Program Details
2026-11-17 14:30:00
Over 1,000+ webinars
Course Overview
2026-11-17 14:30:00
2h CLE Credits
Intermediate
2
2:30 pm - 3:30 pm ESTThis session examines the August 12, 2026 National Security Presidential Memorandum that established the federal framework authorizing vetted private companies to conduct offensive cyber operations against foreign Cyber-Enabled Transnational Criminal Organizations. Attorneys will learn how the program is structured, which companies are eligible and how they are vetted, what categories of operations are authorized, and what oversight and legal guardrails govern participation. Attendees will leave able to identify the program’s legal foundation, its constitutional and statutory ambiguities, and the compliance risks that counsel must understand before advising any client considering participation.
Erez Liebermann
Stephanie D. Thomas 3:40 pm - 4:40 pm ESTThis session moves from the program’s rules to the operation itself. Attorneys will examine how participating companies collect, handle, and share data during authorized operations, how they coordinate and deconflict with the FBI and DOJ, and how to prepare for the inquiries, subpoenas, and litigation that can follow when an operation draws scrutiny. Attendees will leave able to spot surveillance-law issues in offensive operations, build evidence-handling protocols that hold up in court, and guide clients through government investigations, third-party claims, and national security review of corporate transactions.
Trisha Anderson
Chloe GoodwinErez Liebermann is a Partner in the New York office of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, where he serves as Co-Chair of the firm’s Technology Group and is a member of its Data Strategy & Security Group. He advises major businesses on their most complex and high-impact cyber incident responses and on data-related regulatory and litigation matters, including the investigation and litigation of data breaches, business email compromise, and law enforcement access to data. He counsels C-suite executives and boards of directors on high-profile cyber incident investigations and on reducing data-related regulatory and reputational risk. Mr. Liebermann brings a rare combination of perspectives to that work: he has been a litigator, a federal cybercrime prosecutor, and the senior in-house cybersecurity lawyer at a global financial services company, and he is a trained aerospace engineer. Having spent a decade investigating and prosecuting hackers for the Department of Justice and then building and running a corporate threat intelligence and threat hunting team, he understands both sides of an offensive cyber operation — how the government authorizes, supervises, and prosecutes intrusions, and how a company must govern, document, and defend the actions it takes against an adversary.
Trisha Anderson is a Partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Hecker Fink LLP, where she advises clients in both the private and public sectors on complex constitutional and statutory issues, represents them in trial and appellate litigation, guides them through crises, and responds to inquiries from federal executive branch agencies, state attorneys general, and Congress. Her clients have included major companies, individuals, public officials, universities, nonprofits, and philanthropies, and she regularly counsels them on compliance and risk management in a rapidly evolving and uncertain legal landscape. Ms. Anderson joined the firm after more than a decade in senior roles across the Executive Branch — at the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Commerce — where she oversaw the legal support for the FBI’s national security and cyber investigations, supervised Treasury’s sanctions authorities, and advised the White House Counsel and agency General Counsels on the outer limits of presidential and executive power. Few lawyers in private practice have been as close to the government’s own decisions about how, when, and under what authority to act against foreign cyber actors — the very questions companies now face as they consider participating in, or being affected by, the new private offensive cyber operations program.
Chloe Goodwin is a Senior Associate in the Washington, D.C. office of Hecker Fink LLP, where she represents companies across a broad range of litigation and compliance matters. She advises clients on regulatory enforcement, the evolving landscape of technology law, and complex privacy issues, including cross-border data transfers, conflicts of law, and law enforcement access to digital evidence. Her practice also focuses on national security concerns, surveillance authority regulations, and key constitutional protections — including the Fourth and First Amendments — as well as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Ms. Goodwin has spent her career at the seam between technology companies and the government: defending companies against legal process for user data, challenging sanctions designations, and analyzing the legal frameworks that govern when private actors may cooperate with, resist, or act on behalf of the state — the central tension of the new private offensive cyber operations program.
