The experts also disagreed with Capgemini’s defence that new Web provider (IP) tackles set up by Razer could have led to the particular breach.
Razer’s independent specialist said it was most likely that Mr Cabalag caused the security misconfiguration, given the occasions that occurred.
For example , during a 16-minute window when the professional said the misconfiguration had occurred, Mister Cabalag was the just one troubleshooting the ELK Stack.
He or she was also the only one using the knowledge and experience to access and make changes to a settings file in Razer’s server, and had reported to the Razer group that everything has been fine shortly after the particular 16-minute window.
Razer’s lawyers remarked that in its post-incident reports, Capgemini had did not mention that the breach occurred because of activities taken during that screen.
When Razer’s management team found out about the breach on Sep 9 in 2020, Mr Cabalag resolved the issue in just a day. However , he or she claimed that he failed to cause the infringement and Capgemini furthermore claimed that it cannot tell who did it.
“Razer realizes that Capgemini wants to get in and say goodbye to Razer at this altar of liability due to reputational issues. However , Capgemini was involved for the job and was paid in full for it.
“Capgemini should therefore do the right thing simply by its customer – stand up and get responsibility. ”
Razer contended that will Capgemini had breached its contractual commitments, such as ensuring that the IT systems had been secure and making sure that its personnel — including Mr Cabalag — had the proper and adequate skill, qualifications and encounter.
Razer furthermore claimed that Capgemini was liable for the breach through the negligence, having due Razer a responsibility of care as the subject-matter experts within the IT field.
LOSSES TO BE ASSESSED
The gaming company is claiming these in losses:
- Around US$6. 85 million in loss of profits from the online website
- S$50, 000 pertaining to management and employees’ time and expenditures
- US$60, 6000 for engaging the forensic investigator
- S$223, 000 to get hiring law firm Norton Rose Fulbright to advise and behave for Razer in responding to regulators globally
- US$2, 500 in compensation to the security researcher who seem to discovered the outflow, under Razer’s bug bounty programme
- An unquantified amount for loss of income from its digital financial institution licence application being rejected
Razer said that the cybersecurity infringement was widely documented in mainstream plus online media, causing a “wide array of losses” of “upwards of US$7 million at the very least”.
The company also seeks an announcement that Capgemini pays full compensation for all damages, losses and expenses incurred plus which Razer may incur as a result of the particular breach.
On Wednesday, Razer’s key of staff Patricia Liu took the particular witness stand as the first plaintiff see. She was also the firm’s data protection officer when the information leak happened.
The trial is set to continue for the rest of the particular week before Justice Lee Seiu Family member.
Razer’s legal team comprises Mr Wendell Wong, Mister Andrew Chua plus Ms Olivia Suntan from Drew & Napier, while Capgemini is represented by Senior Counsel Andre Yeap, Mr Lionel Tan and Microsoft Yap Pui Yee from Rajah & Tann.
This story was originally released in TODAY.