Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Comments
IT Leaders, Employees Divided on Data Security
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RyanSepe
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
4/30/2019 | 11:05:38 PM
Re: Brief them properly
Definitely provides further context to the study. I still think its important to cite that different folks see things through different lenses. These differences help provide a more concrete basis to the study and in turn validate it.
DavidHamilton
DavidHamilton,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/30/2019 | 2:24:53 AM
Brief them properly
It is expected of employees to give their answers as such because they are not security experts. They have not been properly briefed regarding what are the risks involved during their daily work habits. They answered as such because they do not know any better.
RyanSepe
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/26/2019 | 9:53:45 AM
Risk Ownership
I think two facets come into play here. Ultimately, as data owners executives of said data are more heavily responsible for securing data at the company even though the data custodians (employees) directly touch said data. Due to this they way the risks more heavily and are more inclined to support data that creates a narrative that more needs to be done to secure the data. Employees on the other hand, and I believe the term is used to be department agnostic not security centric, support a business function. Many will not stop to think of the ramifications of what they are doing until they are told by a security function that it is not best practice. Due to this ignorance it is more than likely that those individuals surveyed would be inclined to think that they are not jeopardizing company data.
REISEN1955
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
3/25/2019 | 2:38:22 PM
Han Solo and Srgt. Schultz
Solp: It's not my fault.  Schultz:  I know nothing.  Of course employees are blameless, as there is that line called UNEMPLOYMENT and so they have done nothing wrong and if they did, well, it is the corp at fault because they did not provide security controls.  It was there, so, well I had to take it with me.  You never stopped me from walking into the safe (wide open anyway) and remove cash.  



Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Practical Network Security Approaches for a Multicloud, Hybrid IT World
The report covers areas enterprises should focus on for their multicloud/hybrid cloud security strategy: -increase visibility over the environment -learning cloud-specific skills -relying on established security frameworks -re-architecting the network
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-30333
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-09
RARLAB UnRAR before 6.12 on Linux and UNIX allows directory traversal to write to files during an extract (aka unpack) operation, as demonstrated by creating a ~/.ssh/authorized_keys file. NOTE: WinRAR and Android RAR are unaffected.
CVE-2022-23066
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-09
In Solana rBPF versions 0.2.26 and 0.2.27 are affected by Incorrect Calculation which is caused by improper implementation of sdiv instruction. This can lead to the wrong execution path, resulting in huge loss in specific cases. For example, the result of a sdiv instruction may decide whether to tra...
CVE-2022-28463
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08
ImageMagick 7.1.0-27 is vulnerable to Buffer Overflow.
CVE-2022-28470
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08
marcador package in PyPI 0.1 through 0.13 included a code-execution backdoor.
CVE-2022-1620
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-08
NULL Pointer Dereference in function vim_regexec_string at regexp.c:2729 in GitHub repository vim/vim prior to 8.2.4901. NULL Pointer Dereference in function vim_regexec_string at regexp.c:2729 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted input.