对冲基金不希望您分享他们的信件。太糟糕了，你有iphone。

在2010年秋天，保罗歌手的埃利克管理层在战争中。This time, however, the hedge fund’s target wasn’t a poorly run company or a sovereign nation defaulting on its debt: Instead it was an industry trade publication that had gotten its hands on a copy of Elliott’s latest quarterly letters and had had the temerity to write about them.

艾略特与出版物一起去战斗 -AR.杂志，由母公司拥有亚博赞助欧冠— armed with a favorite weapon: lawyers. The firm slapped the magazine with a “motion to compel,” an attempt to force it to reveal who had leaked the letter.

亚博赞助欧冠’s own lawyers immediately fired back, citing so-called fair-use statutes that allow reporters to excerpt copyrighted material, as well as the First Amendment to the Constitution and New York State shield laws that protect reporters from having to identify their sources. Two days beforeAR.was to file a response in New York State Supreme Court, Elliott dropped the matter.

对冲基金与亚博赞助欧冠eventually went back to normal — but Elliott has since turned its outrage on the leakers. In 2015 the firm told clients in a letter that it had uncovered the identities of “certain individuals who breached their confidentiality obligations” by leaking its quarterly letters to unintended recipients and that it was “seeking monetary damages.”

Nor is Elliott alone in wanting to go after leakers. Last year U.K. hedge fund firm Brevan Howard won an injunction against Reuters to stop the news service from reporting on the contents of one of its letters. (The online Wall Street tabloid Dealbreaker couldn’t resist speculating on why the notoriously secretive firm went to such lengths to block the story: “Did Brevan Howard Engage in an Olive Oil–Drenched Threesome With a British Celebrity?” blared标题在其现场。）Brevan Howard发言人拒绝发表评论，但熟悉该裁决的人表示，法院确定，如果对冲基金公司必须承担其所有通信，那么它不会能够向投资者沟通必要的信息。

And in 2014, David Einhorn’s Greenlight Capital sued finance blog Seeking Alpha for revealing that Greenlight had taken a stake in chip maker Micron, saying that Greenlight had not widely disclosed that information to investors and that the blog post made it more expensive for the hedge fund to build its position. Greenlight later dropped the suit, claiming it had identified the blogger on its own.

许多对冲基金愿意愿意走到很大的长篇，以防止他们的信件和其他信息落入记者和其他可能将其内容展示到更广泛的受众的人。有些人说这些泄漏可以使它们更昂贵地建立位置 - 与绿灯一样 - 或导致短暂的挤压，有些人担心泄露的字母可以对秘密交易策略进行见解。其他人担心可能令人尴尬的人员来曝光，或担心揭示关键员工的身份可能会导致其他公司的天赋偷猎。

一些经理基本上已经放弃了试图阻止泄漏。只要有狡猾的记者，思考就会出现，这些信件将在那里出来。

But others are getting crafty right back.

In addition to using long-standing tools like digital watermarking — the easiest and least expensive technique, which acts more as a deterrent than as an outright roadblock to sharing — some are employing technologies that make it impossible to print or download letters, or even to view them in their entirety. At the extreme, one hedge fund industry veteran says, is the example of John Paulson’s Paulson & Co.: Once clients logged in to see their letters, they could read only three lines of the letter at a time — the rest was covered by black boxes above and below. Paulson did not respond to a request for comment.

但是保密程度太多了多少钱？

“律师事务所Sadis＆Goldberg的合作伙伴，罗恩佩弗纳（Ron Geffner）和其他投资公司合作的合伙人的合伙人罗恩佩弗纳说，这是一个专有和运作的平衡。”他说他有他们的信件泄露的客户，尽管没有面临重大的负面影响。

Geffner表示，管理人员对投资者以开放，及时和统一的方式沟通至关重要的是，这种通信偶尔会涵盖敏感的投资组合信息，业务运营或人事事项。这意味着投资组合经理有时需要透露竞争对手可能会贸易的职位或可能导致人才偷猎的人事。

不过,“我们建议他们假设的信息t some point is going to be public, and even if you’re sharing with investors, they could use the info against you in litigation,” says Geffner.

即使是最严格的抗击性技术也不会阻止人们用手机捕捉照片。

“我对分发的观点是你发出的任何东西都将传播给其他人，”宏观对冲基金的业务发展负责人表示。“水印是一件事 - 您可以在另一封电子邮件中密码保护并发送密码;你可以把它们放在防火墙后面。但是在2018年，每个人都在手中获得了相机。您可以拍摄一些东西并分发它。很难保护。“

---

早些时候many hedge fund firms simply emailed individually watermarked PDFs to their clients and hoped for the best. But hedge funds, wary of both information leaking and hacking, have increasingly been adopting tools like investor portals used in conjunction with customer relationship management software, multifactor authentication (where clients undergo multiple steps to ensure they’re who they say they are), and so-called digital-rights management (DRM) technologies.

