Connect with us

Accounting

Practice Profile: Thriving on threats

Published

on

Monitoring threats from CohnReznick’s digital forensics lab

Monitoring threats from CohnReznick’s digital forensics lab

David Sun is almost always in the middle of a security breach.

Or, at least, that was the half-joking apology the advisory principal at CohnReznick gave for being a few minutes late to an interview — though his colleague, Bhavesh Vadhani, a partner and the global leader of the cybersecurity, technology risk and privacy practice, confirmed that it’s truer than Sun’s playful tone suggested.

Sun and his team are indeed very busy, working out of the digital forensics lab facility the Top 25 Firm built outside of Washington, D.C., in mid-2023. The lab was opened in response to the firm expanding its cybersecurity capabilities, according to Sun, and functions as a central location where the firm can help clients identify cyber incidents, collect and keep digital evidence, and guide them in safeguarding against future attacks and breaches.

“It acts as a state-of-the-art digital forensic lab which serves almost like a nerve center for us, for all kinds of cybersecurity engagements, but predominantly focused on cyber incident response, digital forensics, preserving digital evidence, and then helping clients building resilience against future threats,” explained Vadhani. “Part of what David and team do, they go and they analyze, from a digital forensic standpoint, a root-cause analysis standpoint, they go through all these exercises to eventually make sure of whatever they learn from that, not only supporting the clients that they’re engaged with right now during the incident or the digital forensics, but they take those lessons learned and apply them to all the other clients that we have to make them future-ready. That’s the whole purpose of this.”

The latest cyber risks

Cyberthreats are constantly evolving for the security incident response and recovery services and computer forensic and litigation support services practices that Sun leads, as well as CohnReznick’s wider cybersecurity practice. Sun’s team of approximately 10 professionals and the larger cybersecurity practice of 50 to 70 full-time employees, plus contract employees and staff in India, are offering an ever-wider range of services for the roughly 250 to 300 client engagements the cybersecurity team handles per year.

“Historically, as with many accounting firms, the cybersecurity practice was on the proactive side of things,” Sun explained. “The firm saw a strategic benefit in becoming a more full-spectrum cybersecurity practice, more end to end. Beyond proactive [services] we started handling the reactive side.”

In other words, CohnReznick’s cybersecurity practice handles both end of those services — arming clients with proactive strategies to prevent attacks before they happen, and also working with clients after incidents have occurred, though, as Sun said, lately his team is focusing more on that incident response phase.

And while many clients hire CohnReznick after an attack, they quickly learn the value in being prepared for future incidents. “What we find is that on the proactive side, we tend to have singular engagements more so, not saying exclusively, but then what we find is on the reactive side is the one where we often get multiple engagements,” he said. “So it starts with the reactive, and then that usually spawns off to two or three additional [engagements of] ‘OK, how do we keep this from happening?'”

“As you can imagine in the last 10 years, over the last decade, technology has evolved, right?” Vadhani added. “Our businesses have evolved. We are in a digital economy. So in the midmarket, and the larger firms, as we are providing services in cybersecurity, we quickly realized that we needed to provide full-spectrum services. Just providing proactive services alone was not a solution enough for our clients. They were looking for folks who could provide an end-to-end spectrum of services and we had an advantage there where we had in the middle market, especially in many of our industry verticals, deep knowledge and industry expertise so that we could help clients solve business issues from a cybersecurity perspective and that allowed us to then identify a niche there that many of our competitors don’t have. So for us, it came as a niche play and a strategic play, and getting David on board was one of those strategic initiatives for us, so that he could lead that practice and then eventually build the forensic lab.”

Sun joined the firm when the lab opened in mid-2023, bringing 25 years of advanced cybersecurity and digital forensics experience and an eye for schemes that have been around just as long.

“The niche entails a range of proactive cyber services,” he said. “So in today’s day and age, a lot of the things that you see in the news of cyberattacks, ransomware, things like that, those are happening with more and more frequency. And it’s not just large organizations, but every organization, mom-and-pop shops, they’re all being targeted also in different ways, whether it’s a ransomware attack or a wire-transfer fraud, a business email compromise. There’s just a number of [types of attacks] that many companies are still very susceptible to. So we see a lot of that, and that coupled with historically what’s been happening for 20-plus years and continues to happen.”

