Consumer data privacy is no longer a necessary evil but a competitive differentiator for any company participating in the global economy. The EU’s GDPR represents the world’s most comprehensive regulation for privacy best practices, holding companies to stringent standards for data collection, storage and use. US national privacy law Many countries have followed suit in recent years by adopting similarly aggressive privacy laws that reflect a greater dedication to data protection. In stark contrast, the … More
Researchers have been able to find all sorts of personal information within GPT-2. This information was part of the training data, and can be extracted with the right sorts of queries.
Abstract: It has become common to publish large (billion parameter) language models that have been trained on private datasets. This paper demonstrates that in such settings, an adversary can perform a training data extraction attack to recover individual training examples by querying the language model.
We demonstrate our attack on GPT-2, a language model trained on scrapes of the public Internet, and are able to extract hundreds of verbatim text sequences from the model’s training data. These extracted examples include (public) personally identifiable information (names, phone numbers, and email addresses), IRC conversations, code, and 128-bit UUIDs. Our attack is possible even though each of the above sequences are included in just one document in the training data.
We comprehensively evaluate our extraction attack to understand the factors that contribute to its success. For example, we find that larger models are more vulnerable than smaller models. We conclude by drawing lessons and discussing possible safeguards for training large language models.
We generated a total of 600,000 samples by querying GPT-2 with three different sampling strategies. Each sample contains 256 tokens, or roughly 200 words on average. Among these samples, we selected 1,800 samples with abnormally high likelihood for manual inspection. Out of the 1,800 samples, we found 604 that contain text which is reproduced verbatim from the training set.
The rest of the blog post discusses the types of data they found.
This is bad:
More than 100,000 Zyxel firewalls, VPN gateways, and access point controllers contain a hardcoded admin-level backdoor account that can grant attackers root access to devices via either the SSH interface or the web administration panel.
Installing patches removes the backdoor account, which, according to Eye Control researchers, uses the “zyfwp” username and the “PrOw!aN_fXp” password.
“The plaintext password was visible in one of the binaries on the system,” the Dutch researchers said in a report published before the Christmas 2020 holiday.
68% of SMB and mid-market business executives believe working with a managed service provider (MSP) helps them stay ahead of their competition, according to Infrascale. MSP adoption The research also suggests that the top reason that businesses opt to work with MSPs, chosen by 51% of respondents, is to save costs. The second most common reason survey respondents said they use an MSP is for increased security (46%). 96% of the respondents said that it … More
The post Cost savings and security are key drivers of MSP adoption appeared first on Help Net Security.
One of the most notable ballot propositions impacting the privacy and cybersecurity world during the US 2020 election was the passage of the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA).
Predominantly considered an updated version of 2018’s California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), the CPRA incorporates several changes other than the highly touted establishment of the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA).
Not only does the CPRA incorporate several changes that might place a burden on small retailers, it also focuses more specifically on cybersecurity, hinting at the future of privacy and security legislation.
What new duties does the CPRA impose?
The new iteration of the California law specifically incorporates data security and integrity requirements in several places. The changes filter across CPRA’s fifty-three pages. When brought together, they show a shift towards making the CPRA a hybrid privacy-security regulation.
The first mention occurs in section 100, which requires that businesses collecting personal information “shall implement reasonable security procedures and practices.” This new language highlights the deeply intertwined relationship between security and privacy. The CCPA hinted at security controls, but the CPRA outright requires them.
This new mandate aligns with the following addition of “security and integrity” in the definitions section:
- the ability: (1) of a network or an information system to detect security incidents that compromise the availability, authenticity, integrity, and confidentiality of stored or transmitted personal information; (2) to detect security incidents, resist malicious, deceptive, fraudulent, or illegal actions, and to help prosecute those responsible for such actions; and (3) a business to ensure the physical safety of natural persons.
This definition reinforces proactive cybersecurity monitoring and threat detection as important to ensuring privacy. Specifically, the “to help prosecute those responsible” indicates that organizations who must comply with CPRA need to have appropriate forensic documentation that will give them the ability to work with law enforcement.
How does the CPRA change the definition of data collection?
From a purely academic position, the new definitions of consent, dark patterns, and cross-context behavioral advertising indicate that the CPRA looks to the future of data collection technologies.
The definition of consent specifically states:
- acceptance of a general or broad term of use or similar document that contains descriptions of personal information processing along with other, unrelated information, does not constitute consent. Hovering over, muting, pausing, or closing a given piece of content does not constitute consent. Likewise, agreement obtained through use of dark patterns does not constitute consent.
Both of these notifications could be considered broad terms and conditions. Additionally, both contain personal information processing along with “other, unrelated information” such as the marketing assets the user wants to download.
However, the CPRA goes further in the definitions section to include marketing technologies that gather user intent data. Many websites use “heatmaps” that collect information on where users click, what videos they watch or pause, and what areas they hover over. For example, tools such as Decibel and Hotjar are behavior analytics tools that give insight into what content users click through to, whether they get distracted by non-clickable elements, and whether they respond to opt-ins. The CPRA’s language indicates that businesses will need to obtain consent before collecting this information.
The CPRA goes yet another step further, defining “dark patterns” as “a user interface designed or manipulated with the substantial effect of subverting or impairing user autonomy, decision-making, or choice, as further defined by the regulation.” Dark patterns are marketing ploys that try to leverage users’ emotions against them, such as email request boxes with buttons that say, “No thanks, I don’t want a discount today.” Under the CPRA, these would be considered non-compliant tactics.
Finally, the CPRA covers all its privacy bases by including the following definition of cross-context behavioral advertising:
- targeting of advertising to a consumer based on the consumer’s personal information obtained from the consumer’s activity across businesses, distinctly-branded websites, applications, or services, other than the business, distinctly-branded website, application, or service with which the consumer intentionally interacts.
In other words, if a consumer looks to buy something from the Gap, the Gap cannot use that information to target advertising for the Banana Republic’s clothing.
Consumer businesses will need to specifically delineate their consumer data collection repositories and be more proactive about the way in which they position their digital marketing strategies.
How the CPRA impacts the data supply chain
CPRA also tackles the data supply chain, giving specific directions on what and how service providers and contractors fit into the privacy puzzle. Sections 105, 121, and 130 all reference these third-party data organizations that, when aggregated, create a series of contractual requirements across the data supply chain.
First, under Section 105, “Consumers’ Right to Delete Personal Information,” the CPRA clarifies that service providers are only beholden to business with whom they contracted, not consumers. Second, the clause creates a waterfall approach for deleting personal data. Businesses need to tell their service providers and contractors who in turn need to contact their service providers and contractors. Presumably, this waterfall continues down the data supply stream until no more additional contracted parties remain.
Second, CPRA established section 121, a new provision not in the CCPA. This section gives consumers the right to limit how businesses use their data and requires businesses to push those limitations downstream as well. Fundamentally, this provision means that consumers can now create accounts for services, such as purchasing through a business owned application, but limit the way that data is used to that single case.
Finally, under section 130, the CPRA clarifies service provider and contractor responsibilities focusing on contractual obligations. Service providers and contractors need to respond only to requests as provided by the businesses with whom they contract. This section reinforces the distance between consumers and a business’s service providers and contractors.
What can we hypothesize about the direction CPRA takes data privacy and security?
Fundamentally, CPRA gives a lot of insight into the way that data security and privacy increasingly intertwine. The CPRA no longer hints at the interconnection but specifically speaks to data security best practices. It additionally goes further than other regulations by requiring businesses to provide data security event information that helps track cybercriminals after an incident occurs.
