IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/accper/v19y2020i2p73-100.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cybersecurity Disclosure by the Companies on the S&P/TSX 60 Index

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvie Héroux
  • Anne Fortin

Abstract

Cybersecurity has become a topic of great interest since 2010. Accounting issues surrounding cybersecurity governance, management, and disclosure have gained attention from accounting standard setters, large accounting firms, and professional associations, but only a limited number of studies have looked at cybersecurity disclosure. In this study, we examine whether the content of cybersecurity disclosures of Canadian firms comprising the S&P/TSX 60 index is aligned with best practices—that is, financial regulators' guidelines in that matter. A content analysis was performed of documents issued between January 2017 and mid‐2018, consisting of recent annual information forms (AIFs), annual and quarterly management's discussion and analysis (MD&As), proxy circulars, material change reports, and news releases. To assess the nature and extent of cybersecurity disclosure, we developed a scoring grid featuring 40 items based on financial regulators' guidelines. Results show that cybersecurity disclosure levels are low. Companies vary widely in the amount of detail they provide, and the information is often not company‐specific. The variations among industrial sectors involve the categories related to cybersecurity risk, cybersecurity risk mitigation, and other items. Most of the companies provided cybersecurity disclosures in the annual MD&A, and several reiterated some disclosure items in the AIF and proxy circular. The results of this study highlight some areas where cybersecurity disclosures have evolved and others where they could be improved. They suggest that some firms strive to avoid boilerplate language and be more company‐specific. The findings also suggest that financial regulators could issue more stringent requirements. Informations fournies par les sociétés de l'indice S&P/TSX 60 en matière de cybersécurité La cybersécurité suscite un grand intérêt depuis 2010. Les enjeux comptables afférents à la gouvernance et à la gestion de la cybersécurité, de même qu'à la communication d'informations en matière de cybersécurité, retiennent l'attention des normalisateurs comptables, des grands cabinets d'expertise comptable et des associations professionnelles, alors que les études sur la communication d'informations relatives à la cybersécurité demeurent peu nombreuses. Les auteures se demandent si le contenu des informations relatives à la cybersécurité fournies par les sociétés canadiennes qui composent l'indice S&P/TSX 60 est conforme aux pratiques d'excellence, plus précisément aux lignes directrices des autorités de réglementation en la matière. Elles procèdent à une analyse de contenu de documents publiés entre janvier 2017 et le milieu de 2018, regroupant les versions récentes de notices annuelles, de rapports de gestion annuels et trimestriels, de circulaires de sollicitation de procurations, de déclarations de changements importants et de communiqués de presse. Pour évaluer la nature et l'étendue des informations communiquées à l'égard de la cybersécurité, les auteures élaborent une grille d'évaluation comportant 40 éléments, basée sur les lignes directrices des autorités de réglementation financière. Les résultats révèlent que le degré d'exhaustivité des informations fournies en matière de cybersécurité est faible. La quantité de détails donnés varie largement selon les sociétés et, souvent, les informations communiquées ne sont pas spécifiques à la société. Des écarts entre les secteurs d'activité sont observés dans le cas des éléments classés dans les catégories du risque lié à la cybersécurité, de l'atténuation du risque lié à la cybersécurité ainsi que de divers autres éléments. La plupart des sociétés fournissent des informations en matière de cybersécurité dans le rapport de gestion annuel, et beaucoup reprennent certaines de ces informations dans la notice annuelle et la circulaire de sollicitation de procurations. Les résultats de l'étude mettent en relief certains domaines dans lesquels les informations fournies en matière de cybersécurité ont évolué et d'autres domaines dans lesquels ces informations sont susceptibles d'amélioration. Ces résultats semblent indiquer que certaines sociétés s'efforcent d'éviter les formulations stéréotypées et de rendre davantage l'information spécifique à leur réalité. Les observations des auteures donnent aussi à penser que les autorités de réglementation financière pourraient faire preuve d'une plus grande sévérité dans leurs exigences.