“For 25 years I’ve been doing this, and ransomware has only been around for eight or so years,” Sun continued. “But what has always been around, and continues to be still a huge piece that nobody talks about, is what I call insider threat, which is, you know, Bob in accounting, Joe in sales, Jane in HR, whatever. And that can be things like people in the accounting department stealing money and misdirecting it for themselves. Or it could be departing employees taking intellectual property rights and/or clients. And again, it’s 20-plus years I’ve been doing this and it still hasn’t stopped.”

But in terms of newer threats, Sun and Vadhani identified a few, including the “North Korean fake employee scam” where the country gains access to company data and money by impersonating a remote U.S. employee, and deep-fake scams where, using artificial intelligence, someone’s likeness is stolen to fool targets on a video or audio call to exchange information.

“We are seeing a lot of those threats surging, especially when organizations just go after the shiny new object, which is AI, without truly understanding the repercussions and the risks associated with it,” Vadhani said. “So there are quite a bit of lessons learned there for many organizations who fall prey to it. It’s things that the companies have to start thinking about beyond just ‘It’s a technology issue, my IT guy will solve it.’ Deep fake is not a technology issue your IT person is going to be able to solve. It’s more training, it’s more vigilance, it’s more coming up with nontechnical ways of validating whether it’s [the real person] or not.”

A helping of ‘special sauce’

CohnReznick’s holistic, proactive cybersecurity offerings are far beyond the capabilities of many IT departments — and they can also involve a learning curve for its clients.

“A challenge we still see, especially in the middle-market companies, is they still don’t consider cyber as a business issue,” Vadhani explained. “They still think cyber is a technical issue, and because of that, they don’t allocate adequate resources towards what should be done, to have an adequate cybersecurity posture program, strategy and technical configurations and resources applied to this so that IT can enable your business. They still think about this as, ‘I’ve given IT a budget. My IT guys should be figuring this out,’ when in reality this is broader than just IT, right? It impacts the business at the heart of it. Somebody clicking a link is not an IT issue. So that’s the kind of thing you still see as common challenges and sometimes clients have varied opinions of that.”

The CohnReznick cybersecurity practice’s broad scope, meanwhile, includes working on investigations for clients as unique as U.S. state attorney generals. The team then brings those lessons to other clients, which span a variety of industry verticals — all which are susceptible to cyberthreats, Vadhani emphasized.

“We use our forensic lab for many of those investigations and whatever we learn through that, because at the end of the day, the state attorney generals are then investigating organizations who had data breaches impacting their constituents,” Vadhani explained. “We understand from the settlement terms or legal enforceable actions, what are the things that our clients should be proactively thinking about as they design their cybersecurity strategy and program and how they set up their entire teams and technical configurations. So we essentially bring all these different elements that organizations need to think about, or may have thought about, but they’re not enhancing it on a regular basis. We bring all of that together and then help them mature their overall program and their posture.”

One recent improvement had universal applications — and could have even prevented the recent Chinese attacks on Microsoft, according to Sun.

“What is very, very popular is our Microsoft 365 security assessment,” he said. “This is, I would say, an industry-leading service that we have. So Microsoft 365 — great cloud platform, but unfortunately it has lots of problems with how it’s launched by default. As a result, there’s a tremendous number of business email compromises that occur within Microsoft 365 and we’ve responded to hundreds, maybe even thousands of these at this point. And what we found is the same commonalities between all our clients who’ve had an incident, the same issues. And so what we did was we created a highly focused, highly targeted Microsoft 365 assessment, and with that we examine all of the security settings in Microsoft 365 and talk to clients and point out where they are not meeting industry benchmarks that have been established.”

Based on this, the firm has developed “what we refer to as the CohnReznick special sauce,” Sun continued. “That CohnReznick special sauce is about 13 to 25 settings that even the industry’s standard benchmark people don’t talk about or know about, but that we have seen through all our forensic responses.”

“Microsoft actually had an incident eight months ago where the Chinese hacked into Microsoft 365, and Microsoft did the full forensic analysis and issued a report about what the vulnerability was that the Chinese exploited,” he explained. “Well, that vulnerability we have been including in our CohnReznick special sauce for over a year, because we had seen that in other places also. So, if Microsoft had gotten our service, they might not have gotten hacked by the Chinese.”