More importantly, CPRA’s clarifications create a morass of requirements that make data retrieval difficult. These requirements enforce data minimization by placing undue burdens on businesses and the data supply chain when responding to consumer requests. For example, Section 130(3)(B)(ii) now requires businesses to provide consumers, upon request, with “the specific pieces of personal information obtained.”
Originally, under CCPA, businesses needed to share the categories of information. By requiring them to supply the specific pieces of personal information, businesses that need to respond to consumers now need to think more carefully about the data they collect. If the “pieces of data” collected come from website heatmaps, then businesses need to be able to segregate that data out if a consumer requests it.
In short, many of these new requirements force businesses to think more carefully about the information they collect. If a business needs to furnish data upon customer request, it needs to know the specific pieces of information it collects, not just the categories. Since this will increase the operational costs associated with responding to these requests, the CPRA fundamentally gives businesses two options. Collect all the data but pay the operational costs when responding to consumer requests or limit data collection as much as possible to reduce the operational costs of responding to consumer requests.
By January 2020, at least three states had prepared new privacy legislation based on the CCPA. As data privacy and security professionals look to the future of privacy regulations, the CPRA creates new fundamental requirements that states, and the US federal government may use to strengthen consumer data rights.
This has been a uniquely transformative year. Prompted by a global pandemic, we’ve been forced to change many things about how we live, work, and relate. For most businesses, this means a rapid and comprehensive shift toward remote work. While more than half of all employees participated in a rapid transition to remote work, it’s clear that this is more than just a temporary change. According to a June survey by PwC, 83% of employees … More
The post How can companies secure a hybrid workforce in 2021? appeared first on Help Net Security.
In this interview, Matt Cooke, cybersecurity strategist, EMEA at Proofpoint, discusses the cybersecurity challenges for retail organizations and the main areas CISOs need to focus on.
Generally, are retailers paying enough attention to security hygiene?
Our research has shown that the vast majority of retailers in the UK and Europe-wide simply aren’t doing enough to protect their customers from fraudulent and malicious emails – only 11% of UK retailers have implemented the recommended and strictest level of DMARC protection, which protects them from cybercriminals spoofing their identity and decreases the risk of email fraud for customers.
Despite this low and worrying statistic, it’s promising to see that a small majority of UK retailers have at least started their DMARC journey – with 53% publishing a DMARC record in general. When we look at the top European-wide online retailers, 60% of them have published a DMARC record.
If we compare this to the largest organisations in the world (the Global 2000), only 51% of these brands have published a DMARC record. This illustrates the retail industry is slightly ahead of the curve – therefore certainly is paying attention to security hygiene – but there’s still a long way to go.
Unfortunately, starting your DMARC journey isn’t quite enough – without having the ‘reject’ policy in place cyber criminals can still pretend to be you and trick your customers.
What areas should a CISO of a retail organization be particularly worried about?
Business Email Compromise (BEC) and Email Account Compromise Attacks (EAC), are on the rise, targeting organisations in all industries globally. Dubbed cyber-security’s priciest problem, social engineering driven cyber threats such as BEC and EAC are purpose-built to impersonate someone users trust and trick them into sending money or sensitive information.
These email-based threats are a growing problem. Recent Proofpoint research has shown that since March 2020, over 7,000 CEOs or other executives have been impersonated. Overall, more money is lost to this type of attack than any other cybercriminal activity. In fact, according to the FBI, these attacks have cost organisations worldwide more than $26 billion between June 2016 and July 2019.
The retail industry has a very complex supply chain. When targeting an organisation in this sector, cyber criminals don’t only see success from tricking consumers/customers, they can also target suppliers, with attacks such as BEC, impersonating a trusted person from within the business.
We have seen cases within the retail sector where cyber criminals are compromising suppliers’ email accounts in order to hijack seemingly legitimate conversations with someone within the retail business. The aim here is to trick the retailer into paying an outstanding invoice into the wrong account – the cybercriminals’ account, as opposed to the actual supplier.
In addition, due to the pandemic, global workforces have been thrusted into remote working – and those in the retail sector are not exempt. As physical stores have closed worldwide, customer service and interaction has shifted to digital communication more so than ever. Those employees that were used to talking directly to customers, are now using online platforms and have new cloud accounts – expanding the attack surface for cybercriminals.
The retail industry – along with all other industries – need to ensure employees are adequately trained around identifying the risks that might be delivered by these different communication channels and how to securely handle customer data.
Domain spoofing and phishing continue to rise, what’s the impact for retail organizations?
Threat actors are constantly tailoring their tactics, yet email remains the cybercriminals’ attack vector of choice, both at scale and in targeted attacks, simply because it works.
Cybercriminals use phishing because it’s easy, cheap and effective. Email addresses are easy to obtain, and emails are virtually free to send. With little effort and little cost, attackers can quickly gain access to valuable data. As seen in recent breaches, emails sent from official addresses that use the domains of known international companies, seem trustworthy both to the receiver and spam-filters, increasing the number of potential victims. However, this has a detrimental effect on both the brands’ finances and reputation.
Organisations have a duty to deploy authentication protocols, such as DMARC to protect employees, customers, and partners from cybercriminals looking to impersonate their trusted brand and damage their reputation.
Opportunistic cyber criminals will tailor their emails to adapt to whatever is topical or newsworthy at that moment in time. For example, Black Friday-themed phishing emails often take advantage of recipients’ desire to cash in on increasingly attractive deals, creating tempting clickbait for users.
These messages may use stolen branding and tantalising subject lines to convince users to click through, at which point they are often delivered to pages filled with advertising, potential phishing sites, malicious content, or offers for counterfeit goods. As with most things, if offers appear too good to be true or cannot be verified as legitimate email marketing from known brands, recipients should avoid following links.
Do you expect technologies like AI and ML to help retailers eliminate most security risks in the near future?
Today, AI is a vital line of defence against a wide range of threats, including people-centric attacks such as phishing. Every phishing email leaves behind it a trail of data. This data can be collected and analysed by machine learning algorithms to calculate the risk of potentially harmful emails by checking for known malicious hallmarks.
While AI and ML certainly help organisations to reduce risks, they are not going to eliminate security risks on their own. Organisations need to build the right technologies and plug the right gaps from a security perspective, using AI and ML as just part of this overall solution.
Organisations should not outsource their risk management entirely to an AI engine, because AI doesn’t know your business.
There is no doubt that artificial intelligence is now a hugely important line of cyber defence. But it cannot and should not replace all previous techniques. Instead, we must add it to an increasingly sophisticated toolkit, designed to protect against rapidly evolving threats.
Bitglass released a report which uncovers whether organizations are properly equipped to defend themselves in the cloud. IT and security professionals were surveyed to understand their top security concerns and identify the actions that enterprises are taking to protect data in the cloud.
Orgs struggling to use cloud-based resources safely
93% of respondents were moderately to extremely concerned about the security of the public cloud. The report’s findings suggest that organizations are struggling to use cloud-based resources safely. For example, a mere 31% of organizations use cloud DLP, despite 66% citing data leakage as their top cloud security concern.
Similarly, organizations are unable to maintain visibility into file downloads (45%), file uploads (50%), DLP policy violations (50%), and external sharing (55%) in the cloud.
Many still using legacy tools
The report also found that many still try to use tools like firewalls (44%), network encryption (36%), and network monitoring (26%) to secure the use of the cloud–despite 82% of respondents recognizing that such legacy tools are poorly suited to do so and that they should instead use security capabilities designed for the cloud.
