Scott Steinberg · Consultant, Analyst and Business Strategist
Most of what is contested after a breach is not how the attacker got in. It is how long the organization took to work out what happened, what it told people and when, and whether the remedy offered bore any relationship to the exposure. A consultant to 3000+ organizations, Scott Steinberg addresses this and more.
Expert reports, declarations, deposition and trial testimony on cybersecurity, IT, AI technology, breach response practice, detection and escalation timelines, notification conduct, affected party communication, remediation adequacy, hacks, vendor breach arrangements and more.
Testimony consultants and expert witness advisors cover a wide range of AI, automation, cybersecurity, IT, consulting and technology topics.
Response practice covers whether a plan existed, whether it was followed, who was mobilized and how quickly external expertise was brought in.
Testimony addresses what response comparable organizations mounted for incidents of that type and scale, and how this one compared.
The interval between first signal and organizational awareness is frequently the most contested fact in these matters, and it is reconstructible from records across several functions.
Research assembles that timeline and addresses whether the delays observed are consistent with sector practice or indicate a failure to act on available signals.
Notification disputes examine when the organization had enough information to notify, what delayed it, and how the timing compared to what comparable organizations did.
Opinions look at notification practice as a matter of conduct, leaving statutory deadline compliance to counsel.
What people were told matters as much as when: whether the notice explained what was taken, what the risk was and what to do, or whether it minimized in ways that left recipients unable to act.
Work covers breach communication practice and whether the notice was reasonably calculated to inform.
Remedies offered after a breach range from meaningful to nominal, and the question is whether what was provided matched the exposure created.
Reports review remediation practice for breaches of that data type and scale and whether the offering was proportionate.
Breaches at a vendor raise questions about notification obligations between parties, who controlled communication and how quickly the customer organization learned.
Testimony hits on vendor breach arrangement convention and how responsibility was allocated in practice.
Determining who was affected and what data was exposed drives everything downstream, and organizations frequently revise scope repeatedly as understanding develops.
Looking at scope assessment practice and whether revisions reflected genuine discovery or delayed acknowledgment.
Response expectations differ by sector and have tightened over time, so conduct has to be measured against the applicable period and industry.
Testimony establishes that baseline from comparable incidents, published guidance and what organizations of that type were doing in the same window.
Response timelines are reconstructed from records held by security, legal, communications and executive functions simultaneously, and the sequence matters more than any single document. Any party may instruct.
Written opinions on cybersecurity, response, AI, IT, notification conduct, communication adequacy and remediation fit.
Testimony reconstructing what the organization knew when and how its response compared to sector practice.
Responsive analysis of response reasonableness assertions and characterizations of notification timing.
Non-testifying response timeline reconstruction and discovery scoping across functions.
Scott Steinberg is an analyst, consultant and business trends expert with over 25 years of experience providing management and strategic consulting services to more than 3,000 businesses and brands ranging from startups to government agencies and Fortune 500 firms.
He has testified in sample areas including intellectual property — copyrights, trademarks and patents — patent infringement, marketing, branding, video games, mobile applications, consumer product development, and the growth and monetization of online distribution platforms.
He is the author of over 30 books and has published more than five thousand articles addressing areas including but not limited to marketing, technology, leadership, innovation, advertising, digital transformation, data privacy and social networks. He appears regularly on ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC, and has led seminars and training programs for organizations including Wells Fargo, the PGA Tour, Century 21, Ford, Dell and Procter & Gamble.
His consulting work has been broadly recognized. He has served as a thought leader for the American Bar Association and Corporate Counsel magazine, and has received honors from the International Association for Scholastic Excellence, Fortune, and the 21st Century Icon Awards, among others.
Cybersecurity measures, AI, IT, automation, hacks, phishing, social engineering. Response and notification conduct: whether a plan existed and was followed, how long detection and escalation took, when notification occurred and why, what affected people were told, and whether the remedy offered matched the exposure. Work often builds on forensic findings rather than producing them.
Generally via reconstructing the timeline from records held across security, IT, legal, communications and executive functions, then comparing intervals against what comparable organizations achieved for similar incidents. The gap between first signal and organizational awareness is usually the most contested and most reconstructible fact.
Some might say whether it left recipients able to act: explaining what data was involved, what the realistic risk was and what steps to take, in a channel and format they would actually encounter. Notices that minimize exposure or bury the actionable content are assessable against convention, separately from statutory content requirements.
No. Whether a notification met a particular legal deadline is for counsel and the court. Testimony addresses notification as conduct: when the organization had sufficient information, what delayed it, and how that compared to comparable organizations facing similar circumstances, etc.
Initial conversations about scope, timing and conflicts are without charge. Helpful detail includes the incident period, the affected population and the response steps at issue, plus any expert disclosure deadline already set.
A conflicts check is run before any substantive discussion. An initial note listing the party names and a one-line description of the dispute is enough to start; please hold privileged or confidential material until the check clears.