Adjusting to the SEC's Revised Cybersecurity Disclosure Mandates: Consequences for Financial Reporting
Keywords:
SEC cybersecurity disclosure, financial reporting, corporate governance, public companies, cybersecurity risk management, SEC cybersecurity rules, business continuityAbstract
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) new cybersecurity disclosure standards influence publically traded corporations' communication of their cybersecurity vulnerabilities, incidents, and governance systems. These actions aim to be more transparent, thereby providing investors a better understanding of how companies manage the rising cyberrisk. By requiring more comprehensive and timely reports on cybersecurity issues, the SEC hopes to guarantee that investors have access to required data for making decisions on their investments. The new regulations mandate businesses to rapidly identify significant cybersecurity breaches and furnish details on their financial impact, risk management policies, and governance systems. These changes indicate a significant change in corporate reporting and emphasize the need of businesses revealing mishaps and defining their programs of resilience and preparation. This shift presents challenges, particularly with regard to the accuracy of quantifying the financial consequences of cyberattacks and the timely and exact identification of events. Particularly when defining their cybersecurity policy, companies need help in juggling openness with the protection of sensitive corporate data. Companies will definitely have difficulties as they try to follow these rules, particularly in matching their internal procedures with the new criteria. Business governance and investor relations can be much changed by these disclosures. Businesses that take more aggressive approach to cybersecurity problems demonstrate their commitment to protect investor interests and confidence building. This tendency towards more honest and accurate reporting could influence how stakeholders view organizational resistance to cyber hazards, hence producing new ideas on risk management and long-term sustainability. Companies who want to comply with rules and improve their cybersecurity systems and governance policies have to lastly implement these new standards, so creating a strong precedent in an atmosphere getting more and more digital and connected.
References
1. Wang, T., Yen, J. C., & Yoon, K. (2022). Responses to SEC comment letters on cybersecurity disclosures: An exploratory study. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, 46, 100567.
2. Daoud, M. M., & Serag, A. A. (2022). A proposed framework for studying the impact of cybersecurity on accounting information to increase trust in the financial reports in the context of industry 4.0: An event, impact and response approach. التجارة والتمويل, 42(1), 20-61.
3. Leiva, A. M., & Clark, M. E. (2020). COVID-19 considerations for SEC cybersecurity guidance, disclosure, enforcement, and parallel proceedings: navigating the new normal. Journal of Investment Compliance, 21(2/3), 111-126.
4. Young, S. (2012). Contemplating corporate disclosure obligations arising from cybersecurity breaches. J. Corp. L., 38, 659.
5. Peng, J., & Krivacek, G. (2020). The growing role of cybersecurity disclosures. ISACA Journal, 2020, 1-7.
6. Karmel, R. S. (2016). Disclosure reform—The SEC is riding off in two directions at once. The Business Lawyer, 71(3), 781-834.
7. Skinner, C. P. (2019). Bank disclosures of cyber exposure. Iowa L. Rev., 105, 239.
8. Martin, D., Engvall, D., Burke, K., Hodgkins, G., Franker, M., & Hooper, R. (2019). US SEC report calls for better internal accounting controls for cyber-related threats. Journal of Investment Compliance, 20(1), 5-9.
9. Bakker, T. G. (2015). Accuracy of self-disclosed cybersecurity risks of large US banks.
10. Fisher, R., Wood, J., Porod, C., & Greco, L. (2019). Evaluating cyber risk reporting in US financial reports. Cyber Security: A Peer-Reviewed Journal, 3(3), 275-286.
11. Eaton, T. V., Grenier, J. H., & Layman, D. (2019). Accounting and cybersecurity risk management. Current Issues in Auditing, 13(2), C1-C9.
12. Yang, L., Lau, L., & Gan, H. (2020). Investors’ perceptions of the cybersecurity risk management reporting framework. International Journal of Accounting & Information Management, 28(1), 167-183.
13. Jin, J. (2015). Cybersecurity disclosure effectiveness on public companies.
14. Harper Ho, V. (2018). Nonfinancial risk disclosure and the costs of private ordering. American Business Law Journal, 55(3), 407-474.
15. Rosati, P., Gogolin, F., & Lynn, T. G. (2017). Cyber-Security Incidents, External Monitoring and Probability of Restatements. External Monitoring and Probability of Restatements (July 29, 2017).
16. Thumburu, S. K. R. (2022). EDI and Blockchain in Supply Chain: A Security Analysis. Journal of Innovative Technologies, 5(1).
17. Thumburu, S. K. R. (2022). A Framework for Seamless EDI Migrations to the Cloud: Best Practices and Challenges. Innovative Engineering Sciences Journal, 2(1).
18. Gade, K. R. (2022). Data Analytics: Data Fabric Architecture and Its Benefits for Data Management. MZ Computing Journal, 3(2).