“To address modern cloud security needs, organizations should leverage multi-faceted security platforms that are capable of providing comprehensive and consistent security for any interaction between any device, app, web destination, on-premises resource, or infrastructure,” said Anurag Kahol, CTO at Bitglass.
“According to our research, 79% of organizations already believe it would be helpful to have such a consolidated security platform; now they just need to choose and implement the right one.”
Businesses around the globe are facing challenges as they try to protect data stored in complex hybrid multi-cloud environments, from the growing threat of ransomware, according to a Veritas Technologies survey.
Only 36% of respondents said their security has kept pace with their IT complexity, underscoring the need for greater use of data protection solutions that can protect against ransomware across the entirety of increasingly heterogenous environments.
Need to pay ransoms
Typically, if businesses fall foul to ransomware and are not able to restore their data from a backup copy of their files, they may look to pay the hackers responsible for the attack to return their information.
The research showed companies with greater complexity in their multi-cloud infrastructure were more likely to make these payments. The mean number of clouds deployed by those organizations who paid a ransom in full was 14.06. This dropped to 12.61 for those who paid only part of the ransom and went as low as 7.22 for businesses who didn’t pay at all.
In fact, only 20% of businesses with fewer than five clouds paid a ransom in full, 44% for those with more than 20. This compares with 57% of the under-fives paying nothing to their hackers and just 17% of the over-20s.
Slow recovery times
Complexity in cloud architectures was also shown to have a significant impact on a business’s ability to recover following a ransomware attack. While 43% of those businesses with fewer than five cloud providers in their infrastructure saw their business operations disrupted by less than one day, only 18% of those with more than 20 were as fast to return to normal.
Moreover, 39% of the over-20s took 5-10 days to get back on track, with just 16% of the under-fives having to wait so long.
Inability to restore data
Furthermore, according to the findings of the research, greater complexity in an organization’s cloud infrastructure, also made it slightly less likely that they would ever be able to restore their data in the event of a ransomware attack.
While 44% of businesses with fewer than five cloud providers were able to restore 90% or more of their data, just 40% of enterprises building their infrastructure on more than 20 cloud services were able to say the same.
John Abel, SVP and CIO at Veritas said: “The benefits of hybrid multi-cloud are increasingly being recognised in businesses around the world. In order to drive the best experience, at the best price, organizations are choosing best-of-breed cloud solutions in their production environments, and the average company today is now using nearly 12 different cloud providers to drive their digital transformation.
“However, our research shows many businesses’ data protection strategies aren’t keeping pace with the levels of complexity they’re introducing and, as a result, they’re feeling the impact of ransomware more acutely.
“In order to insulate themselves from the financial and reputational damage of ransomware, organizations need to look to data protection solutions that can span their increasingly heterogenous infrastructures, no matter how complex they may be.”
Businesses recognize the challenge
The research revealed that many businesses are aware of the challenge they face, with just 36% of respondents believing their security had kept pace with the complexity in their infrastructure.
The top concern as a result of this complexity, as stated by businesses, was the increased risk of external attack, cited by 37% of all participants in the research.
Abel continued: “We’ve heard from our customers that, as part of their response to COVID, they rapidly accelerated their journey to the cloud. Many organizations needed to empower homeworking across a wider portfolio of applications than ever before and, with limited access to their on-premise IT infrastructure, turned to cloud deployments to meet their needs.
“We’re seeing a lag between the high-velocity expansion of the threat surface that comes with increased multi-cloud adoption, and the deployment of data protection solutions needed to secure them. Our research shows some businesses are investing to close that resiliency gap – but unless this is done at greater speed, companies will remain vulnerable.”
Need for investment
46% of businesses shared they had increased their budgets for security since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic. There was a correlation between this elevated level of investment and the ability to restore data in the wake of an attack: 47% of those spending more since the Coronavirus outbreak were able to restore 90% or more of their data, compared with just 36% of those spending less.
The results suggest there is more to be done though, with the average business being able to restore only 80% of its data.
Back to basics
While the research indicates organizations need to more comprehensively protect data in their complex cloud infrastructures, the survey also highlighted the need to get the basics of data protection right too.
Only 55% of respondents could claim they have offline backups in place, even though those who do are more likely to be able to restore more than 90% of their data. Those with multiple copies of data were also better able to restore the lion’s share of their data.
Forty-nine percent of those with three or more copies of their files were able to restore 90% or more of their information, compared with just 37% of those with only two.
The three most common data protection tools to have been deployed amongst respondents who had avoided paying ransoms were: anti-virus, backup and security monitoring, in that order.
The safest countries to be in to avoid ransomware attacks, the research revealed, were Poland and Hungary. Just 24% of businesses in Poland had been on the receiving end of a ransomware attack, and the average company in Hungary had only experienced 0.52 attacks ever.
The highest incident of attack was in India, where 77% of businesses had succumbed to ransomware, and the average organization had been hit by 5.27 attacks.
A Hamilton Beach Smart Coffee Maker that could eavesdrop, an Amazon Halo fitness tracker that measures the tone of your voice, and a robot-building kit that puts your kid’s privacy at risk are among the 37 creepiest holiday gifts of 2020 according to Mozilla.
Researchers reviewed 136 popular connected gifts available for purchase in the United States across seven categories: toys & games; smart home; entertainment; wearables; health & exercise; pets; and home office.
They combed through privacy policies, pored over product and app features, and quizzed companies in order to answer questions like: Can this product’s camera, microphone, or GPS snoop on me? What data does the device collect and where does it go? What is the company’s known track record for protecting users’ data?”
The guide includes a “Best Of” category, which singles out products that get privacy and security right, while a “Privacy Not Included” warning icon alerts consumers when a product has especially problematic privacy practices.
Meeting minimum security standards
It also identifies which products meet Mozilla’s Minimum Security Standards, such as using encryption and requiring users to change the default password if a password is needed. For the first time, Mozilla also notes which products use AI to make decisions about consumers.
“Holiday gifts are getting ‘smarter’ each year: from watches that collect more and more health data, to drones with GPS, to home security cameras connected to the cloud,” said Ashley Boyd, Mozilla’s Vice President of Advocacy.
“Unfortunately, these gifts are often getting creepier, too. Poor security standards and privacy practices can mean that your connected gift isn’t bringing joy, but rather prying eyes and security vulnerabilities.”
Boyd added: “Privacy Not Included helps consumers prioritize privacy and security when shopping. The guide also keeps companies on their toes, calling out privacy flaws and applauding privacy features.”
What are the products?
37 products were branded with a “Privacy Not Included” warning label including: Amazon Halo, Dyson Pure Cool, Facebook Portal, Hamilton Beach Smart Coffee Maker, Livescribe Smartpens, NordicTrack T Series Treadmills, Oculus Quest 2 VR Sets, Schlage Encode Smart WiFi Deadbolt, Whistle Go Dog Trackers, Ubtech Jimu Robot Kits, Roku Streaming Sticks, and The Mirror
22 products were awarded “Best Of” for exceptional privacy and security practices, including: Apple Homepod, Apple iPad, Apple TV 4K, Apple Watch 6, Apple Air Pods & Air Pods Pro, Arlo Security Cams, Arlo Video Doorbell, Eufy Security Cams, Eufy Video Doorbell, iRobot Roomba i Series, iRobot Roomba s Series, Garmin Forerunner Series, Garmin Venu watch, Garmin Index Smart Scale, Garmin Vivo Series, Jabra Elite Active 85T, Kano Coding Kits, Withings Thermo, Withings Body Smart Scales, Petcube Play 2 & Bites 2, Sonos SL One, and Findster Duo+ GPS pet tracker
A handful of leading brands, like Apple, Garmin, and Eufy, are excelling at improving privacy across their product lines, while other top companies, like Amazon, Huawei, and Roku, are consistently failing to protect consumers.
