment scores, in addition to applicable flood rate maps when determining annual chargeable premium rates.

Map Appeals. Create a new appeals process for states, local governments, or the owners or lessees of real property who want their maps updated.

Mitigation Credits

Community Mitigation Plans. Require covered flood prone areas to develop a community-specific plan for mitigating continuing flood risks if they have 50 or more repetitive loss structures or 5 or more severe or extreme repetitive loss structures.  Communities that fail to develop or make sufficient progress in executing their plan would be subject to certain sanctions.

Community Credits. Provide communities that have joined its Community Rating System program with appropriate credits in calculating their annual chargeable premium rates when those communities implement or benefit from measures that protect natural and beneficial floodplain functions.

Property Acquisition. Authorize a pilot program to provide financial assistance for states and local communities to purchase properties located in participating communities from eligible low-income owners that have incurred substantial damage from a flood event.

Claims Handling

Fraud Penalties. Require FEMA to prohibit false or fraudulent statements connected to the preparation, production, or submission of claims adjustment or engineering reports.

Policyholder Appeals. Codify the due process protections for policyholders established after Superstorm Sandy by FEMA for individuals wishing to appeal a full or partial denial of their NFIP claim by their insurance company, and require FEMA to provide policyholders with a written appeal decision that upholds or overturns the decision of the insurer.

Deadline For Claims. Require FEMA to make final determinations regarding the approval of a claim for payment or disapproval of the claim within 90 days of the claim being made.

Write Your Own (WYO) Company Litigation. Provide FEMA with additional authorities and responsibilities for overseeing litigation conducted by WYO insurance companies acting on behalf of the NFIP. Ensure that WYO litigation expenses are reasonable, appropriate, and cost effective. Give FEMA the authority to direct litigation strategy as necessary.

Underpayment Of Claims. Align penalties for WYO insurance companies that knowingly underpay claims for losses covered to be commensurate with the NFIP’s penalties applicable to overpayment of such claims.

Technical Assistance Reports. Restrict the use of outside technical reports by WYO insurance companies and the NFIP direct servicing agents.

The draft bill follows some of the recommendations in a flood insurance report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Reinsurers’ Report

On the same day that the House proposal was unveiled, the Reinsurance Association of America (RAA) released a report claiming more private sector involvement in the flood insurance market could save billions in taxpayer dollars.

RAA’s findings are based on a comparative analysis between the NFIP and Florida Citizens Property Insurance Corp., a government-subsidized property insurer that has been following a “depopulation” strategy of having private insurers assume blocks of its business, while also increasing rates and investing in reinsurance.

According to the analysis, if the NFIP took actions similar to Citizens, it could reduce taxpayer exposure by 31 percent and would decrease the additional Treasury financing required to pay losses on floods that have a 1 percent chance of occurring by 91 percent over the next four years.

“Increased competition from the private sector would not only reduce the NFIP’s size and debt, but would ensure that the federal program remains sustainable for years to come,” said Frank Nutter, president of RAA.

 

Source: Insurance Journal

Maritime: The Next ‘Playground’ For Hackers

Cyber-security specialist CrowdStrike will be warning of the dangers the shipping industry faces from at hackers at Nor-Shipping 2017.

Appearing alongside the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), CrowdStrike will lead a session focusing on the tactics, techniques and procedures of ‘invisible pirates’, and the actions the industry can take to rebuff them.

“Maritime has been described as ‘the next playground for hackers’,” said Crowdstrike’s John Titmus, director, EMEA – cybersecurity strategy advisor. “It’s an industry revolving around high value assets, moving valuable cargoes, that is transitioning to an increased reliance on digital systems. Smart shipping and the advent of broadband communication between ship and shore can unlock huge potential for the sector. Unfortunately that’s also true for the criminal fraternity.”

The joint CrowdStrike and ABS event takes place as part of Nor-Shipping’s Disruptive Talks program on May 31.

 

Source: Seatrade Maritime News

What’s Next After ‘Massive Disruption’ From Latest Cyber-Attack? A View From The Trenches

As the cyber-attack continues to spread around the globe causing massive disruption and damage for universities, hospitals, automakers and many other businesses including FedEx, only one thing is certain: It won’t be the last.

That’s because the cyber criminals are running a multibillion-dollar enterprise with the help of ultra-sophisticated tools, said Yuri Frayman, co-founder and CEO of Aventura-based cybersecurity company Zenedge. The company, which launched in 2014 after two years of development, helps companies worldwide protect their web applications and networks against cyber-attacks with its proprietary technology.

“If this was not a wake-up call to the corporate world, I don’t know what needs to happen next,” said Frayman, offering his view from the trenches. “About 220,000 companies have been hit, and this is just what we know. We are seeing a massive disruption in the network operations across the globe.”

