Andrew Gillan of Janus Henderson Investors says he likes markets in the Philippines and Indonesia, and explains why it's difficult to invest in Vietnam despite its...Investingread more
China has other "weapons" in its trade battle with the United States — and selling off its U.S. Treasury holdings will not be one of them, said Richard McGregor, senior fellow...China Economyread more
Deutsche Bank Wealth Management's global chief investment officer predicted the Federal Reserve will cut interest rates twice in the next 12 months, but chances of a four-time...US Economyread more
Google's services have been blocked in China for several years, but the company still has businesses there, as the tech giant seeks to sell products to Chinese firms in...Technologyread more
Netflix can sustain its lofty valuation only if global subscriber growth can support increasing content spending and debt.Technologyread more
Germany online bank N26 said it raised a huge $170 million in additional funding, valuing the six-year-old fintech start-up at $3.5 billion.Technologyread more
Stocks in Asia traded lower on Thursday afternoon. Australia's jobs data showed the net number of jobs created was far below expectations.Asia Marketsread more
The House voted to table a resolution to start impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump introduced by Rep. Al Green.Politicsread more
A photo editing app has introduced a few new wrinkles to the faces of celebrities — and to the ongoing discussion around personal digital security, NBC reports.Technologyread more
Property price gains across the wider U.K. have been slowing since 2016, according to the U.K.'s Office for National Statistics.Real Estateread more
The International Monetary Fund on Wednesday said that the U.S. dollar was overvalued by 6% to 12%, based on near-term economic fundamentals, while the euro, Japan's yen and...World Economyread more
On May 21, the CEO of one of the hottest companies in the booming cybersecurity sector appeared on CNBC and highlighted a new credential that would help to separate his company from its hard-charging rivals.
In an interview on CNBC's "Mad Money " with Jim Cramer, FireEye CEO Dave DeWalt said a certification granted by the Department of Homeland Security under a law known as the SAFETY Act "allows companies who use our product to basically be indemnified against legal costs relative to being breached."
That was an important development, DeWalt said, "So if you use FireEye's product you basically are prevented from being sued in the criminal justice system of America, which can save a lot of money."
A casual viewer might come away from that comment thinking that the Department of Homeland Security was offering FireEye's customers legal indemnification if they suffer a data breach.
But a spokesman for Homeland Security said that's not the case.
In particular, the spokesman said, the certification in question only provides "some liability protections" in the event of a cyberbreach that qualifies as an "act of terrorism" as designated by the secretary of Homeland Security.
And that's never happened before. The spokesman said no cyberattack has ever been designated an act of terrorism. In fact, the secretary of Homeland Security has never designated an act of terrorism of any kind under the SAFETY Act, which was passed in 2002.
"SAFETY Act protections only apply if the secretary of Homeland Security determines that there has been an act of terrorism as set forth in the SAFETY Act statute," said Homeland Security spokesman S.Y. Lee in a statement to CNBC. "In the instance of a cyberbreach where the secretary has not made this determination, then the SAFETY Act is not triggered and provides no coverage for the technology's seller or the users of the technology."
CNBC asked FireEye about this apparent discrepancy, and a spokesman responded that DeWalt's comments on the program were accurate.
Basically, FireEye says the accuracy of the statement depends on what the meaning of "basically" is.
"Dave uses the term 'basically,' so the statement is broad enough in that context to be accurate," said FireEye spokesman Vitor De Souza in an email to CNBC. "With the limited time on TV, multiple follow-up questions couldn't be addressed."
"Dave did NOT say that the SAFETY Act covered ALL legal costs or ALL breache(s), just said it generally applies to those costs," wrote De Souza.
The CNBC appearance was not the only time DeWalt has used the term "basically" when describing the Homeland Security certification.
In May, DeWalt spoke at an investor conference organized by JPMorgan, and he explained the importance of the certification.
"And what it is is the Department of Homeland Security awarded a certification to FireEye for our products that basically exonerates any company using FireEye from litigation and legal expense related to being sued," DeWalt said, according to a transcript of the event.
The certification is "pretty amazing," DeWalt said. "Now the government putting a kind of a underwriter lab seal of approval on you to say, hey, use this company and it will help you from being breached. And if you do get breached by using this product, you're exonerated from legal expenses."
FireEye's spokesman said DeWalt's last phrase in that statement— "you're exonerated from legal expenses"—should have been expanded. "By the technical definition, yes, that last phrase is incorrect," De Souza said. "The rest of the statement is pretty true."
De Souza said the company does not tell its customers the law provides 100 percent indemnification. He also pointed to a frequently asked questions section of FireEye's website that explains the liability protections of the law apply to acts of terrorism. On the website, FireEye says that the SAFETY Act offers liability and procedural defenses in the case of a lawsuit.
De Souza added that FireEye considers a number of events—including recent hacks into Sony and the Sands Las Vegas casino—to be acts of terrorism, although they have not been designated as such by the Department of Homeland Security. "The definition of cyberterrorism is really not well defined yet," De Souza said. "It's a new world. We're proud to be the test case."
The Department of Homeland Security said that the SAFETY Act does offer some liability protections in the case of a terror attack. "In the event the secretary of Homeland Security determines that there has been an act of terrorism, thereby triggering the SAFETY Act's protections, users have some liability protections when they use SAFETY Act approved technologies," Lee said. "They may be able to have claims dismissed against them in court that allege a failure of the approved technology."
But Homeland Security also said that the certification does not remove all liability from companies, even in the event of a terrorist attack. "They may remain responsible, however, for claims that allege negligence such as if they did not take proper actions following a malware alert provided by the cybersecurity technology," Lee said.
Basically, that is.