Apple products don’t share or sell your data. They take special care to make sure your Siri requests aren’t associated with you. And after facing backlash in 2019, Apple doesn’t automatically opt-in users to human voice review.
Eufy Security Cameras are especially trustworthy. Footage is stored locally rather than in the cloud, and is protected by military-grade encryption. Further, Eufy doesn’t sell their customer lists.
Roku is a privacy nightmare. The company tracks just about everything you do — and then shares it widely. Roku shares your personal data with advertisers and other third parties, it targets you with ads, it builds profiles about you, and more.
Amazon’s Halo Fitness Tracker is especially troubling. It’s packed full of sensors and microphones. It uses machine learning to measure the tone, energy, and positivity of your voice. And it asks you to take pictures of yourself in your underwear so it can track your body fat.
Tech companies want a monopoly on your smart products
Big companies like Amazon and Google are offering a family of networked devices, pushing consumers to buy into one company. For instance: Nest users now have to migrate over to a Google-only platform. Google is acquiring Fitbit.
And Amazon recently announced it’s moving into the wearable technology space. These companies realize that the more data they have on people’s lives, the more lucrative their products can be.
Products are getting creepier, even as they get more secure
Many companies — especially big ones like Google and Facebook — are improving security. But that doesn’t mean those products aren’t invasive. Smart speakers, watches, and other devices are reaching farther into our lives, monitoring our homes, bodies, and travel. And often, consumers don’t have insight or control over the data that’s collected.
Connected toys and pet products are particularly creepy. Amazon’s KidKraft Kitchen & Market is made for kids as young as three — but there’s no transparency into what data it collects. Meanwhile, devices like the Dogness iPet Robot put a mobile, internet-connected camera and microphone in your house — without using encryption.
The pandemic is reshaping some data sharing for the better. Products like the Oura Ring and Kinsa smart thermometer can share anonymized data with researchers and scientists to help track public health and coronavirus outbreaks. This is a positive development — data sharing for the public interest, not just profit.
It is a mathematical certainty that data is more protected by communication products that provide end-to-end encryption (E2EE).
Yet, many CISOs are required to prioritize regulatory requirements before data protection when considering the corporate use of E2EE communications. Most Fortune 1000 compliance and security teams have the ability to access employee accounts on their enterprise communications platform to monitor activity and investigate bad actors. This access is often required in highly regulated industries and E2EE is perceived as blocking that critical corporate access.
Unfortunately for enterprise security and compliance teams in most companies, unsanctioned communications platforms like WhatsApp are being used outside to conduct sensitive business in contravention of corporate policies. Just recently Morgan Stanley executives were removed from the firm for using WhatsApp.
Employees have come to understand that their IT, compliance and security teams are not the only ones who have special access to their communications. They know that Slack, Microsoft, Google, etc., can also access their data and communications. As such, many have turned to consumer E2EE products because they are not comfortable conducting sensitive business on systems where the service provider is both listening and responsible for security.
Why consumer apps running rampant is bad for business
Taking sensitive business to consumer products is risky. These consumer-grade platforms are not purpose-built for secure and compliant communications. They prioritize engagement and entertainment resulting in an ongoing pattern of security flaws, like person-in-the-middle attacks and remote code execution vulnerabilities. WhatsApp users have borne the brunt of these security vulnerabilities for years.
CISOs have been left to choose between turning a blind eye to employees using consumer E2EE products like WhatsApp or, worse yet, relenting and creating policy exceptions that they hope will placate regulators. Yet this approach is an endorsement of long-term use of non-compliant and insecure consumer products.
End-to-end encryption is more flexible than you think
Corporate security teams have operated under the misconception that E2EE is rigid. That not having a backdoor implies that there is only a one-size-fits-all implementation of the world’s most reliable cryptography. In reality, E2EE is flexible and can be deployed in concert with corporate policies and industry regulations.
CISOs don’t need to choose between compliance and strong encryption. Organizations, regardless of industry, can use E2EE that adheres to regulations, internal policies and integrates with IT workflows. This means that the corporate decision to use E2EE can be focused on protecting data from adversaries, competitors and service providers, instead of a fear of breaking the rules.
Choosing an E2EE-enabled communications platform
When it comes to choosing an E2EE-enabled communications platform, security professionals need to assess vendors’ claims, capabilities and motivations. While some mainstream platforms advertise E2EE, they only encrypt the traffic from endpoint to server. This is called Client-to-Server encryption (C2S). This happened most notably with Zoom earlier this year when they sold their product as E2EE.
Most reasonable security professionals agree this was not a malicious attempt to trick end users, rather a genuine lack of cryptographic understanding and sophistication. The company decided that a green lock symbol would make end users feel good – despite a C2S architecture that was prone to person-in-the-middle attacks.
Providers who are not in the business of securing critical user information will almost certainly make claims they do not understand and ship solutions that “don’t suck” rather than serious security technology.
CISOs who embrace E2EE will benefit from the certainty of math. It’s important to ensure that the service provider is capable of, and committed to, providing true E2EE.
There are three important pillars to a strong E2EE solution:
- Both the cryptographic protocols and results from third-party security reviews are public
- Their servers do not store data; and
- The service provider’s business model isn’t reliant upon access to customer data
This is to say that the CISO’s zero trust security policy should be extended to the service provider. If your Unified Communications service provider can access, mine and analyze your data, then they are an attack surface. We know that this access can lead to unauthorized access. Strong E2EE eliminates the service provider risk with mathematical certainty.
Compliance-ready E2EE is a relatively new phenomenon. But it is more important than ever for CISOs to weigh the risk of giving service providers access to all of their company’s data and the unparalleled benefits of taking control of their data while adhering to corporate compliance requirements.
When it comes to providing no-compromise security for enterprise communications, E2EE is a must-have for organizations, and now implementing it can be done without breaking the rules. Further, when organizations deploy enterprise E2EE with forethought they can pull end users off dangerous products like WhatsApp, We Chat and Telegram by giving their employees the security and privacy they need and deserve.
43% of C-suite executives and 12% of small business owners (SBOs) have experienced a data breach, according to Shred-it.
While businesses are getting better at protecting their customers’ personal and sensitive information, their focus on security training and protocols has declined in the last year. This decline could pose issues for businesses, as 83% of consumers say they prefer to do business with companies who prioritize protecting their physical and digital data.
The findings reinforce the need for business owners to have data protection policies in place as threats to data security, both physical (including paper documents, laptop computers or external hard drives) and digital (including malware, ransomware and phishing scams), have outpaced efforts and investments to combat them.
The report, which was completed prior to COVID-19, also exposes that more focus is needed around information security in the home, where C-suites and SBOs feel the risk of a data breach is higher.
While advancements in technology have allowed businesses to move their information to the cloud, only 7% of C-suites and 18% of SBOs operate in a paperless environment. Businesses still consume vast amounts of paper, dispelling the myth of offices going digital and signaling a need for oversight of physical information and data security.
