Only minutes passed between first learning of the Paris attacks and confirming that our son, studying abroad in France, was safe. But it seemed to last a lifetime. My wife and I were with him in Paris just two weeks earlier, strolling happily a few blocks from where slaughter would soon visit the Bataclan Concert Hall and La Belle Equipe. Then, like a sick, twisted Groundhog Day, it felt like 9/11 all over again.

The Paris terrorism has rekindled an ongoing debate over government surveillance power, personal privacy, and cybersecurity. In this crucial, consequential debate, it behooves us to remember that terrorism’s goal is to trigger emotional, extreme reaction, and that perspective and balance are the antitheses of violent radicalism.

There are at least 1,040 reasons to love Florida. Who isn’t drawn to the sunshine, the pristine beaches, the food… and the tax fraud racket? For decades, South Florida has been the Silicon Valley for scam artists, drawn by the weather and the opportunity to make lots of money without actually doing much work. According to the Federal Trade Commission, Florida holds the highest per capita rate of identity theft complaints, followed by Georgia and California. While Medicare fraud, mortgage fraud, and securities fraud have traditionally been the bread and butter of South Florida scam artists, tax refund scams are definitely the new darling. But as the IRS recently announced, it’s the dawn of a new day for tax fraud prevention.

While data breaches have become a common occurrence, the epic breach of the Office of Personal Management (“OPM”) records stands out for many reasons. The hackers obtained PII on at least 21.5 million people and accessed highly confidential background check and security clearance information, including personal details such as fingerprint data and financial history. But what is most shocking is that the federal government was aware of security flaws within OPM’s computer system for years before the breach, yet never addressed those vulnerabilities.

Husch Blackwell along with CBIZ and UMB co-sponsored Security, Data Breach & The Bottom Line: A Forecast For Manufacturers on Oct. 29 at Boulevard Brewery in Kansas City. Seventy people attended the manufacturing-focused seminar, which covered various areas of vulnerability specific to manufacturers and included a special keynote by AUSA, John Cowles and FBI Agent…

While advising the board of directors of a company to pay close attention to data security issues is akin to your dentist telling you to floss, the stakes are too high for a board to ignore. The board of any company must constantly monitor and assess its company’s data security procedures and potential risks. Although there is no strategy to prevent a security breach, each member of a board must exercise its fiduciary duty to consider the risks to a company. To the credit of many companies in the last several years, the assessment of data security risks has achieved a more pronounced position.

Wow, our group health plan premiums are crushing us. Wait a minute—what if we ramped up our company’s wellness program, using cool technology to help get our workforce in shape? Let’s get all our employees to use those wearable fitness tracker gizmos! We can fold those into our BYOD program, offer a device subsidy, and then have our employees report their stats and progress in some kind of fitness competition, with cool stuff as motivating rewards. Premium costs down, flab down, fitness up, profits up… what could possibly go wrong?

Plenty will go wrong, unless the company takes a breather and checks the pulse of information-related risks and compliance issues. So, let’s run a quick information governance circuit drill.

In the late 1500s, privateer and explorer Martin Frobisher embarked upon a journey that would net him fame—Frobisher Bay is named for him—but not much fortune. His travels took him to what is now Canada, where he claimed Baffin Island for the Crown because of the vast amounts of gold he found there. He was so convinced he had found great riches that he continued to make multiple trips with increasingly more ships to mine and send the ore home for safekeeping. Queen Elizabeth I even ordered quadruple locks in the Tower of London to guard the trove.

Unfortunately for all, however, what Frobisher had so diligently worked to procure, transport, and store was nothing but iron pyrite—fool’s gold. Once it was discovered that his cache was not real gold, an Italian alchemist was engaged to work his magic and transform the worthless rocks into the gold everyone desired. Needless to say, he was unsuccessful.

I was reminded of this story while attending the Information Governance Conference recently in Connecticut.

You’ve no doubt heard that on Tuesday the European Court of Justice declared the U.S.- EU Safe Harbor invalid. Under European law, the transfer of EU citizens’ personal data to a third country may only occur if the third country ensures adequate protection of that data. A European Commission decision in 2000 declared the United States’ laws and policies provided such adequate protection, through the vehicle of the U.S.- EU Safe Harbor Framework. Nearly 4,500 U.S. companies partake of Safe Harbor protected status – at least until this week’s European Court of Justice’s ruling pulled the plug.

As a result of this ruling, each of the European Union’s 28 national data protection authorities (“DPAs”) now has the power to establish its own rules and regulations for data transfers. Although the U.S. and the European Commission are engaged in continuing negotiations for “Safe Harbor 2.0,” there is no certainty about when the new framework will be established, or even what the framework will be. In the meantime, the question looms – what will the national DPAs do?

 will be missed, but his wisdom will endure. Who else could have observed “No one goes there nowadays. It’s too crowded”? The information governance equivalent is “No one has information anymore. There’s too much of it.” In the last decade we have witnessed the systemic utilitization of computing power. Data used to be housed predominantly within a company’s own systems, but now, through remote storage, SaaS, PaaS, and other cloud solutions, more and more information is hosted by third-party providers. Also, as marketplace forces compel organizations to leverage or outsource functions that used to reside internally, operational service providers increasingly create, receive, maintain, and process information on the organization’s behalf.

It follows that information governance (the organization’s approach to satisfying information compliance and controlling information risk while maximizing information value) can no longer simply be an internally-focused exercise. IG “has come to a fork in the road, and must take it.” Service provider selection, contracting, and oversight are now primary vehicles of information governance – because when it comes to governing your organization’s information, “the future ain’t what it used to be.”