Want to scan your crypto wallet for risks? Check: AML crypto BTC, USDT, ETH. Checking cryptocurrency wallets for dirty money.

Cost of Cyber Crime Up 19% For U.S. Businesses

In its annual Cost of Cyber Crime study, the Ponemon Institute found that the average annual cost of cyber crime per large company is now $15.4 million in the United States. That figure has increased 19% from last year’s .

buy naprosyn online www.delineation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/naprosyn.html no prescription pharmacy

7 million, and presents an 82% jump from the institute’s first such study six years ago. This year, losses ranged from $307,800 to $65,047,302.

Globally, the average annual cost of cybercrime is $7.7 million, an increase of 1.9% from last year. The U.S. sample had the highest total average cost, while the Russian sample reported the lowest, with an average cost of $2.5 million. Germany, Japan, Australia, and Russia experienced a slight decrease in the cost of cyber crime over the past year.

buy nolvadex online www.delineation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/nolvadex.html no prescription pharmacy

To try to benchmark the complete cost of cyber crime, the Ponemon Institute examines the total cost of responding to incidents, including detection, recovery, investigation and incident-response management. While it is virtually impossible to quantify all of the losses due to reputation damage or business interruption, the researchers did look at after-the-fact expenses intended to minimize the potential loss of business or customers.

buy propecia online www.delineation.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/propecia.html no prescription pharmacy

Check out more of the study’s findings in the infographic below:

global cost of cyber crime ponemon institute

Navigating Data Breach Regulatory Requirements

Data breach

Amidst the gridlock on Capitol Hill and in State Houses across the country on many policy priorities, there seems to be one issue related to corporate governance that brings both parties together. In response to a tidal wave of security incidents, both policymakers and regulators are passing and debating new rules regulating how companies must respond to a data breach.

Along with managing internal expectations from the rest of the C-suite and board on how a data breach needs to be handled, risk managers now face a continually shifting regulatory landscape. It is essential that risk managers are up to speed on the latest policy developments and understand how they will influence how a company responds to an incident. In a policy white paper released by Experian, we found the following to be some of the most significant trends changing the regulatory landscape.

State Laws and Regulator Expectations 

Today, when a data breach occurs, risk management professionals need to take into account 49 different laws and regulations across states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The nuances between each law require careful review, especially for businesses that operates in multiple locations.

buy lariam online greendalept.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/lariam.html no prescription pharmacy

Further complicating matters, many states are actively making updates to their laws:

  • Oregon recently signed a law requiring that notification of a data breach be provided to the state attorney general if a company experiences a breach that affects more than 250 consumers.
  • Connecticut added a requirement that companies provide credit monitoring for at least 12 months to impacted parties, as well as provide notice of a breach within 90 days of the incident’s discovery.
  • Rhode Island now requires consumer notice no later than 45 days after breach discovery and expanded the definition of personal information to include email addresses combined with passwords.
  • Illinois is considering legislation that would move the definition of personal information to include marketing data.

State attorneys general are also increasingly scrutinizing how companies respond to a data breach, and are often vocal if they think a company is not taking the proper steps to protect affected constituents. In addition to conducting more official investigations, state attorneys general are leveraging the power of the press to make their point.

Congress Looking to Reach Consensus

The current complexity caused by evolving state laws could soon become a non-issue if Congress is able to pass a comprehensive federal data breach notification bill. Lawmakers have made passing a national federal data breach and data security standard a priority in the current Congressional session. One bill, the Data Security and Breach Notification Act of 2015, has already been passed by the House Energy and Commerce Committee and could make its way to a full vote. In the Senate, there are also a number of competing pieces of data breach legislation being debated that are fighting for support.

This is not the first time Congress has attempted to pass a comprehensive bill.

buy sinequan online greendalept.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/sinequan.html no prescription pharmacy

Several bills were previously introduced and passed by House and Senate committees, but were unable to make it any further in the process due both to lack of support and not being high on the priority list. However, while reaching consensus may not come easy, there is pressure today on federal lawmakers to pass a bill, which is driving more action in the space.

Lending to the cause, President Obama is also a vocal advocate for a national uniform breach notification standard. He explicitly referenced the need for comprehensive legislation during his latest State of the Union Address, and gave a speech to the FTC in January 2015 that outlined his version of a draft data security bill – the Personal Data Notification and Protection Act. In addition to data breach law, recent high profile security incidents also led Obama to encourage Congress to pass legislation that regulates and supports voluntary sharing of cyber threat information between companies and the government. With attention and support from the executive branch on cyber security, it is much more likely we will see progress on the topic from Congress.

