Lessons On Protecting Your Company's Crown Jewels – Do A Better Job Than The Louvre Did Protecting Its Crown Jewels

The Louvre is synonymous with cultural excellence. That's what makes the recent heist of crown jewels—and the subsequent state audit—so jarring. This wasn't a Hollywood caper. It was a case study in how predictable, preventable security failures accumulate over time when leadership choices systematically favor the visible over the vital.

The French state auditor's report describes a familiar imbalance: large investments in revenue‑enhancing and prestige‑boosting initiatives, and comparatively paltry spending on the unglamorous work of security and maintenance. Between 2018 and 2024, the Louvre spent roughly €105 million acquiring artworks and only €26.7 million on maintenance and security. Of an €83 million plan for security upgrades, just €3 million had been advanced. The consequence was not theoretical. A four‑person team exploited a blind spot, rolled up in a truck‑mounted lift, used angle grinders to breach a window and display cases, and left within eight minutes with an estimated $102 million in jewels.

There are several lessons here for companies far outside the museum world. First, strategy is budget. The Louvre's statutes direct 20% of ticket revenue to acquisitions, a structural commitment that, over time, crowded out funding for cameras, monitoring, and crisis preparedness. In corporate terms, this is what happens when customer‑facing spend is ring‑fenced but foundational risk controls are "best efforts" and endlessly deferred. Years after an earlier audit flagged major weaknesses—from insufficient entrance checks to crisis‑response gaps—large portions of the complex still lacked camera coverage. Only 134 cameras were added or replaced across multiple years, and the upgrade program lagged. Attackers needed only to find the soft spot that the organization already knew existed.

Second, adversaries optimize against your slowest control. The thieves did not deploy advanced tradecraft; they exploited latency. Low‑tech tools and a lift truck beat a fragmented surveillance footprint and an incomplete rollout. In cyber terms, think of an unpatched external system, a long‑planned but not‑yet‑deployed EDR solution, or a backlog of identity hardening tasks. If your roadmap spans years and your attackers operate in minutes, the roadmap is your exposure.

Third, culture travels from the top. Following the heist, the museum's director reportedly offered to resign; the offer wasn't accepted. That is a governance story as much as a staffing one. Boards and executives set priorities explicitly through budgets and implicitly through what they tolerate. If the organization's operating truth is that "we'll get to security next quarter," expect attackers to get there first.

A word on passwords, because it has drawn outsized attention in public commentary: reports have circulated of a weak password such as "lourve" being used in connection with museum systems. Whether or not that specific detail is accurate, the point stands. Basic identity hygiene—strong, unique passwords; multifactor authentication; privileged access management; and continuous monitoring—is table stakes. If your controls allow a single trivial credential to unlock crown‑jewel assets, you have not designed for failure and you have not assumed breach.

For companies looking to translate these lessons into action, the path is not mysterious, but it is disciplined. Align funding with risk, not with optics. Protect your crown jewels first, then build outward. Retire structural rules that privilege prestige over resilience. Close known gaps on a defined timetable, and publish that timetable internally so slippage is visible and accountable. Instrument your environment so that blind spots do not persist; where they must exist, compensate for them with layered controls and tested response plans. Finally, measure the mean time from identified weakness to remediation. If it is measured in quarters while your adversaries move in minutes, recalibrate now.

The Louvre's paradox—an institution with global brand power struggling with basic protective controls—should sound familiar to any enterprise with a celebrated product and a deferred security backlog. You can be world‑class in what you create and still be vulnerable in how you protect it. Attackers will choose the cheaper problem to solve. Don't make it cheaper for them.

To view Foley Hoag's Security, Privacy and The Law Blog please click here

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.