Stephanie D. Thomas is an Associate in the Litigation Department of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP in New York and a member of the firm’s Data Strategy & Security Group and White Collar & Regulatory Defense Group. Her practice centers on cybersecurity incident response — including ransomware attacks, large-scale data theft, and cross-border incidents — together with the regulatory notifications, inquiries, and defense that follow. She also advises clients on cybersecurity preparedness, data privacy and strategy, internal investigations, and artificial intelligence governance. Her recent work includes managing incident responses for financial services, insurance, technology, and law firm clients, building AI governance programs, and advising on critical infrastructure and operational resilience regulation, placing her at the center of the regulatory and operational questions companies now face when deciding whether, and how, to engage with government-sanctioned offensive cyber operations.
Erez Liebermann is a Partner in the New York office of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, where he serves as Co-Chair of the firm’s Technology Group and is a member of its Data Strategy & Security Group. He advises major businesses on their most complex and high-impact cyber incident responses and on data-related regulatory and litigation matters, including the investigation and litigation of data breaches, business email compromise, and law enforcement access to data. He counsels C-suite executives and boards of directors on high-profile cyber incident investigations and on reducing data-related regulatory and reputational risk. Mr. Liebermann brings a rare combination of perspectives to that work: he has been a litigator, a federal cybercrime prosecutor, and the senior in-house cybersecurity lawyer at a global financial services company, and he is a trained aerospace engineer. Having spent a decade investigating and prosecuting hackers for the Department of Justice and then building and running a corporate threat intelligence and threat hunting team, he understands both sides of an offensive cyber operation — how the government authorizes, supervises, and prosecutes intrusions, and how a company must govern, document, and defend the actions it takes against an adversary.
Trisha Anderson is a Partner in the Washington, D.C. office of Hecker Fink LLP, where she advises clients in both the private and public sectors on complex constitutional and statutory issues, represents them in trial and appellate litigation, guides them through crises, and responds to inquiries from federal executive branch agencies, state attorneys general, and Congress. Her clients have included major companies, individuals, public officials, universities, nonprofits, and philanthropies, and she regularly counsels them on compliance and risk management in a rapidly evolving and uncertain legal landscape. Ms. Anderson joined the firm after more than a decade in senior roles across the Executive Branch — at the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of the Treasury, and the Department of Commerce — where she oversaw the legal support for the FBI’s national security and cyber investigations, supervised Treasury’s sanctions authorities, and advised the White House Counsel and agency General Counsels on the outer limits of presidential and executive power. Few lawyers in private practice have been as close to the government’s own decisions about how, when, and under what authority to act against foreign cyber actors — the very questions companies now face as they consider participating in, or being affected by, the new private offensive cyber operations program.
Chloe Goodwin is a Senior Associate in the Washington, D.C. office of Hecker Fink LLP, where she represents companies across a broad range of litigation and compliance matters. She advises clients on regulatory enforcement, the evolving landscape of technology law, and complex privacy issues, including cross-border data transfers, conflicts of law, and law enforcement access to digital evidence. Her practice also focuses on national security concerns, surveillance authority regulations, and key constitutional protections — including the Fourth and First Amendments — as well as Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Ms. Goodwin has spent her career at the seam between technology companies and the government: defending companies against legal process for user data, challenging sanctions designations, and analyzing the legal frameworks that govern when private actors may cooperate with, resist, or act on behalf of the state — the central tension of the new private offensive cyber operations program.
Stephanie D. Thomas is an Associate in the Litigation Department of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP in New York and a member of the firm’s Data Strategy & Security Group and White Collar & Regulatory Defense Group. Her practice centers on cybersecurity incident response — including ransomware attacks, large-scale data theft, and cross-border incidents — together with the regulatory notifications, inquiries, and defense that follow. She also advises clients on cybersecurity preparedness, data privacy and strategy, internal investigations, and artificial intelligence governance. Her recent work includes managing incident responses for financial services, insurance, technology, and law firm clients, building AI governance programs, and advising on critical infrastructure and operational resilience regulation, placing her at the center of the regulatory and operational questions companies now face when deciding whether, and how, to engage with government-sanctioned offensive cyber operations.
Requirements
The Alabama State Bar MCLE Commission requires attorneys to complete 12 credits, including 1 ethics, by December 31 of each year. All credits must be reported by February 15 of the following year. A maximum of 12 credits, including 1 ethics credit, may be carried over for 1 year only.
Formats
