According to the figures recently released in the IDC Asia\/Pacific Semiannual Security Software Tracker, most security markets in the Asia\/Pacific excluding Japan (APEJ) region are expected to post strong double-digit growth in 2010 compared to 2009. According to the study, the largest growth will be in the Security and Vulnerability Management (SVM) market which is forecast to grow some 19% to US$115.44 million in 2010. The Identity and Access Management (IAM) market is estimated to grow by 15.2% to reach US$ 326.38 million.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The security landscape has been seeing new threats growing explosively in number and complexity – attacks that exploit the vulnerabilities of applications, insider sabotages, identity fraud and unauthorized access to corporate systems and networks.<\/p>\n
Companies are required to align with international regulations, standards and best practices when collaborating with business partners around the world.<\/p>\n
Many of these companies have turned to SVM products to establish a security management framework for various compliance requirements such as policy compliance, log archiving and auditing,” said Judy Wu, Research Manager for IDC Asia\/Pacific Security Research.<\/p>\n
At the same time, previous purchase and deployment of security products over the years have increased management and integration complexity.<\/p>\n
The SVM segment is a key growth area across Asia\/Pacific as companies turn to SVM’s capabilities – such as patch management, policy enforcement and security incident analysis and management – to reduce complexity and increase management efficiency.<\/p>\n
Compared with the first half of 2008, there was a minor decline in 1H09 for security spending due to the global recession which reared its ugly head at the end of 2008.<\/p>\n
We expect companies to continue to find ways and leverage new security technologies such as policy and IT compliance suites, as well as vulnerability assessment and risk management products to increase management efficiency.<\/p>\n
http:\/\/www.idc.com\/getdoc.jsp?pid=23571113&containerId=prHK22160710<\/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-2241","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\/2241","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=2241"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2241\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4728,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2241\/revisions\/4728"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2241"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2241"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.cybersecurityinstitute.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2241"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}