{"id":2226,"date":"2009-01-29T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-01-29T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2009\/01\/29\/mcafee-highlights-perils-of-offshoring-sensitive-data\/"},"modified":"2021-12-30T11:40:54","modified_gmt":"2021-12-30T11:40:54","slug":"mcafee-highlights-perils-of-offshoring-sensitive-data","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/2009\/01\/29\/mcafee-highlights-perils-of-offshoring-sensitive-data\/","title":{"rendered":"McAfee highlights perils of offshoring sensitive data"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Global companies may have lost over $1tn (\u00a3696bn) worth of intellectual property last year owing to data theft, according to new research from McAfee presented today at the World Economic Forum in Davos.  Respondents to the study indicated that they lost a combined $4.6bn (\u00a33.2bn) worth of intellectual property last year, and spent around $600m (\u00a3418m) repairing damage from data breaches.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The security firm surveyed over 800 chief information officers in the US, UK, China and India for its report.<\/p>\n<p>McAfee security analyst Greg Day argued that many firms look to offshoring in order to reduce costs without thinking of the security implications of their intellectual property being stored or processed in other regions.<\/p>\n<p>The research found that Brazil, China and India, for example, are spending more money on security than Germany, the UK, the US and Japan, but that some of the former countries have poor reputations for investigating security incidents, and may be lax at enforcing policies and regulations.<\/p>\n<p>http:\/\/www.infomaticsonline.co.uk\/vnunet\/news\/2235374\/firms-lost-trillion-dollars-ip<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-trends"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2226","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=2226"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2226\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4713,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2226\/revisions\/4713"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}