Depth and breadth

The same level of precision is brought to the firm’s wider client engagements, according to Vadhani. “If their organization is looking at a cybersecurity governance or strategy or program, things that we learn generally during our forensics and security response recovery engagement — it’s not just technical issues, it’s a combination of everything. Including if your governance documents were not updated, or your roles and responsibilities that we identified through the investigations were outdated. Your board was not informed, the communication plan was not in place — so there are many things.”

CohnReznick’s holistic assessment and services include AI’s ever-expanding reach, for which Vadhani offers some general tips to firms utilizing the technology.

“AI governance is very important. Transparency and accountability within AI is very important,” he explained. “Sure, nobody’s saying don’t use AI, but understand what you’re doing, why you’re doing it. Have transparency in it. Make sure everybody understands what the tool is supposed to do and what the outputs are supposed to be. Make sure there’s adequate guardrails and governance in place. Train your employees on how to detect anomalies or patterns, or how do you detect if AI is going rogue on you? Because you’re training AI on something, it’s supposed to do a set of activities. How do you know it’s not doing activities plus something else that you’re not aware of? So there’s a lot of aspects to this where you need to train your AI properly. You need to train your people properly so that you’re keeping the human in the loop and making sure AI does not go rogue. Along with that, making sure that there is enough transparency and accountability in the entire process, and that there’s no bias, there’s no ethical dilemmas that you’re creating using AI. Because all of those can be exploited and will be exploited.”

CohnReznick’s cybersecurity practice also provides an essential service to audit clients, Sun said, vetting any cybersecurity incidents impacting their financial statements “to help make sure that we can then be comfortable attesting to the organization, to the financials going forward.”

“And again, I think that’s part of what makes us a little more special,” Sun continued, “because I don’t think any other accounting firm has that level of expertise, when it comes to that component of a financial audit.”

Despite the breadth of the cybersecurity team’s offerings, Sun laments, “Unfortunately a lot of clients are still asking, ‘Hey, I’ve just been attacked, please come help me.'”

But Sun is optimistic about the tide starting to turn.

“What we’re seeing though, is for the clients that are a little smarter or a little more proactive, a little more willing to get ahead of it, they’re doing the security assessments and all the types of protective measures,” he shared. “But then they’re also saying, ‘OK, we’re going to do everything we can to protect ourselves, but what happens is we still get attacked anyway. How can we be the most prepared and ready for it?’ So it’s [making] sure you’re going to do everything you can to prevent the house from burning down. But let’s do some fire drills anyways, just in case. So everybody knows when or if a fire alarm gets pulled, you know where the nearest exit is. How do you get out? Where do you regroup? All those types of things, right?… And so we’re seeing more — not enough, but more — clients get into that, make a concerted effort to get smarter and be more rehearsed in those areas.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Accounting

SEC’s Semiannual Reporting Proposal Faces Investor Pushback: What CFOs Need to Know

Published

on

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

A proposal from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to potentially shift some public companies away from quarterly financial reporting toward a semiannual model is drawing significant pushback from investors, even as it continues moving through the regulatory process. The debate has direct implications for corporate finance teams, auditors, and the broader transparency of U.S. capital markets.

What the SEC Proposed

According to a summary published by accounting advisory firm Cohen & Co., the SEC issued a proposed rule on May 19, 2026, aimed at simplifying financial reporting requirements for many U.S. public companies. The proposal would potentially reduce the frequency of certain mandatory disclosures from quarterly to semiannual, a structural change that has not been made to core U.S. reporting requirements in decades.

The proposal follows an extended debate within U.S. policy circles, with proponents arguing that reduced reporting frequency could lower compliance costs and free up management time for longer-term strategic planning rather than quarter-to-quarter results management.

Why Investors Are Pushing Back

Comment letters submitted in response to the proposal have been extensive, and according to Cohen & Co.’s review of the public record, investors “appear to be largely opposed” to the shift, viewing frequent interim reporting as a core benefit of U.S. capital markets relative to other jurisdictions.

Accounting and law firms have taken a more measured position, generally urging any changes to remain aligned with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), whose existing disclosure requirements and guidance are built around a quarterly reporting cadence. A shift to semiannual reporting without corresponding changes to FASB guidance could create friction between SEC filing requirements and GAAP-based disclosure expectations.