Having policies in place can mitigate the risk of physical security breaches
C-suites and SBOs indicated external threats from vendors or contractors (25% C-suites; 18% SBOs) and physical loss or theft of sensitive information (22% C-suites, 19% SBOs) are the top information security threats facing their business.
Yet, the number of organizations with a known and understood policy for storing and disposing of confidential paper documents adhered to by all employees has declined 13% for C-suites (73% in 2019 to 60% in 2020) and 11% for SBOs (57% in 2019 to 46% in 2020).
In addition, 49% of SBOs have no policy in place for disposing of confidential information on end-of-life electronic devices.
While the work-from-home trend has risen over the years, the COVID-19 pandemic abruptly launched employees into work-from-home status, many without supporting policies.
77% of C-suites and 53% of SBOs had employees who regularly or periodically work off-site. Despite this trend, 53% of C-suites and 41% of SBOs have remote work policies in place that are strictly adhered to by employees working remotely (down 18% from 71% in 2019 for C-suites; down 8% from 49% in 2019 for SBOs).
“As we adjust to our new normal in the workplace, or at home, it’s crucial that policies are adapted to align with these changes and protect sensitive information,” said Cindy Miller, president and CEO, Stericycle.
“As information security threats grow, it’s more important than ever that we help businesses and communities protect valuable documents and data from the risks of an information breach.”
Better training on security procedures and policies is needed
When it comes to training, 24% of C-suites and 54% of SBOs reported having no regular employee training on information security procedures or policies.
Additionally, the number of organizations that regularly train employees on how to identify common cyber-attack tactics, such as phishing, ransomware or other malicious software, declined 6% for C-suites (from 88% in 2019 to 82% in 2020) and 7% for SBOs (from 52% in 2019 to 45% in 2020).
“As a society, we are facing new information security challenges every day, from the rise of remote working to increased consumer concern,” said Michael Borromeo, VP of data protection, Stericycle.
“To protect businesses now and for the long haul, it’s instrumental that leaders reevaluate information security training and protocols to adjust to our changing world and maintain consumer trust.”
Businesses deal with data security and declining consumer trust
While many U.S. businesses feel they are getting better at protecting sensitive information, declining consumer trust and increased expectations may impact the bottom line.
- 86% of consumers are concerned that private, personal information about them is present on the internet.
- 24% of consumers would stop doing business with a company if their personal information was compromised in a data breach. Beyond losing their loyalty, consumers would lose trust in the business (31%) and demand to know what the business is doing to prevent future breaches (31%).
- 38% consumers trust that all physical and digital data breaches are properly disclosed to consumers (up 4% from 34% in 2019).
Businesses are reducing focus on policies for disposing of confidential information despite physical theft and vendor threats being top risks.
- While 60% of C-suites and 46% of SBOs have a known and understood policy for storing and disposing of confidential paper documents, strict employee adherence to these policies has declined from 2019. Down 13% from 73% in 2019 for C-suites and down 11% from 57% in 2019 for SBOs.
- Additionally, 10% of C-suites and 38% of SBOs admit they have no policies in place for disposing of confidential paper documents, up 4% for C-suites (from 10% in 2019) and 8% for SBOs (from 30% in 2019).
Remote work has increased over the years, but information security policies are lacking.
- Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, 45% of small businesses did not have a policy for storing and disposing of confidential information when employees work off-site from the office.
- A secondary study found that 75% of employees own a home printer that they use to print work documents and 43% print work-related documents weekly.
Trustwave released a report which depicts how technology trends, compromise risks and regulations are shaping how organizations’ data is stored and protected.
Data protection strategy
The report is based on a recent survey of 966 full-time IT professionals who are cybersecurity decision makers or security influencers within their organizations.
Over 75% of respondents work in organizations with over 500 employees in key geographic regions including the U.S., U.K., Australia and Singapore.
“Our findings illustrate organizations are under enormous pressure to secure data as workloads migrate off-premises, attacks on cloud services increases and ransomware evolves. Gaining complete visibility of data either at rest or in motion and eliminating threats as they occur are top cybersecurity challenges all industries are facing.”
More sensitive data moving to the cloud
Types of data organizations are moving into the cloud have become increasingly sensitive, therefore a solid data protection strategy is crucial. Ninety-six percent of total respondents stated they plan to move sensitive data to the cloud over the next two years with 52% planning to include highly sensitive data with Australia at 57% leading the regions surveyed.
Not surprisingly, when asked to rate the importance of securing data regarding digital transformation initiatives, an average score of 4.6 out of a possible high of five was tallied.
Hybrid cloud model driving digital transformation and data storage
Of those surveyed, most at 55% use both on-premises and public cloud to store data with 17% using public cloud only. Singapore organizations use the hybrid cloud model most frequently at 73% or 18% higher than the average and U.S. organizations employ it the least at 45%.
Government respondents store data on-premises only the most at 39% or 11% higher than average. Additionally, 48% of respondents stored data using the hybrid cloud model during a recent digital transformation project with only 29% relying solely on their own databases.
Most organizations use multiple cloud services
Seventy percent of organizations surveyed were found to use between two and four public cloud services and 12% use five or more. At 14%, the U.S. had the most instances of using five or more public cloud services followed by the U.K. at 13%, Australia at 9% and Singapore at 9%. Only 18% of organizations queried use zero or just one public cloud service.
Perceived threats do not match actual incidents
Thirty-eight percent of organizations are most concerned with malware and ransomware followed by phishing and social engineering at 18%, application threats 14%, insider threats at 9%, privilege escalation at 7% and misconfiguration attack at 6%.
Interestingly, when asked about actual threats experienced, phishing and social engineering came in first at 27% followed by malware and ransomware at 25%. The U.K. and Singapore experienced the most phishing and social engineering incidents at 32% and 31% and the U.S. and Australia experienced the most malware and ransomware attacks at 30% and 25%.
Respondents in the government sector had the highest incidents of insider threats at 13% or 5% above the average.
Patching practices show room for improvement
A resounding 96% of respondents have patching policies in place, however, of those, 71% rely on automated patching and 29% employ manual patching. Overall, 61% of organizations patched within 24 hours and 28% patched between 24 and 48 hours.
The highest percentage patching within a 24-hour window came from Australia at 66% and the U.K. at 61%. Unfortunately, 4% of organizations took a week to over a month to patch.
Reliance on automation driving key security processes
In addition to a high percentage of organizations using automated patching processes, findings show 89% of respondents employ automation to check for overprivileged users or lock down access credentials once an individual has left their job or changed roles.
This finding correlates to low concern for insider threats and data compromise due to privilege escalation according to the survey. Organizations must exercise caution when assuming removal of user access to applications to also include databases, which is often not the case.
Data regulations having minor impact on database security strategies
These findings may suggest a lack of alignment between information technology and other departments, such as legal, responsible for helping ensure stipulations like ‘the right to be forgotten’ are properly enforced to avoid severe penalties.
Small teams with big responsibilities
Of those surveyed, 47% had a security team size of only six to 15 members. Respondents from Singapore had the smallest teams with 47% reporting between one and ten members and the U.S. had the largest teams with 22% reporting team size of 21 or more, 2% higher than the average.
Thirty-two percent of government respondents surprisingly run security operations with teams between just six and ten members.
Researchers from the University of Ottawa, in collaboration with Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and Bar-Ilan University scientists, have been able to create optical framed knots in the laboratory that could potentially be applied in modern technologies.
Top view of the framed knots generated in this work
Their work opens the door to new methods of distributing secret cryptographic keys – used to encrypt and decrypt data, ensure secure communication and protect private information.
