{"id":118,"date":"2006-01-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-01-09T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/01\/09\/firms-offshoring-to-india-urged-to-review-security\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:36:33","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:36:33","slug":"firms-offshoring-to-india-urged-to-review-security","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/01\/09\/firms-offshoring-to-india-urged-to-review-security\/","title":{"rendered":"Firms offshoring to India urged to review security"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>UK firms using Indian IT and back-office facilities are being urged to upgrade their security in the wake of a suspected terrorist attack on Bangalore, the country&#8217;s technology hub and a popular offshore destination for Western firms.   Indian IT trade group Nasscom said that while the country&#8217;s IT sector has implemented many security measures, the incident shows a need to review and upgrade protection.  UK firms with Indian sites should ensure they have security provisions such as metal detectors, CCTV, security guards and strict access policies, advised Peter Ryan of analyst Datamonitor.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Subramaniam Ramadorai, chief executive of Indian IT services giant TCS, said that firms should also mitigate risk by ensuring they have backup sites at multiple locations.<\/p>\n<p>Martyn Hart of the UK&#8217;s National Outsourcing Association said further attacks could cause companies to avoid developing their own sites in favour of outsourcing work to Indian service providers with established security procedures.  Further attacks could also discourage Western managers from visiting Indian sites to better integrate onshore and offshore work.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.itweek.co.uk\/itweek\/news\/2148252\/firms-offshoring-india-urged<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-118","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=118"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2605,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118\/revisions\/2605"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=118"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=118"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=118"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}