Of course, for firms that were already nervous about cyber-security, 2014 probably didn’t help.
“Who’s going do a better job of securing your data? A small firm, or somebody like Google or Dropbox who’s doing business with major companies? The reality is, from a security perspective, they’ll do a better job than most firms can afford to do.” Petro said that although it’s standard practice for a lot of cloud providers to keep the encryption key, there are likewise a number of services, like Spideroak and Sookasa, that can provide the user with such a key. We’re talking about protecting the confidentiality of a client’s information.”īut if you ask Petro, cloud security comes down to only two things: multi-factor authentication and retention of the encryption key that allows access to encrypted files. “Attorney fears aren’t overblown,” Baldwin said. Merri Baldwin, vice-chair of the California State Bar’s ethics committee, agreed with Siegel. Otherwise, you don’t have to use the cloud.” “Data encryption, strong passwords-these are reasonable requirements for storing client data in the cloud. “While the cloud is in many ways safer than it used to be, you still need to take appropriate measures,” Siegel said. The opinion suggests implementing basic security measures, like encrypting and backing up data, but also requires an attorney to negotiate favorable terms of service with a cloud provider.ĭaniel Siegel, the principal author of the Pennsylvania opinion, acknowledged that firms don’t always have leverage to negotiate terms of use with cloud service provider, but rejected the notion that the ethical requirements were too onerous, or that requirements like these show an undue nervousness. The ethics opinion issued by the Pennsylvania State Bar, for example, includes no less than 33 factors for deciding whether an attorney’s use of the cloud meets ethical standards. “Attorneys have this innate fear of cloud,” Petro said, “but it isn’t justifiable anymore. Nerino Petro, chief information officer atHolmstrom & Kennedy in Illinois, and a lecturer on data security for the American Bar Association, thinks that while there are legitimate risks, the legal community is, at times, unjustifiably afraid of the cloud. Although all 19 committees that have issued formal opinions on cloud computing have given the green light, they have done so with, in some cases, a laundry list of qualifications. The state bar ethics committees that have taken up the issue of cloud computing have certainly been cautious.
Sookasa may also be known as or be related to Sookasa, Sookasa Inc and Sookasa, Inc.No one doubts the benefits of cloud computing, but considering the unique ethical obligations of law practice, and the frightening cyber-security headlines, a firm might wonder whether a client’s information should be anywhere but locked up in a warehouse. The data presented on this page does not represent the view of Sookasa and its employees or that of Zippia. None of the information on this page has been provided or approved by Sookasa.
While we have made attempts to ensure that the information displayed are correct, Zippia is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for the results obtained from the use of this information. Sources of data may include, but are not limited to, the BLS, company filings, estimates based on those filings, H1B filings, and other public and private datasets.
The data on this page is also based on data sources collected from public and open data sources on the Internet and other locations, as well as proprietary data we licensed from other companies. The employee data is based on information from people who have self-reported their past or current employments at Sookasa. Zippia gives an in-depth look into the details of Sookasa, including salaries, political affiliations, employee data, and more, in order to inform job seekers about Sookasa.