“Losses caused by or resulting from a Cyber Incident are not covered” | Hacker News Reader

“Losses caused by or resulting from a Cyber Incident are not covered”

chubb.com

40 points740222 comments

Finally I can use my niche industry knowledge to give insights! The push for exclusion of Cyber coverage comes from the reinsurance industry. Until -2020 reinsurers would cover Cyber claims within the same contracts covering property, theft, etc. Lately the attitude changed mostly for two reasons:

1. The total amount of claims is growing rapidly, in particular in connection with ransomware.

2. Re-insurers are concerned about potential accumulation losses, e.g. a vulnerability that causes many instances of theft or fraud.

Now Cyber risks must be covered and priced separately, so that insurers and reinsurers can quantify more accurately their exposure.

The specific clauses are very similar across insurers and closely mirror the corresponding exclusion on the reinsurance contracts.

And it's also becoming the most lucrative niche for the insurers ( what i heard ~a year ago)

( Belgium)

We live in the future that people who wrote Snowcrash were dreaming about. It turned out to be a lot more boring than a novel -- who would've guessed? -- but it's still cyberpunk AF for insurance companies to be limiting payouts in event of cyberattacks. For... checks notes... Auto rentals and cell phones.

Straight out of Deus Ex.

I want burbclaves. When I’m able to start my own burbclave franchise and restore pizza delivery to 30 minutes or less only then will the metaverse be real.

Have lived in one. Developed severe allergies to blond hair, tennis attire, and HOA landscape boards.

B--, would not live in again.

Just the way Uncle Enzo intended

I saw a really good comment the other day.

We're in the "hoverboard" with wheels timeline.

On the home page:

"How to Protect Your Family from Cyberbullies"

In the details:

"8. Make sure you have the coverage you need.

If, despite everything you do, your child is a victim of a cyberbully, your child may become distressed, anxious, depressed, or worse. Make sure you have insurance coverage that can help you put security measures in place, provide your child with counseling, and even protect you if your child happens to be the bully."

Hmmmmm. Are they planning to sell special cyber coverage?

I mean, you can sell insurance on anything (profitably) if you can effectively model and price future payouts.

That last sentence is hilarious.

Now, instead of raising my children properly I can just buy insurance for when they turn into shitcocks online.

They do sell cyber insurance - https://www.chubb.com/us-en/business-insurance/privacy-netwo...

This looks like it’s in reference to some credit card? Why would a credit card offer comprehensive cyber insurance?

Side note: I have a homeowners insurance policy through Chubb that actually has very comprehensive cyber coverage.

> A Cyber Incident means any of the following acts:

> [...]

> (b) [...] theft, [...] of [...] Rental Vehicle

Well, IANAL, but how is a car theft a "Cyber Incident"?

Do you think this is a typo? They use the random trio several places.

"unauthorized access to or use of Your Digital Data or an Eligible Wireless Cellular Telephone, Rental Vehicle, or Covered Purchase;"

"unauthorized access to or use of Your Digital Data ON an Eligible Wireless Cellular Telephone, Rental Vehicle, or Covered Purchase;"?

If it’s self-driving and connected to a network, I can easily see how a cyberattack could result in a car theft.

Subverting the nfc key would count. Or if your car is unlocked/controlled by an app, subverting that app.

This is not cyber insurance, so this isn't exactly surprising? There is separate insurance for Cyber.

Agreed. This is like linking to the windshield-exclusion in your auto policy (generally an add-on because they're so regularly damaged by gravel/those without mudflaps), or the flood-exclusion for things stored in your basement if you reside in a flood plain.

Cyber insurance has sometimes been thrown into other policies, but presumably the risk profile is getting poor enough for Chubb that charging separately is preferable.

We need real law on this, yesterday.

not only cyber but also human error are no longer covered. at least we still have act of God coverage..

> at least we still have act of God coverage

Many (most? maybe all unless you pay significantly more) insurance policies explicitly waive responsibility for natural disasters and other “acts of god”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com