19. Gade, K. R. (2022). Data Modeling for the Modern Enterprise: Navigating Complexity and Uncertainty. Innovative Engineering Sciences Journal, 2(1).
20. Katari, A., & Vangala, R. Data Privacy and Compliance in Cloud Data Management for Fintech.
21. Katari, A., Ankam, M., & Shankar, R. Data Versioning and Time Travel In Delta Lake for Financial Services: Use Cases and Implementation.
22. Komandla, V. Enhancing Product Development through Continuous Feedback Integration “Vineela Komandla”.
23. Komandla, V. Enhancing Security and Growth: Evaluating Password Vault Solutions for Fintech Companies.
24. Thumburu, S. K. R. (2021). A Framework for EDI Data Governance in Supply Chain Organizations. Innovative Computer Sciences Journal, 7(1).
25. Thumburu, S. K. R. (2021). EDI Migration and Legacy System Modernization: A Roadmap. Innovative Engineering Sciences Journal, 1(1).
26. Boda, V. V. R., & Immaneni, J. (2022). Optimizing CI/CD in Healthcare: Tried and True Techniques. Innovative Computer Sciences Journal, 8(1).
27. Immaneni, J. (2022). End-to-End MLOps in Financial Services: Resilient Machine Learning with Kubernetes. Journal of Computational Innovation, 2(1).
28. Nookala, G., Gade, K. R., Dulam, N., & Thumburu, S. K. R. (2022). The Shift Towards Distributed Data Architectures in Cloud Environments. Innovative Computer Sciences Journal, 8(1).
29. Nookala, G. (2022). Improving Business Intelligence through Agile Data Modeling: A Case Study. Journal of Computational Innovation, 2(1).
30. Immaneni, J. (2020). Cloud Migration for Fintech: How Kubernetes Enables Multi-Cloud Success. Innovative Computer Sciences Journal, 6(1).
31. Muneer Ahmed Salamkar, and Karthik Allam. “Data Lakes Vs. Data Warehouses: Comparative Analysis on When to Use Each, With Case Studies Illustrating Successful Implementations”. Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 5, Sept. 2019
32. Muneer Ahmed Salamkar. Data Modeling Best Practices: Techniques for Designing Adaptable Schemas That Enhance Performance and Usability. Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 5, Dec. 2019
33. Muneer Ahmed Salamkar. Batch Vs. Stream Processing: In-Depth Comparison of Technologies, With Insights on Selecting the Right Approach for Specific Use Cases. Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 6, Feb. 2020
34. Muneer Ahmed Salamkar, and Karthik Allam. Data Integration Techniques: Exploring Tools and Methodologies for Harmonizing Data across Diverse Systems and Sources. Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 6, June 2020
35. Naresh Dulam. DataOps: Streamlining Data Management for Big Data and Analytics . Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 2, Oct. 2016, pp. 28-50
36. Naresh Dulam. Machine Learning on Kubernetes: Scaling AI Workloads . Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 2, Sept. 2016, pp. 50-70
37. Naresh Dulam. Data Lakes Vs Data Warehouses: What’s Right for Your Business?. Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 2, Nov. 2016, pp. 71-94
38. Naresh Dulam, et al. Kubernetes Gains Traction: Orchestrating Data Workloads. Distributed Learning and Broad Applications in Scientific Research, vol. 3, May 2017, pp. 69-93
39. Sarbaree Mishra. “A Reinforcement Learning Approach for Training Complex Decision Making Models”. Journal of AI-Assisted Scientific Discovery, vol. 2, no. 2, July 2022, pp. 329-52
40. Sarbaree Mishra, et al. “Leveraging in-Memory Computing for Speeding up Apache Spark and Hadoop Distributed Data Processing”. Journal of AI-Assisted Scientific Discovery, vol. 2, no. 2, Sept. 2022, pp. 304-28
41. Sarbaree Mishra. “Comparing Apache Iceberg and Databricks in Building Data Lakes and Mesh Architectures”. Journal of AI-Assisted Scientific Discovery, vol. 2, no. 2, Nov. 2022, pp. 278-03
42. Sarbaree Mishra. “Reducing Points of Failure - a Hybrid and Multi-Cloud Deployment Strategy With Snowflake”. Journal of AI-Assisted Scientific Discovery, vol. 2, no. 1, Jan. 2022, pp. 568-95
43. Babulal Shaik. Developing Predictive Autoscaling Algorithms for Variable Traffic Patterns . Journal of Bioinformatics and Artificial Intelligence, vol. 1, no. 2, July 2021, pp. 71-90
44. Babulal Shaik, et al. Automating Zero-Downtime Deployments in Kubernetes on Amazon EKS . Journal of AI-Assisted Scientific Discovery, vol. 1, no. 2, Oct. 2021, pp. 355-77