A screenshot of the warning screen from a purported ransomware attack, as captured by a computer user in Taiwan, is seen on laptop in Beijing on Saturday. Thousands of companies were hit with a huge ransomware attack over the weekend that locked up computers and held users’ files for ransom in hospitals, companies and government agencies. (PHOTO CREDIT: Mark Schiefelbein AP)

None of the firms his company protects have reported any disruptions from the so-called “WannaCry” ransomware virus, he said. But as the attack has unfolded, Zenedge has been talking with industry security specialists around the globe about how they are mitigating the damage and seeking to stabilize large infrastructure companies.

What really worries Frayman is what comes next in this attack, and ones to follow. Companies such as FedEx will throw everything at this problem in the next three or four days at an unbelievable cost, said Frayman, who has himself been expecting a FedEx delivery for the past two days. But less-sophisticated firms may may not even know a virus lurks in their system.

 “A second problem is the massive shortage of cyber-security experts. The enemies are hackers who are years ahead, Frayman said.  “Telecommuting also creates risk. Ninety-eight percent of the world population doesn’t know if their home has been hacked. If I have your home, I can hack your corporate environment. Many people around the world work from home, and that is another black hole that is ready to explode.

The solution – beyond turning off the internet – is commitment to vigilance. Generally, the largest financial services companies are very proactive, appropriating the proper budget, staff and training and putting key processes in place. But take a step outside of that and you will see across the board that corporations have not taken this seriously. Hiring a chief security officer is not enough. It’s not about buying cyber insurance and hiring a couple of people – it’s about discipline. Having a dedicated staff and/or vendors whose single task is to secure and protect the company is key. So is continual staff training. You can’t just be clicking anymore…. Hackers are using very sophisticated tools to mimic regular emails you get every single day. If you click on one that downloads a virus, it eventually could discover the system administration credentials. Once the hackers know those, they can do whatever they want.”

Zenedge currently has about 250 clients spanning the financial, ecommerce, gaming, healthcare and manufacturing industries worldwide and also protects large internet service providers, said Frayman, who previously helped lead and sell four other companies. Zenedge raised $6.2 million in September to finance its global expansion; in total, it has raised $13.7 million in venture capital funding.

“Every single attack, every single malware, we take it apart, and we train our algorithyms to be able to pick up the behavior of an attacker,” Frayman said. “If you train a computer to think like a human, then you can protect as many customers as we do without a need for a human interaction.”

 

Source: Miami Herald

What To Do About Insurance Sticker Shock

Owners and buyers of multifamily housing are experiencing sticker shock when they refinance, sell or purchase properties.

Insurance premiums have jumped as much as 25% because of the broadened insurance requirements set forth by lenders.

GlobeSt.com caught up with Ryan Cassidy and Evan Seacat, both senior directors at Franklin Street Insurance Services, for a deeper understanding of why lenders have changed their standards and what owners and buyers can expect in part one of this exclusive interview.

GlobeSt.com: What caused originators and buyers of multifamily mortgages to change insurance requirements on multifamily properties?

Ryan CassidyThey were caught by surprise just as much as the rest of us by events of the past decade. Their overall requirements have become stricter, causing panic from multifamily owners. The government-sponsored enterprise also will not accept into its network multifamily properties with policies that limit or exclude from coverage natural causes of damages such as flood, hail, hurricanes and wind. Loss of rental income as a result of the before mentioned perils has become one of the most sought after coverages. The cost to add this specific item is one of the most expensive for owners. Freddie Mac has similar requirements.

GlobeSt.comAren’t those kinds of coverages to be expected even though we have not had a major terrorist attack like 9/11 or a hurricane like Wilma in more than a decade?

Evan Seacat: First, owners are having trouble finding standard policies that include these provisions, for a reasonable price. On top of the overall expense for the added coverage, this can be a very time-consuming exercise. Therefore, national and local proprietary programs are becoming more common and the level of interest has risen for property owners.

GlobeSt.com: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the biggest financers of multifamily housing. But there must be alternatives.

Ryan Cassidy: Yes, but we have found that lenders providing financing for private portfolios are adopting similar rules, giving owners and buyers fewer ways to avoid the requirements. And most banks are making it harder to meet the insurance requirements.

 

Source: GlobeSt.

How The Insurance Industry Could Change The Game For Security

The recent growth in the cyber insurance market is already improving cybersecurity in some industry segments, and has the potential to do more — if the industry is able to address its data problem.

One area where cyber insurance has already made an impact is in the retail space, said David White, founder and COO at Axio Global, a cyber risk company. After the 2013 Target breach, it became very difficult for retailers to get a decent price for cyber insurance unless they had completely switched over to end-to-end encryption, or had a definite plan in place for doing that.