“This is fundamentally important, in particular from a topology-focused perspective, since framed knots provide a platform for topological quantum computations,” explained senior author, Professor Ebrahim Karimi, Canada Research Chair in Structured Light at the University of Ottawa.
“In addition, we used these non-trivial optical structures as information carriers and developed a security protocol for classical communication where information is encoded within these framed knots.”
The concept of framed knots
The researchers suggest a simple do-it-yourself lesson to help us better understand framed knots, those three-dimensional objects that can also be described as a surface.
“Take a narrow strip of a paper and try to make a knot,” said first author Hugo Larocque, uOttawa alumnus and current PhD student at MIT.
“The resulting object is referred to as a framed knot and has very interesting and important mathematical features.”
The group tried to achieve the same result but within an optical beam, which presents a higher level of difficulty. After a few tries (and knots that looked more like knotted strings), the group came up with what they were looking for: a knotted ribbon structure that is quintessential to framed knots.
“In order to add this ribbon, our group relied on beam-shaping techniques manipulating the vectorial nature of light,” explained Hugo Larocque. “By modifying the oscillation direction of the light field along an “unframed” optical knot, we were able to assign a frame to the latter by “gluing” together the lines traced out by these oscillating fields.”
According to the researchers, structured light beams are being widely exploited for encoding and distributing information.
“So far, these applications have been limited to physical quantities which can be recognized by observing the beam at a given position,” said uOttawa Postdoctoral Fellow and co-author of this study, Dr. Alessio D’Errico.
“Our work shows that the number of twists in the ribbon orientation in conjunction with prime number factorization can be used to extract a so-called “braid representation” of the knot.”
“The structural features of these objects can be used to specify quantum information processing programs,” added Hugo Larocque. “In a situation where this program would want to be kept secret while disseminating it between various parties, one would need a means of encrypting this “braid” and later deciphering it.
“Our work addresses this issue by proposing to use our optical framed knot as an encryption object for these programs which can later be recovered by the braid extraction method that we also introduced.”
“For the first time, these complicated 3D structures have been exploited to develop new methods for the distribution of secret cryptographic keys. Moreover, there is a wide and strong interest in exploiting topological concepts in quantum computation, communication and dissipation-free electronics. Knots are described by specific topological properties too, which were not considered so far for cryptographic protocols.”
“Current technologies give us the possibility to manipulate, with high accuracy, the different features characterizing a light beam, such as intensity, phase, wavelength and polarization,” said Larocque.
“This allows to encode and decode information with all-optical methods. Quantum and classical cryptographic protocols have been devised exploiting these different degrees of freedom.”
“Our work opens the way to the use of more complex topological structures hidden in the propagation of a laser beam for distributing secret cryptographic keys.”
“Moreover, the experimental and theoretical techniques we developed may help find new experimental approaches to topological quantum computation, which promises to surpass noise-related issues in current quantum computing technologies,” added Dr. Ebrahim Karimi.
The importance of privacy and data protection is a critical issue for organizations as it transcends beyond legal departments to the forefront of an organization’s strategic priorities.
A FairWarning research, based on survey results from more than 550 global privacy and data protection, IT, and compliance professionals outlines the characteristics and behaviors of advanced privacy and data protection teams.
By examining the trends of privacy adoption and maturity across industries, the research uncovers adjustments that security and privacy leaders need to make to better protect their organization’s data.
The prevalence of data and privacy attacks
Insights from the research reinforce the importance of privacy and data protection as 67% of responding organizations documented at least one privacy incident within the past three years, and over 24% of those experienced 30 or more.
Additionally, 50% of all respondents reported at least one data breach in the last three years, with 10% reporting 30 or more.
Overall immaturity of privacy programs
Despite increased regulations, breaches and privacy incidents, organizations have not rapidly accelerated the advancement of their privacy programs as 44% responded they are in the early stages of adoption and 28% are in middle stages.
Healthcare and software rise to the top
Despite an overall lack of maturity across industries, healthcare and software organizations reflect more maturity in their privacy programs, as compared to insurance, banking, government, consulting services, education institutions and academia.
Harnessing the power of data and privacy programs
Respondents understand the significant benefits of a mature privacy program as organizations experience greater gains across every area measured including: increased employee privacy awareness, mitigating data breaches, greater consumer trust, reduced privacy complaints, quality and innovation, competitive advantage, and operational efficiency.
Of note, more mature companies believe they experience the largest gain in reducing privacy complaints (30.3% higher than early stage respondents).
Attributes and habits of mature privacy and data protection programs
Companies with more mature privacy programs are more likely to have C-Suite privacy and security roles within their organization than those in the mid- to early-stages of privacy program development.
Additionally, 88.2% of advanced stage organizations know where most or all of their personally identifiable information/personal health information is located, compared to 69.5% of early stage respondents.
Importance of automated tools to monitor user activity
Insights reveal a clear distinction between the maturity levels of privacy programs and related benefits of automated tools as 54% of respondents with more mature programs have implemented this type of technology compared with only 28.1% in early stage development.
Automated tools enable organizations to monitor all user activity in applications and efficiently identify anomalous activity that signals a breach or privacy violation.
“It is exciting to see healthcare at the top when it comes to privacy maturity. However, as we dig deeper into the data, we find that 37% of respondents with 30 or more breaches are from healthcare, indicating that there is still more work to be done.
“This study highlights useful guidance on steps all organizations can take regardless of industry or size to advance their program and ensure they are at the forefront of privacy and data protection.”
“As the research has demonstrated, it is imperative that security and privacy professionals recognize the importance of implementing privacy and data protection programs to not only reduce privacy complaints and data breaches, but increase operational efficiency.”
Organizations are rapidly increasing the size, scope and scale of their data protection infrastructure, reflected in dramatic rises in adoption of public key infrastructure (PKI) across enterprises worldwide, according to Entrust research.
PKI is at the core of nearly every IT infrastructure, enabling security for critical digital initiatives such as cloud, mobile device deployment, identities and the IoT.
The annual study is based on feedback from more than 1,900 IT security professionals in 17 countries.
IoT, authentication and cloud, top drivers in PKI usage growth
As organizations become more dependent on digital information and face increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks, they rely on PKI to control access to data and ascertain the identities of people, systems and devices on a mass scale.
IoT is the fastest growing trend driving PKI application deployment, up 26 percent over the past five years to 47 percent in 2020, with cloud-based services the second highest driver cited by 44 percent of respondents.
PKI usage surging for cloud and authentication use cases
TLS/SSL certificates for public-facing websites and services are the most often cited use case for PKI credentials (84 percent of respondents).
Public cloud-based applications saw the fastest year-over-year growth, cited by 82 percent, up 27 percent from 2019, followed by enterprise user authentication by 70 percent of respondents, an increase of 19 percent over 2019. All underscore the critical need of PKI in supporting core enterprise applications.
The average number of certificates an organization needs to manage grew 43 percent in the 2020 study over the previous year, from 39,197 to 56,192 certificates, highlighting a pivotal requirement for enterprise certificate management.
The rise is likely driven by the industry transition to shorter certificate validity periods, and the sharp growth in cloud and enterprise user authentication use cases.
Challenges, change and uncertainty
The study found that IT security professionals are confronting new challenges to enabling applications to use PKI. 52 percent cited lack of visibility of an existing PKI’s security capabilities as their top challenge, an increase of 16 percent over the 2019 study.
This issue underscores the lack of cybersecurity expertise available within even the most well-resourced organizations, and the need for PKI specialists who can create custom enterprise roadmaps based on security and operational best practices.
