{"id":1895,"date":"2006-10-09T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-10-09T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/10\/09\/how-insecure-do-you-think-you-are\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:40:15","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:40:15","slug":"how-insecure-do-you-think-you-are","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2006\/10\/09\/how-insecure-do-you-think-you-are\/","title":{"rendered":"How Insecure Do You Think You Are?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>A new Cisco  sponsored global study of 1,000 remote workers indicates that IT workers may well be engaged in more insecure activities than they are willing to admit.  Users are apparently aware of insecure activities, such as opening e-mail attachments from unknown senders; yet they still open the attachments and e-mails.  The study, which was conducted by research firm InsightExpress, reveals a number of such security contradictions.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>For the most part, users are aware of IT security concerns, but not pervasively so.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;At least one-third were not even aware that they are exposed to or could experience security breaches or compromises,&#8221; Bruce Murphy, Cisco&#8217;s vice president of Advanced Services, told internetnews.com.<\/p>\n<p>Only 25 percent of global respondents admitted to using their work computers to open an unknown e-mail.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;We see inconsistencies between what people say they do and what they propose they might do in certain cases,&#8221; said Erica DesRoches, program manager for InsightExpress.<\/p>\n<p>According to DesRoches, the inconsistency of responses is one of the most surprising aspects of the survey and one that likely requires further examination to better understand.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.internetnews.com\/stats\/article.php\/3636831<\/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-1895","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\/1895","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=1895"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1895\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4382,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1895\/revisions\/4382"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1895"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1895"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1895"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}