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvie Héroux & Anne Fortin, 2020. "Cybersecurity Disclosure by the Companies on the S&P/TSX 60 Index," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 73-100, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:19:y:2020:i:2:p:73-100
    DOI: 10.1111/1911-3838.12220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1911-3838.12220
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1911-3838.12220?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Marta Meisner, 2017. "Financial Consequences Of Cyber Attacks Leading To Data Breaches In Healthcare Sector," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 6(3), pages 63-73.
    2. Fabio BISOGNI & Simona CAVALLINI & Sara DI TROCCHIO, 2011. "Cybersecurity at European Level: The Role of Information Availability," Communications & Strategies, IDATE, Com&Strat dept., vol. 1(81), pages 105-124, 1st quart.
    3. Christian Biener & Martin Eling & Jan Hendrik Wirfs, 2015. "Insurability of Cyber Risk: An Empirical Analysis†," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 40(1), pages 131-158, January.
    4. Sabyasachi Mitra & Sam Ransbotham, 2015. "Information Disclosure and the Diffusion of Information Security Attacks," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 565-584, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maryam Firoozi & Sana Mohsni, 2023. "Cybersecurity disclosure in the banking industry: a comparative study," International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(4), pages 451-477, December.
    2. Agbodoh-Falschau, Kouassi Raymond & Ravaonorohanta, Bako Harinivo, 2023. "Investigating the influence of governance determinants on reporting cybersecurity incidents to police: Evidence from Canadian organizations’ perspectives," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matteo Malavasi & Gareth W. Peters & Pavel V. Shevchenko & Stefan Truck & Jiwook Jang & Georgy Sofronov, 2021. "Cyber Risk Frequency, Severity and Insurance Viability," Papers 2111.03366, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2022.
    2. Ulrik Franke, 2020. "IT service outage cost: case study and implications for cyber insurance," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 45(4), pages 760-784, October.
    3. Antoine Bouveret, 2018. "Cyber Risk for the Financial Sector: A Framework for Quantitative Assessment," IMF Working Papers 2018/143, International Monetary Fund.
    4. Michael McShane & Trung Nguyen, 2020. "Time-varying effects of cyberattacks on firm value," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 45(4), pages 580-615, October.
    5. Ajjima Jiravichai & Ruth Banomyong, 2022. "A Proposed Methodology for Literature Review on Operational Risk Management in Banks," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Xiaoying Xie & Charles Lee & Martin Eling, 2020. "Cyber insurance offering and performance: an analysis of the U.S. cyber insurance market," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 45(4), pages 690-736, October.
    7. Uddin, Md Hamid & Mollah, Sabur & Islam, Nazrul & Ali, Md Hakim, 2023. "Does digital transformation matter for operational risk exposure?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    8. Farkas, Sébastien & Lopez, Olivier & Thomas, Maud, 2021. "Cyber claim analysis using Generalized Pareto regression trees with applications to insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 92-105.
    9. Ulrik Franke, 0. "IT service outage cost: case study and implications for cyber insurance," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 0, pages 1-25.
    10. Zängerle, Daniel & Schiereck, Dirk, 2022. "Modelling and predicting enterprise‑level cyber risks in the context of sparse data availability," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 136276, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    11. Sachin Shetty & Michael McShane & Linfeng Zhang & Jay P. Kesan & Charles A. Kamhoua & Kevin Kwiat & Laurent L. Njilla, 2018. "Reducing Informational Disadvantages to Improve Cyber Risk Management†," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 224-238, April.
    12. Shah, Anand, 2016. "Pricing and Risk Mitigation Analysis of a Cyber Liability Insurance using Gaussian, t and Gumbel Copulas – A case for Cyber Risk Index," MPRA Paper 111968, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Aldasoro, Iñaki & Gambacorta, Leonardo & Giudici, Paolo & Leach, Thomas, 2022. "The drivers of cyber risk," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    14. Martin Eling & Davide Nuessle & Julian Staubli, 2022. "The impact of artificial intelligence along the insurance value chain and on the insurability of risks," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 47(2), pages 205-241, April.
    15. Rustam Jamilov & Hélène Rey & Ahmed Tahoun, 2021. "The Anatomy of Cyber Risk," NBER Working Papers 28906, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. David M. Pooser & Mark J. Browne & Oleksandra Arkhangelska, 2018. "Growth in the Perception of Cyber Risk: Evidence from U.S. P&C Insurers," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(2), pages 208-223, April.
    17. Gareth W. Peters & Matteo Malavasi & Georgy Sofronov & Pavel V. Shevchenko & Stefan Truck & Jiwook Jang, 2022. "Cyber Loss Model Risk Translates to Premium Mispricing and Risk Sensitivity," Papers 2202.10588, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    18. Terrence August & Duy Dao & Marius Florin Niculescu, 2022. "Economics of Ransomware: Risk Interdependence and Large-Scale Attacks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8979-9002, December.
    19. Eling, Martin & Wirfs, Jan, 2019. "What are the actual costs of cyber risk events?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 272(3), pages 1109-1119.
    20. Antonella Cappiello, 2020. "The Digital (R)evolution of Insurance Business Models," American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Science Publications, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:accper:v:19:y:2020:i:2:p:73-100. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1911-3838 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.