Respondents also cited inability to change legacy applications and the inability of their existing PKIs to support new applications as critical challenges – both at 51 percent.
When it comes to deploying and managing a PKI, IT security professionals are most challenged by organizational issues such as no clear ownership, insufficient skills and insufficient resources.
PKI deployment figures from the study clearly indicate a trend toward more diversified approaches, with as-a-service offerings even becoming more prevalent than on-premise offerings in some countries.
The two greatest areas of PKI change and uncertainty come from new applications such as IoT (52 percent of respondents) and external mandates and standards (49 percent). The regulatory environment is also increasingly driving deployment of applications that use PKI, cited by 24 percent of respondents.
Security practices have not kept pace with growth
In the next two years, an estimated average of 41 percent of IoT devices will rely primarily on digital certificates for identification and authentication. Encryption for IoT devices, platforms and data repositories, while growing, is at just 33 percent – a potential exposure point for sensitive data.
Respondents cited several threats to IoT security, including altering the function of IoT devices through malware or other attacks (68 percent) and remote control of a device by an unauthorized user (54 percent).
However, respondents rated controls relevant to malware protection – like securely delivering patches and updates to IoT devices – last on a list of the five most important IoT security capabilities.
The US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) recommends that cryptographic modules for certificate authorities (CAs), key recovery servers and OCSP responders should be validated to FIPS 140-2 level 3 or higher.
Thirty-nine percent of respondents in this study use hardware security modules (HSMs) to secure their PKIs, most often to manage the private keys for their root, issuing, or policy CAs. Yet only 12 percent of respondents indicate the use of HSMs in their OSCP installations, demonstrating a significant gap between best practices and observed practices.
“PKI underpins the security of both the business and the consumer world, from digitally signing transactions and applications to prove the source as well as integrity, to supporting the authentication of smart phones, games consoles, citizen passports, mass transit ticketing and mobile banking, says Larry Ponemon, founder of the Ponemon Institute.
“The 2020 Global PKI and IoT Trends Study shows a surge in the use of PKI credentials for cloud-based applications and enterprise user authentication, underscoring the criticality of PKI in supporting core enterprise applications.”
“We are seeing increasing reliance on PKI juxtaposed with struggles by internal teams to adapt it to new market needs — driving changes to traditional PKI deployment models and methods,” says John Grimm, vice president strategy for digital solutions at Entrust.
“In newer areas like IoT, enterprises are clearly failing to prioritize security mechanisms like firmware signing that would counter the most urgent threats, such as malware.
“And with the massive increase in certificates issued and acquired found in this year’s study, the importance of automated certificate management, a flexible PKI deployment approach, and strong best practice-based security including HSMs has never been greater.”
We live in the age of data. We are constantly producing it, analyzing it, figuring out how to store and protect it, and, hopefully, using it to refine business practices. Unfortunately, 58% of organizations make decisions based on outdated data.
While enterprises are rapidly deploying technologies for real-time analytics, machine learning and IoT, they are still utilizing legacy storage solutions that are not designed for such data-intensive workloads.
To select a suitable data storage for your business, you need to think about a variety of factors. We’ve talked to several industry leaders to get their insight on the topic.
Phil Bullinger, SVP and General Manager, Data Center Business Unit, Western Digital
Selecting the right data storage solution for your enterprise requires evaluating and balancing many factors. The most important is aligning the performance and capabilities of the storage system with your critical workloads and their specific bandwidth, application latency and data availability requirements. For example, if your business wants to gain greater insight and value from data through AI, your storage system should be designed to support the accelerated performance and scale requirements of analytics workloads.
Storage systems that maximize the performance potential of solid state drives (SSDs) and the efficiency and scalability of hard disk drives (HDDs) provide the flexibility and configurability to meet a wide range of application workloads.
Your applications should also drive the essential architecture of your storage system, whether directly connected or networked, whether required to store and deliver data as blocks, files, objects or all three, and whether the storage system must efficiently support a wide range of workloads while prioritizing the performance of the most demanding applications.
Consideration should be given to your overall IT data management architecture to support the scalability, data protection, and business continuity assurance required for your enterprise, spanning from core data centers to those distributed at or near the edge and endpoints of your enterprise operations, and integration with your cloud-resident applications, compute and data storage services and resources.
Ben Gitenstein, VP of Product Management, Qumulo
When searching for the right data storage solution to support your organizational needs today and in the future, it’s important to select a solution that is trusted, scalable to secure demanding workloads of any size, and ensures optimal performance of applications and workloads both on premises and in complex, multi- cloud environments.
With the recent pandemic, organizations are digitally transforming faster than ever before, and leveraging the cloud to conduct business. This makes it more important than ever that your storage solution has built in tools for data management across this ecosystem.
When evaluating storage options, be sure to do your homework and ask the right questions. Is it a trusted provider? Would it integrate well within my existing technology infrastructure? Your storage solution should be easy to manage and meet the scale, performance and cloud requirements for any data environment and across multi-cloud environments.
Also, be sure the storage solution gives IT control in how they manage storage capacity needs and delivers real-time insight into analytics and usage patterns so they can make smart storage allocation decisions and maximize an organizations’ storage budget.
David Huskisson, Senior Solutions Manager, Pure Storage
Data backup and disaster recovery features are critically important when selecting a storage solution for your business, as now no organization is immune to ransomware attacks. When systems go down, they need to be recovered as quickly and safely as possibly.
Look for solutions that offer simplicity in management, can ensure backups are viable even when admin credentials are compromised, and can be restored quickly enough to greatly reduce major organizational or financial impact.
Storage solutions that are purpose-built to handle unstructured data are a strong place to start. By definition, unstructured data means unpredictable data that can take any form, size or shape, and can be accessed in any pattern. These capabilities can accelerate small, large, random or sequential data, and consolidate a wide range of workloads on a unified fast file and object storage platform. It should maintain its performance even as the amount of data grows.
If you have an existing backup product, you don’t need to rip and replace it. There are storage platforms with robust integrations that work seamlessly with existing solutions and offer a wide range of data-protection architectures so you can ensure business continuity amid changes.
Tunio Zafer, CEO, pCloud
Bear in mind: your security team needs to assist. Answer these questions to find the right solution: Do you need ‘cold’ storage or cloud storage? If you’re looking to only store files for backup, you need a cloud backup service. If you’re looking to store, edit and share, go for cloud storage. Where are their storage servers located? If your business is located in Europe, the safest choice is a storage service based in Europe.
Client-side encryption means that your data is secured on your device and is transferred already encrypted. What is their support package? At some point, you’re going to need help. A data storage service with a support package that’s included for free, answers in up to 24 hours is preferred.
Kaseya announced the results of its sixth annual IT operations benchmark report, consisting of two distinct survey audiences: IT practitioners (the IT managers and technicians working daily with technology) and IT leaders (IT directors and above).
The study surveyed 878 SMB respondents, 543 of whom were IT practitioners and 335 were IT leaders. The differences in priorities and concerns between the two audiences understandably center around aspects of their roles impacted most by COVID-19: IT leaders are currently more focused on maintaining operations while keeping IT budgets in check, whereas one of IT practitioners’ greatest struggles is maintaining productivity using limited resources.
However, many similarities also emerged for both groups, including an emphasis on IT security, data protection and the interplay between automation and productivity in 2020.
Improving security is a top priority
Although 63% of IT practitioners said they had not experienced a security breach or ransomware attack in the past three years, the increase in cyberattacks during the pandemic has cemented cybersecurity and data protection as a top priority for both groups.
