[cabfpub] Denial of all insurance coverage for Diginotar

[kirk_hall at trendmicro.com]

I don’t know.  I do know that (in the US and Canada) all policies have “cooperation,” “duty to report incidents,” and “bad acts” clauses which are conditions to providing any coverage.  If the insured (Diginotar) fails to comply with those contractual provisions, it makes things harder for the insurer to handle any claims (and remember, the first duty of the insurer is to defend the insured and try to defeat the claims, not to pay the claims…  claims are only paid after litigation, etc., so the insurance is not there to help the public or injured customers).

Here, it’s my understanding that the insurer walked away, with the court’s approval, maybe because Diginotar failed to take action early on.

From: Adriano Santoni [mailto:adriano.santoni at staff.aruba.it]
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 11:34 PM
To: Kirk Hall (RD-US); CABFPub (public at cabforum.org)
Subject: R: [cabfpub] Denial of all insurance coverage for Diginotar

This automatic translation is rather difficult to understand, to me. Who was the Insurer in this case?


Inviato da Samsung Mobile.

-------- Messaggio originale --------
Da: kirk_hall at trendmicro.com
Data:03/05/2014 23:02 (GMT+01:00)
A: "CABFPub (public at cabforum.org)"
Oggetto: [cabfpub] Denial of all insurance coverage for Diginotar


Jeremy, in response to your question below -- it was Bob Relyea who found the link during our last CABF meeting stating (in translation) that Diginotar’s insurer denied all coverage, so there was no possibility of any recovery for claims by the public or customers.  See link.  That’s why it makes sense to delete the current coverage requirements.



----- Forwarded Message -----

From: Bob Relyea <bob at relyea.com>

To: Robert Relyea <rrelyea at redhat.com>

Sent: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 15:29:26 -0500 (EST)

Subject: Diginotar



http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://webwereld.nl/beveiliging/77898-curator-diginotar-haalt-bakzeil-in-zaak-tegen-opta&prev=/search%3Fq%3Ddiginotar%2Bcurator%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D775





-----Original Message-----
From: Jeremy Rowley [mailto:jeremy.rowley at digicert.com]
Sent: Friday, May 02, 2014 9:00 AM
To: Kirk Hall (RD-US); 'Gervase Markham'; public at cabforum.org
Subject: RE: [cabfpub] Ballot 121 - EVGL Insurance Requirements



Can you please send a link to the info about DigiNotar.  This is the first I've heard that the insurance company didn't have to pay anything to damaged end users and would like to investigate further.  My guess is that the claims were not being brought by the right party.







TREND MICRO EMAIL NOTICE

The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential

and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection.

If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or

disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or

telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.




<table class="TM_EMAIL_NOTICE"><tr><td><pre>
TREND MICRO EMAIL NOTICE
The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential 
and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. 
If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or 
disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or
telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
</pre></td></tr></table>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cabforum.org/pipermail/public/attachments/20140504/480fab39/attachment-0003.html>