Lessons From the U.K. Experience

The debate is not without precedent. The United Kingdom moved away from mandatory quarterly reporting for listed companies in 2014, returning to a semiannual disclosure requirement. According to Cohen & Co.’s analysis, that experience offers a cautionary data point: there was no measurable increase in capital expenditure or R&D investment following the change, while analyst coverage of affected companies declined as reliable interim information became less available — a particular risk for smaller and newly public companies that rely on analyst coverage to maintain investor visibility.

Practical Implications for Finance Teams

Beyond the debate over disclosure philosophy, the proposal carries practical complications. Many companies have debt covenants and credit agreements structured around quarterly financial delivery; a shift to semiannual reporting could require renegotiating those terms. Reduced reporting frequency would also extend the “window of market silence” between disclosures, a factor that governance and investor-relations teams would need to manage carefully to avoid information asymmetry.

Separately, and unrelated to the reporting-frequency debate, the SEC and FASB have continued finalizing more routine updates this year. New Accounting Standards Updates are taking effect for December 31, 2026, fiscal year-ends covering income tax disclosures, credit loss measurement, induced debt conversions, and stock compensation, according to Eide Bailly’s review of 2026 ASU activity. Additional guidance on paid-in-kind dividends and environmental credits is also on the near-term horizon.

What to Watch Next

The semiannual reporting proposal remains in the comment and review phase, and no final rule has been adopted as of this writing. Finance leaders should monitor the SEC’s regulatory agenda for further movement, while treating the current quarterly reporting requirement as the operative standard until any final rule is issued and an effective date is set.

Given the extent of investor opposition documented in the comment file, a full shift to mandatory semiannual reporting appears more likely to result in either a scaled-back compromise or continued study rather than swift adoption — though the SEC’s ultimate direction remains uncertain.

 

Continue Reading

Accounting

AI-Driven Automation and Continuous Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

The accounting profession is undergoing a fundamental structural transition as enterprise finance departments shift from periodic month-end closes toward automated continuous accounting models. By integrating specialized machine learning algorithms directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms, chief accounting officers are transforming financial reporting from a retrospective exercise into a real-time operational asset.

The Shift from Periodic Close to Continuous Financial Reporting
Traditional accounting workflows heavily relied on manual data reconciliation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-week closing cycles at the end of each fiscal period. In contrast, continuous accounting frameworks utilize automated software agents to process, validate, and post transactional data in real time as business activities occur.

Automated bank reconciliation tools cross-reference incoming bank feeds, invoice records, and purchase orders automatically. By resolving transactional variances instantly throughout the month, corporate accounting teams eliminate the traditional workload spikes associated with quarterly and annual closes.

Machine Learning in Audit Trails and Anomaly Detection
Advanced natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning tools are redefining internal audit and financial control environments. Automated systems analyze 100% of general ledger entries, identifying anomalous transactions, duplicate payments, and unauthorized journal entries in real time.

Rather than relying on random statistical sampling, corporate internal auditors can focus their attention on high-risk flags automatically surfaced by algorithmic monitoring platforms. This continuous risk assessment strengthens internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and significantly reduces fraud risk.

Evolving Roles for Accounting Professionals
As routine data entry and manual reconciliation tasks become fully automated, the skill set required for accounting professionals is shifting toward data analysis, system design, and strategic business advisory.
– Systems Governance: Accountants are increasingly responsible for monitoring algorithmic accuracy and managing data integration pipelines.
– Business Partnership: Finance professionals leverage real-time financial dashboards to advise operational leaders on margin management and working capital allocation.
– Regulatory Compliance Management: Accounting teams utilize automated platforms to ensure compliance with dynamic tax codes and international accounting standards.

Core Implementation Recommendations
1. Deploy Automated Reconciliation Tools: Integrate continuous transaction processing modules into existing enterprise ERP architectures.
2. Establish Algorithmic Governance Controls: Implement strict internal testing protocols to ensure automated accounting rules comply with GAAP/IFRS standards.
3. Reskill Accounting Teams: Invest in training finance staff on data analytics, workflow automation, and predictive financial modeling.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

on

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Trending