“I spoke to a large retailer at a conference a year ago who was wringing their hands because they could not buy cyber insurance — the sort that would cover a payment card data breach,” White said. “Their problem was that they had not allocated the funding to install end-to-end encryption and were not even planning to in the foreseeable future. The risk manager told me that they had approached the insurance market annually for several years and all she could get were ‘FU quotes.’ The cyber insurance industry has been a substantial force in driving retailers to adopt end-to-end encryption.”

Next, White said, he expects insurance companies to start insisting on anti-phishing awareness programs, strong network segmentation, and network hygiene controls for industrial control systems.

“A decent analog is the presence of sprinkler systems and other fire suppression systems as a consideration for property insurance,” White said. “Organizations don’t stop buying fire insurance because they install a sprinkler system, but they do get more attractive rates.”

“Insurance companies are helping set some general standards cybersecurity,” said Mark Sangster, vice president and industry security strategist at eSentire. “And it’s not just for the point at which the policy is written, he added. Insurers are adding language to contracts that require companies to maintain a particular level of security. For example, you must do annual cybersecurity training, and if you do those things, you can have the policy and it will cost you this amount. That’s like them saying, if you’re caught doing reckless driving, your auto insurance is null and void. I think they are one of the top influences at the moment when it comes to what cybersecurity policies and procedures need to be looked at.”

Insurance companies are asking for minimum controls, agreed Jenny Soubra, head of the U.S. cyber practice at Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty. But they’re also starting to go beyond that, with more services, she said.

“Pre-loss mitigation services offered by carriers have just become table stakes,” Soubra said. “Everyone wants their clients’ risks to be improved.”

And that translates to better security, she said, as companies become more aware of their vulnerabilities and take steps to close the gaps, train their employees, and reduce response times. But there’s a limit to how much insurance companies can actually do when it comes to measuring risk, she said.

Cyber Insurance Lacks Hard Actuarial Data, Technical Experts

According to Soubra, the insurance industry is still 30 to 50 years away from having a standardized cybersecurity data set, with relevant actuarial data, that it can pull insights from.

“The threat vectors are constantly evolving,” Soubra said. “There are new ways to get into the system, new types of ransomware are constantly being created. This, in turn, has the coverage that we’re offering constantly evolving. So we’re collecting new types of data that we weren’t collecting in the past. It doesn’t help that it’s difficult for insurance companies to share data. We need a way to standardize the data, share it, and repackage it in a way that would be useful.”

For example, insurance companies are often bound by non-disclosure agreements, and there’s no central body that collects cyber information — like, for the example, the Federal Aviation Administration does for airplane accidents and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does for driving.

“We need a way to standardize the data, share it, and repackage it in a way that would be useful,” Soubra said.

Instead, what happens is that insurance companies mostly sell coverage for loss of personally identifiable information and to cover the costs of business interruption due to cyber attacks, said Adam Thomas, principal at Deloitte Cyber Risk Services. The way it works is that companies looking to buy insurance fill out a questionnaire, then their insurance broker sets them up on a conference call with half a dozen carriers.

“It’s a high-level assessment — there’s not a lot of substantiation going on,” Thomas said.

And on the call itself, the carriers tend not to ask probing questions — they don’t want to give away their trade secrets to their competition, and they don’t want the client to think they’re hard to do business with.

“So that’s about as much due diligence as insurance companies do,” Thomas said. “And more recently, some of those calls have gone away because it was too much pressure on the customer.”

The cyber insurance industry doesn’t have anywhere near the kind of deep expertise as, say, property and causality, life insurance, or automotive.

“You’d think they’d take their actuarial knowledge, analytical knowledge and amass a ton of information about the claims they paid out, what the underlying causes were, so they can improve their policies,” Thomas said. “And the reality is, they haven’t.”

Instead, the industry is struggling with a dramatic shortage of personnel and a problem with getting good actuarial data.

“Most people writing cyber insurance don’t have technical backgrounds,” Thomas said. “They come from writing some other type of property and casualty insurance. They need to hire better people — and collect more data.”

And the data is another problem. In cyber insurance, the risks change more quickly than in any other type of insurance. Cars don’t — yet, at least — deliberately try to find new ways to kill their drivers. Tornadoes don’t deliberately aim for trailers parks. But cyber criminals actively look for news ways around security controls, and when they find something that works not only does the news spread quickly to all the other criminals, but through the use of automation, botnets, crimeware-as-a-service and other tools the criminals can launch fast, massive attacks against, well, everybody.

Take ransomware, for example. SonicWall saw the number of attacks go from just 3 million attacks in 2014 to 638 million last year. That added up to $1 billion in profits for the ransomware industry. As a result, there are very few hard criteria for insurance companies to use when pricing policies. “It’s largely qualitative, not quantitative,” said Thomas.