软件供应商Imagineer的首席执行官Jeremie Bacon表示，对冲基金可以选择各种供应商。Intralinks，它提供文档共享和所谓的虚拟数据室服务，以便与客户安全通信，命令大量的对冲基金市场份额。然后，有类似Imagineer的更新提供商，它经营着客户端可以链接到他们公司的客户关系管理软件的可定制Web门户产品。最后，有资金管理员为某些客户提供门户服务。

Bacon表示客户端通常使用这些门户网站的方式：对冲基金通过内容管理系统发布其网站网站的信件，然后通过电子邮件将该字母的链接电子邮件给PROPROVED的客户端列表。如果客户将电子邮件转发给尚未由对冲基金公司尚未认证的人，则将被拒绝访问该人。

“You can secure that web portal with your single sign-on or dual-factor authentication, and it gives you a much higher level of control,” Bacon notes.

彼得汉斯是收获交换的首席执行官，这是一个用于资产管理人员的在线内容管理平台，允许他们发布营销和其他材料并与选择受众分享。他说，收获为其基金经理客户提供了许多方法，以与所需的观众分享他们的信息 - 并限制对他们不想看到的人的访问。

“我们作为预防措施的最大的事情正在制定它，所以除了能够访问它的人之外，文件本身就无法访问，”他说。“因此，使用水印获得PDF的唯一方法是登录系统。他补充说，我们不使用很多密码，“部分是因为它们并不安全。

但对于想要去全乐诺克斯的经理，总有DRM技术。Bacon表示，这项技术可以为用户提供权限打开PDF，但可以防止它们打印，转发甚至屏幕拍摄PDF - 在打印或屏幕抓取时，字母的内容呈现不可读。他说，Imagineer的大型基金客户，可以拥有成千上万的客户自己，对DRM功能特别感兴趣。其他DRM服务流行的对冲基金包括BlackBerry Workspaces - 以前称为WatchDox - 以及名为Sharefile的Citrix应用程序。

Some managers are taking things a step further, using behavioral-analytics platforms in conjunction with services like BlackBerry Workspaces to allow them to track when people are accessing a document — and then using machine learning techniques to observe patterns and detect unusual trading activity that correlates with that document being leaked.

---

THERE ARE PROBLEMS然而，与诺克斯堡的安全水平。对于初学者来说，客户讨厌它。

“As an LP with so many hedge funds, is it is absolutely aggravating,” says an executive at a well-known fund-of-funds. “Look, we’re partners. While we understand their need for confidentiality — there are a few bad apples out there that have ruined it for all of us — it makes it very hard for someone like us who has different offices around the world to share stuff. For those of us that invest with a lot of hedge funds, it becomes a real burden.”

更重要的是，这些技术解决方案昂贵。培根说，只需经过一个简单的网络门户，可以在12,000美元到60,000美元的任何地方，培根说;使用其他平台的大对冲基金可以花费仅为该技术的六个数字。抛出多因素认证和DRM技术，价格甚至更加。培根估计，如果有数百个客户，大公司每月可以花费超过5,000美元，并且每一个用户都打开DRM功能。

出于这些原因，他说，DRM Technologies并没有与整个行业陷入困境，估计只有30％的管理人员正在使用这些更具限制性技术。汉斯注意到更多管理者不使用它们的另一个原因是甚至DRM技术也不是完全防弹。

“我可以拿起相机，”培根说。“如果我只允许阅读三行，我可以创建电影文件。如果人们想要分享您的信息，他们将分享它。它不会阻止人们分享它;它只是让99％的客户对良好演员而不是试图分享您的信息来说更令人讨厌。“

培根说，最常见的方法是中间地面，管理人员采用将水印应用于大多数东西并通过他们的门户网站沟通的组合。用户可以在技术上仍然共享或转发字母，但如果他们这样做，他们的名字将全部通过该文档。

另一种方法正在实现谁可以看到文档的控制。行业专家表示，要求获得几个最近的信件是从头客预期客户的尽职调查问卷的标准，因此并不总能限制对当前投资者的访问。软件提供商Backstop Solutions的高级产品线管理器Ronke Majekodunmi表示，她的公司提供自动解冻激活技术，以便对冲基金公司可以在一段时间后自动停用某些用户;客户还可以设置文档访问到期，以便最终用户无法看到公司的整个存档的字母。

但最终，即使技术供应商也承认没有保证。

“There are one or two letters I get that someone literally snail-mails to me,” says one veteran fund manager, who adds, “Realistically, you have to be crazy to assume that anything you send out is not gonna end up in somebody’s hands.” Investors can also simply read people the contents of fund documents over the phone.

And when letters do get leaked, Geffner notes, it’s difficult for managers to win lawsuits for monetary damages, as it’s hard to prove that leaked letters have caused losses.

他说，有时候，根据公司的公司有多少，他可以劝告客户以书面形式提出某些事情，而是在会议上讨论其他事项 - 只要经理们坚持脚本，以便他们不能被指责向不同的投资者提供不同的信息。最重要的是，Geffner继续，经理需要了解他们可以在保护共享信息时无法控制的。

“You sawJurassic Park，“ 他说。“无论如何，一切都对此有一些风险。”