{"id":1889,"date":"2006-09-12T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-09-12T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/09\/12\/survey-most-insider-related-data-breaches-go-unreported\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:40:13","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:40:13","slug":"survey-most-insider-related-data-breaches-go-unreported","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/09\/12\/survey-most-insider-related-data-breaches-go-unreported\/","title":{"rendered":"Survey: Most insider-related data breaches go unreported"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Most insider-related security breaches go unreported, according to a new survey by Ponemon Institute LLC in Elks Rapids, Mich.   The main reason that happens is because companies don&#8217;t have the resources to tackle the issue, according to the National Survey on Managing the Insider Threat, sponsored by ArcSight Inc., an enterprise security management company in Cupertino, Calif.   &#8220;We found that many of the respondents in our study found that it was difficult, if not impossible, to identify all data breaches that exist &#8212; and over 79% of the respondents said one, if not more, insider-related security breaches at their companies go unreported,&#8221; said Larry Ponemon, chairman of Ponemon Institute.  Approximately 93% believe that the No. 1 barrier to addressing the data breach risk is the lack of sufficient resources, and 80% cited a lack of leadership, he said.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>&#8220;Because it&#8217;s insider-related normally, involving a careless or negligent employee [and] not an evil employee, maybe they are more likely to go unreported because people know each other, and maybe because people know each other, they say it was a mistake and maybe in the future they&#8217;ll fix it.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>More than 61% of the survey respondents said that accidental data leaks occur &#8220;frequently&#8221; or &#8220;very frequently&#8221; because employees or contractors lack sufficient knowledge about preventative measures or because employees or contractors are careless.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.computerworld.com\/action\/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&#038;articleId=9003211<\/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-1889","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\/1889","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=1889"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1889\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4376,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1889\/revisions\/4376"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1889"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1889"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1889"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}