All companies today are at risk from a successful attack on their IT systems. It’s widely acknowledged that it’s no longer a question of if you will be attacked, but when. Unfortunately though, it’s becoming clear that some companies are more at risk than others and are actually being selectively targeted.

Larger companies and enterprises normally having bigger security budgets and bigger security teams, resulting in stronger core defences, so hackers are looking for softer entry points into these systems.

Professional services organisations such as law firms, accountancy and audit firms, management consultants and M&A advisers are now being targeted because of the valuable and confidential information which they may hold on their clients and also because they may provide a back-door entry into those clients’ systems.

>See also: Cyber security guide to the 10 most disruptive enterprise technologies

While larger professional firms tend to have robust security and large IT security teams, many mid-range and boutique organisations are still struggling to play catch up. With the increased range of attack vectors being used, it is important for secondary targets to ensure that they have protected both their perimeter and their key data.

For those relying on indemnity insurance for protection, it is worth reviewing the policy to understand exclusions, and also to look at the impact of recent targeted attacks, both financial and reputational.

While aware of the threats and risks, many professional services firms are not subject to the same depth of compliance as their clients, and some are not using the same degree of penetration testing, security analysis and security defence as that used by their clients.

With some recent breaches raising the profile of this risk area, enterprises are increasingly carrying out risk analysis on their professional suppliers. At one level, that covers supplier access rights into their networks, but we are also seeing professional services companies being required to prove their data security.

The first easy test of how serious service providers are about security is to ask if they have strong two factor and network access authentication – including at the partner level (the people with the highest levels of access, but often the lowest desire to follow the security rules). A ‘No’ to that question should raise serious alarms about whether or not you should provide that supplier with confidential company information.

Last year, whistleblower Edward Snowden urged lawyers, journalists, doctors, accountants, and others with a duty to protect confidential information, to upgrade security in the wake of the spy surveillance revelations. He said: “Unencrypted communications on the internet are no longer safe. Any communication should be encrypted by default.”

The security dangers for professional organisations is certainly an issue which is recognised by professional bodies. The Law Society says on its website, “Cyber attacks are a threat to all businesses today and law firms are particularly attractive sources of information. Commercial data, IP information, and sensitive client data may all be targeted.” The Society actively promotes security and offers a wider range of advice and education to its members.

Accountancy organisation ICAEW also acknowledges the issue and provides a ‘Cyber Security Resource Centre’ on its website. The resource centre is a focal point for ICAEW members looking for support in managing cyber risk.

Industry bodies for professional services companies are a good starting point for those keen to ensure the security of the confidential data they hold on their IT systems. Key security elements, however, should at least include network access control, encryption (of data at rest and data in motion), and mobile device security.

The threats are significant and real. There is not only an increased awareness but also an increase in calls for action. For example, in February, the New York Times reported on US Wall Street banks, and the big law firms that do work for them, getting together to share security information_.

The New York Times also commented on the concern of law enforcement agencies over the vulnerability of US law firms to online corporate espionage because of their repository of company secrets, business strategies and intellectual property.

Also in the US, The Wall Street Journal reported that banks were demanding law firms harden their cyber attack defences. While it would be nice to believe that attacks are only on the US clearly it would be naïve to do so, Seth Berman, executive managing director of Stroz Friedberg, commented that “the failure of UK law firms to tackle online security is leaving clients increasingly vulnerable to attacks”.

Despite this, there is still strong evidence that many service organisations with responsibility for securing confidential supplier information do not have the levels of protection to deal with concerted cyber-targeting. Nor, in many cases, do they have partner-level, focussed teams ensuring that this is an ongoing high-profile area of concern.

The one thing we can be certain of in security is that by the time something becomes a topic of awareness and discussion, it has trickled down from high-end, individual, focussed attacks to a much more mass-attack route.

If you’re providing data to your professional advisers, and it is market-critical or highly confidential, then it’s clearly a good time to review their levels of security. It’s also sensible to check on what security reporting they are able to provide you with to verify their security procedures are succeeding. For professional services providers, this is an opportunity for those who have strong security credentials to differentiate themselves from the many who currently do not.

Sourced from Ian Kilpatrick, Wick Hill Group