IT managers now believe that cybercrime is more costly to their organisations than physical crime. Even more alarmingly, nearly three-quarters of IT managers (74 percent) believe that there are more threats from their own users. That’s according to a survey carried out by Braun Research on behalf of IBM, the company surveyed more than 2,400 IT managers in 16 countries to gauge their views on computer security. There were some stark differences between the countries: There were some stark differences between the countries: US managers were more confident that they had safeguards in place, 83 percent of them boasted that they had adequate saefguards in place to combat cybercrime, that’s compared to just 53 percent of their international counterparts who could make such a claim.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
US IT managers regard keeping anti-virus software and firewalls up to date; using intrusion detection and prevention technologies, and implementing vulnerability\/patch management on their networks as the three most important measures. In contrast, international managers place a higher priority on IPS\/IDS technologies (33 percent compared with 20 percent in the US) and on file encryption (18 percent compared with 7 percent of US businesses).<\/p>\n
“IT executives are making it very clear how seriously they take cybercrime threat, both from internal and external sources,” said Stuart McIrvine, director of IBM’s security strategy. “The nature of crime is changing, and businesses, technology providers and law enforcement must work together to ensure the right safeguards are being put in place to securely operate in today’s environment.”<\/p>\n
http:\/\/www.techworld.com\/security\/news\/index.cfm?NewsID=5568<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1855","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-statistics"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1855","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=1855"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1855\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4342,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1855\/revisions\/4342"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1855"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1855"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1855"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}