They can look at the total amount of data at risk, and cost of responding to breaches and outages. Insurance companies also look at compliance — does the customer meet PCI or HIPAA requirements, or the new financial services regulations in New York State? And these kinds of guidelines don’t help much when the threats come out of the blue.

“Last year, our industry saw a large-scale cyber incident that never occurred before,” said Mike Donaldson, solutions specialist at Bay Dynamics. “We had a DDoS attack executed successfully across millions of endpoints that took down some major retailers.”

The number of vulnerable endpoints is increasing, he added, and now includes cars and medical devices and cameras. That means that an insurance company may be dealing with tens of thousands to millions of endpoints. “That makes it very challenging to assess risks,” he said.

Plus, many companies use third-party services — such as the cloud services providers hit by the recent DDoS attack. In some ways that creates the possibility of wide-ranging, catastrophic risks. But in other ways, using third-party services can improve a company’s risk profile, if the vendor is doing a particularly good job in security. So, for example, a car owner might pay a lower insurance premium if they buy a safer car.

“The cyber insurance industry has not leveraged the same telemetry to make the same kind of decisions,” said Rajiv Gupta, CEO at Skyhigh Networks. “Part of it is that the cyber insurance industry is much younger than the auto insurance or home insurance industry. And, in many cases, the industry is still not even aware that there is a way to objectively determine, or as objectively as possible, what is the security posture of a company.”

One issue is that, traditionally, the insurance industry has been backward-looking, said Steve Durbin, managing director at London-based Information Security Forum. But in technology, a focus on the past isn’t particularly helpful when everything changes so quickly.

“The challenge for insurance companies is more of a cultural or mind shift change that we have to embrace,” Durbin said. “Insurance companies will have to look at predictive analytics until we reach the point where they can combine them with actuarial data. Until then, i think it will be quite challenging for them.”

Uninsurable Risks

When there’s a lack of hard data or strict compliance requirements, getting cyber insurance may be difficult or almost impossible.

According to the Information Security Forum, there is currently little or no insurance available for catastrophic risks such as critical infrastructure failure or state-sponsored attacks, operational mistakes, reputation damage, industrial espionage, and loss of intellectual property or trade secrets.

According to the Ponemon survey, inadequate coverage was a major reason not to purchase cyber insurance for 36 percent of companies, tying for first place with the high price of premiums. And too many exclusions, restrictions and uninsurable risks were cited by 27 percent of respondents. And if a company does get coverage, it may be difficult to get a payout.

“The onus is on the company to prove that their controls were adequate but they still got breached and the insurance company should pay up,” said Javvad Malik, security advocate at AlienVault. “It’s never an easy process. It doesn’t help sometimes that breaches don’t get discovered for months or years. It’s kind of like health insurance. Are you covered for existing conditions? This is where it really gets messy.”

The Problem Of Low-Value Policies

One of the reasons that insurance companies might not be doing as much research and analysis as they could, and requiring serious risk assessments on the part of their customers, is that the dollar values of the policies are still relatively low.

“They’re not risking a lot,” said Itzik Kotler, CTO and co-founder at SafeBreach, an automated penetration testing company. “As the industry grows, then they will revert into more means of measuring the risk.”

SafeBreach has insurance companies as customers, he said, but for internal security testing — not as a risk control for their clients.

“As the industry grows, and companies want to purchase bigger policies, with more money, then the question of how insurance companies will mitigate their risk will be more relevant,” Kotler said.

The global cyber insurance market is now over $3.25 billion, and is expected to reach $20 billion by 2020. The entire US insurance market is more than $500 billion, so that might not seem like much at first. But it’s a significant change for the industry.

“Insurance companies are extremely excited about the product because it’s probably the first new insurance product that they’ve been able to take it to the market in the last 80 to 90 years,” said Deloitte’s Thomas. “So there’s a lot of emotional excitement about it.”

And there’s a lot of room for growth.

According to recent research from the Ponemon Institute, the average company only has 15 percent of their information assets covered by insurance — compared to 59 percent for property, plant and equipment. That’s despite the fact that the average potential loss for the information assets is greater — $979 million, compared to $770 million.

Today, there is only a very small number of large writers, with over $100 million in cyber insurance premiums, according to a report by Betterley Risk Consultants.

There are several insurers in the $50 million to $100 million range, several more in the $25 million to $50 million range, and numerous insurers less than $25 million, the report said.

“That’s more that 60 carriers that offer cyber insurance altogether,” said Marc Schein, risk management consultant at New York-based Marsh & McLennan Agency. “Some carriers are offering it as a standalone product, other insurance companies will offer it in a package.”

Source: CSO