More than half of IT practitioners and 60% of IT leaders listed “improving IT security” as their top priority in 2020, and more than half of respondents from both groups named “cybersecurity and data protection” as their top challenge.
But managing and working with limited budgets makes securing their company during this time difficult for IT teams. Although 73% of IT leaders are optimistic that their IT budgets will remain the same or increase in 2021, nearly one-third are still concerned about having inadequate IT budgets or resources to meet demands — a similar consideration for 32% of practitioners.
As a result of limited budgets, less than a third of practitioners are actually able to patch remote, off-network devices. This potentially exposes the entire company’s networks to higher security risks given the increase in remote workforces using personal devices or connecting to unsecured Wi-Fi connections during the pandemic.
Investing in IT automation improves productivity and reduces costs
In addition to potentially making companies vulnerable to security risks, slashed budgets can also impact an IT team’s productivity. Luckily, both IT practitioners and leaders are on the same page about the solution to this problem in 2020: automation.
IT practitioners who listed “increasing IT productivity through automation” and IT leaders who named “reducing IT costs” are simply pursuing the same goal, since higher productivity ultimately reduces operating costs.
When asked about the technologies IT leaders are planning to invest in for 2021, 60% said “IT automation.” Likewise, 38% of practitioners named “automation of IT processes” as a top use case for their endpoint management solution.
Although consumers remain concerned about sharing personal data with companies, the results of a Privitar survey highlight an opportunity for businesses to take a leadership role and build brand loyalty by protecting their customers.
The report found that more than three-quarters of respondents are concerned or very concerned about protecting their personal data, with 42 percent of consumers saying they wouldn’t share sensitive data (e.g. name, address, email address, phone number, location information, health information, banking information, social security number) with a business for any reason.
As consumers grow increasingly apprehensive when it comes to their data, business success will depend on an organizations’ ability to prioritize and successfully execute on privacy initiatives.
Disconnect between consumer sentiment and actions surrounding data protection
When it comes to the management of their data, many consumers aren’t fully aware of how brands are securing their personal information. According to the survey, 43 percent of consumers don’t know if they’ve worked with a business that has been impacted by a data breach.
When it comes to privacy notices, 28 percent admit to not reading privacy notices at all and 42 percent admitted to only skimming the text. These findings point to a growing sentiment that data privacy should be the responsibility of the business – not the customer. With this, businesses have a tremendous opportunity to make data privacy a differentiator and way to build long-term loyalty.
Pandemic creating more data sharing opportunities, still consumers are wary
Despite the growing advancements on the data protection front, 51 percent of consumers surveyed said they are still not comfortable sharing their personal information. One-third of respondents said they are most concerned about it being stolen in a breach, with another 26 percent worried about it being shared with a third party.
In the midst of the growing pandemic, COVID-19 tracking, tracing, containment and research depends on citizens opting in to share their personal data. However, the research shows that consumers are not interested in sharing their information.
When specifically asked about sharing healthcare data, only 27 percent would share health data for healthcare advancements and research. Another 21 percent of consumers surveyed would share health data for contact tracing purposes.
As data becomes more valuable to combat the pandemic, companies must provide consumers with more background and reasoning as to why they’re collecting data – and how they plan to protect it.
Upcoming U.S. elections driving consumer awareness of data privacy
As the debate grows louder across the nation, 73 percent of consumers think that there should be more government oversight at the federal and/or state/local levels. While legislation can take years to pass, it’s important for businesses to overhaul their technology and processes now to quickly address consumers’ concerns and keep business running.
Businesses must drive data privacy action
Companies rely on brand loyalty to keep their operations up and running. While often referring to affordable costs and personalization as a means to keeping business moving, many overlook the importance of instilling a more personal sense of trust within their customer base.
When working with a business, 40 percent of consumers think the brand’s trustworthiness is most important when it comes to brand loyalty and 31 percent say it’s the brand’s commitment to protecting their data.
Evenly matched up with the 30 percent of consumers who believe customer service matters most, the results prove that data protection is just as critical to keeping customers coming back for more.
However, broken trust and lost responsibility for protecting that data have severe consequences, with 24 percent saying they have either stopped doing business or done less business with a company after it was breached.
As markets grow increasingly competitive in a fluctuating economy, it’s critical for businesses to keep customer loyalty high – and as such, be more open and transparent with how they’re using personal data.
“The global COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the importance of the trust relationship companies and governments need to build with consumers in an increasingly digital world,” said Jason du Preez, CEO, Privitar.
“The results of the survey affirm the growing need for brands to focus on building and maintaining this trust, starting first and foremost with protecting customer data. As more businesses utilize the cloud to enable data driven insights, a firm commitment to data privacy will help to ensure long-term loyalty, consumer satisfaction and shareholder value.”
There are unrealized gaps between the rate of implementation or operation and the effective use of cloud security access brokers (CASB) within the enterprise, according to a global Cloud Security Alliance survey of more than 200 IT and security professionals from a variety of organization sizes and locations.
Utilize cloud security solutions
“CASB solutions have been underutilized on all the pillars but in particular on the compliance, data security, and threat protection capabilities within the service,” said Hillary Baron, lead author and research analyst, Cloud Security Alliance.
“It’s clear that training and knowledge of how to use the products need to be made a priority if CASBs are to become effective as a service or solution,” Baron concluded.
The paper found that while nearly 90% of the organizations surveyed are already using or researching the use of a CASB, 50% don’t have the staffing to fully utilize cloud security solutions, which could be remediated by working with top CASB vendors.
CASBs have yet to become practical for remediation or prevention
More than 30% of respondents reported having to use multiple CASBs to meet their security needs and 34% find solution complexities an inhibitor in fully realizing the potential of CASB solutions.
Overall, CASBs perform well for visibility and detecting behavior anomalies in the cloud but have yet to become practical as a tool for remediation or prevention.
- 83% have security in the cloud as a top project for improvement
- 55% use their CASB to monitor user behaviors, while 53% use it to gain visibility into unauthorized access
- 38% of enterprises use their CASB for regulatory compliance while just 22% use it for internal compliance
- 55% of total respondents use multi-factor authentication that is provided by their identity provider as opposed to a standalone product in the cloud (20%)
As the shift to remote work has increased, most businesses are embracing BYOD in the workplace.
In a survey by Bitglass, 69% of respondents said that employees at their companies are allowed to use personal devices to perform their work, while some enable BYOD for contractors, partners, customers, and suppliers.
While the use of personal devices in the work environment is growing rapidly, many are unprepared to balance security with productivity. When asked for their main BYOD security concerns, 63% of respondents said data leakage, 53% said unauthorized access to data and systems, and 52% said malware infections.
Lack of proper steps to protect corporate data
Despite the concerns, the research shows that organizations are allowing BYOD without taking the proper steps to protect corporate data. 51% of the surveyed organizations lack any visibility into file sharing apps, 30% have no visibility or control over mobile enterprise messaging tools, and only 9% have cloud-based anti-malware solutions in place.
Compounding these problems are results that demonstrated that organizations need physical access to devices and even device PINs to secure them. This may be acceptable for managed endpoints, but it is a clear invasion of privacy where BYOD is enabled.
“However, the reality is that today’s work environment requires the flexibility and remote access that the use of personal devices enables. To remedy this standoff, companies need comprehensive cloud security platforms that are designed to secure any interaction between users, devices, apps, or web destinations.”