Attacks/Breaches

3/7/2011
06:09 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Data Breach Costs Continue Climbing

Some of that cost may be unnecessary, a study has found.

The average cost of a data breach for a U.S. company continues to rise, having reached $7.2 million in 2010.

This represents an increase of 7% from 2009, when the average cost was found to be $6.8 million, according to Symantec which published "2010 Annual Study: U.S. Cost of a Data Breach," and the Ponemon Institute, which conducted the research.

The cost of losing data has grown for U.S. companies every year since 2006.

Larry Ponemon, founder of the Ponemon Institute, says that there was one unusual finding: A rapid response to a breach, which generally involves notifying everyone potentially affected, turns out to be more costly than a slow response.

Increasingly sophisticated data security threats and compliance pressures are pushing organizations to respond as rapidly as possible to data breaches. This is reflected in the finding that malicious attacks have become the most costly cause of breaches. But responding quickly to a breach may not be called for in every instance.

This isn't to say a slow response is always good; rather, it reflects the survey's finding that rapid notification can be a waste of money if subsequent investigation indicates some of those notified were not affected after all.

"In the world of data breaches, telling people your data is lost or stolen and then having to change that doesn't help anyone," said Ponemon in a phone interview.

Quick responders paid $268 per record, an increase of 22% from 2009, while organizations that took more time paid $174 per record, a decrease of 11% from 2009.

Symantec has created an online data breach calculator to help companies assess the potential cost and likelihood of a data breach. Not coincidentally, Symantec sells security solutions, particularly those focused on encryption.

Encryption has become more popular lately because data breach regulations often exempt companies from notification requirements if the lost data was encrypted.

This trend is partially reflected in the survey, which found: an increase in the number of organizations with an "above average IT security posture"; a decrease in breaches due to system failure, lost or stolen devices, and third-party mistakes; and more companies responding faster and putting CISOs in charge of response management.

Negligence remains the most common cause of breach incidents (41%), followed by lost or stolen portable or mobile devices (35%), malicious attacks (31%), and system failure (27%).

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Want Your Daughter to Succeed in Cyber? Call Her John
John De Santis, CEO, HyTrust,  5/16/2018
Don't Roll the Dice When Prioritizing Vulnerability Fixes
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer, Dark Reading,  5/15/2018
Why Enterprises Can't Ignore Third-Party IoT-Related Risks
Charlie Miller, Senior Vice President, The Santa Fe Group,  5/14/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "Security through obscurity"
Current Issue
How to Cope with the IT Security Skills Shortage
Most enterprises don't have all the in-house skills they need to meet the rising threat from online attackers. Here are some tips on ways to beat the shortage.
Flash Poll
[Strategic Security Report] Navigating the Threat Intelligence Maze
[Strategic Security Report] Navigating the Threat Intelligence Maze
Most enterprises are using threat intel services, but many are still figuring out how to use the data they're collecting. In this Dark Reading survey we give you a look at what they're doing today - and where they hope to go.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-11232
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-18
The etm_setup_aux function in drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm-perf.c in the Linux kernel before 4.10.2 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (panic) because a parameter is incorrectly used as a local variable.
CVE-2017-15855
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-17
In Qualcomm Android for MSM, Firefox OS for MSM, and QRD Android with all Android releases from CAF using the Linux kernel, the camera application triggers "user-memory-access" issue as the Camera CPP module Linux driver directly accesses the application provided buffer, which resides in u...
CVE-2018-3567
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-17
In Qualcomm Android for MSM, Firefox OS for MSM, and QRD Android with all Android releases from CAF using the Linux kernel, a buffer overflow vulnerability exists in WLAN while processing the HTT_T2H_MSG_TYPE_PEER_MAP or HTT_T2H_MSG_TYPE_PEER_UNMAP messages.
CVE-2018-3568
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-17
In Qualcomm Android for MSM, Firefox OS for MSM, and QRD Android with all Android releases from CAF using the Linux kernel, in __wlan_hdd_cfg80211_vendor_scan(), a buffer overwrite can potentially occur.
CVE-2018-5827
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-17
In Qualcomm Android for MSM, Firefox OS for MSM, and QRD Android with all Android releases from CAF using the Linux kernel, a buffer overflow vulnerability exists in WLAN while processing an extscan hotlist event.