Staying Informed and Prepared

The reality is that data breaches pose a risk that will always need to be addressed, and until the U.S. passes comprehensive data breach notification legislation, the responsibility falls to risk managers and relevant colleagues to track policy changes. This is why it is important to enlist outside experts such as legal counsel familiar with the evolving regulatory landscape. Understanding the landscape is not enough, however. Companies must ensure that any new rules or regulatory agency expectations are accounted for and updated in data breach response plans. As a best practice, companies should review plans at least twice a year.

More information on data breach legislation and resources can be found at the Experian Data Breach Resolution website and the Experian Data Breach Resolution blog.

Understanding Cyberrisks From Insider Threats

insider threat cyber risk

As cyberrisks evolve, enterprises have begun to focus on the insider threat by adding specialized capabilities for behavioral analytics on top of endpoint and network monitoring. In order for these tools to be most successful, there must be a fundamental understanding of the role an insider plays in a breach. Not every employee-caused breach is malicious, but they certainly are numerous. In fact, according to Verizon’s most recent Data Breach Investigation Report, 90% of breaches have a human component, regardless of intent.

Insider threats are a rampant problem exemplified by several recent headline-making incidents: the indictment of six Chinese nationals on suspicion of stealing intellectual property worth millions from two U.S. technology firms; accusations from financial giant Morgan Stanley toward an employee believed to have stolen client information with the intent to sell it; and claims from wearable-maker Jawbone that its competitor Fitbit regularly courted its privileged employees, enticing several of them to switch companies and bring sensitive details on its products. The uncertainty around all of these cases begs a couple of important questions: how can intent be determined, and how can employee privacy be maintained while ensuring business security?

Malicious or Careless?

Many think of insider threats only in terms of deliberate attacks, but the risk includes damage caused by simple carelessness. It is important to note the differences between malicious and careless incidents to ensure you are taking the right steps to mitigate the threat to your organization.

“Malicious incident” means an employee or someone trusted with network access has acted deliberately, either of their own volition or under the influence of others. A rogue malicious employee usually breaches security policy intentionally for personal gain. This type of incident is illustrated by the Jawbone/Fitbit controversy, as well as the case of the accused Chinese nationals mentioned above.

buy levofloxacin online www.gcbhllc.org/scripts/html/levofloxacin.html no prescription pharmacy

Three of those six individuals allegedly leveraged their positions at tech firms to steal research and technology they could replicate and profit from in China.

Conversely, the non-malicious insider threat often stems from employees’ inadvertent mistakes. There is no endgame, just a failure to follow security protocol. This can happen when employees breach policy intentionally but without malicious intent, not recognizing the risk. Sensitive data may be lost due to use of an unauthorized app (“shadow IT”) or manipulation through social engineering attacks, for example. This is easily the most common form of insider threat and can be seen in any case where employee credentials are stolen due to carelessness. To create a truly complete response plan to address insider threats, these incidents must be accounted for as well.

The Most Common Attack Vectors

Through our customer assessments, we have found that most threats stem from two common groups: employees who are planning on leaving the company, and privileged users who are targeted by outside actors.

We’ve come across employees attempting to steal sensitive information before leaving their employers a shocking number of times. In a large portion of investigations launched within three months of working with new customers, we’ve discovered employees attempting to leave with trade secrets that will help them down the road. In recent customer assessments, we found staff using hacking tools not required for their job—like Wireshark and Process Hacker —in two-thirds of cases, and we found staff actively bypassing company security measures 96% of the time.

But the bigger problem we have noticed is outsiders targeting privileged users in order to get into an organization’s networks. Attackers seek out privileged users in order to get quicker and deeper access to sensitive and strategically important information. It’s not as hard as you’d think; 75% of assessments found staff using pirated software, and 93% found sensitive information both in the cloud and on unencrypted USBs.

buy zyprexa online www.gcbhllc.org/scripts/html/zyprexa.html no prescription pharmacy

These risky practices open the door for phishing schemes, watering-hole attacks, and a slew of other approaches aimed at gaining access to user credentials. A growing number of these highly targeted forms of attack are being perpetrated by sophisticated, well-managed criminal organizations.

Don’t Compromise Privacy

Knowing the varying possibilities, organizations are hard-pressed to guarantee awareness of suspicious or dangerous activities without impacting their employees’ rights to privacy. To address this, start by focusing monitoring on rich, context-heavy data that truly describes typical workforce activity—for example, baseline user behavior over a set period of time to identify uncharacteristic access to sensitive data, running new and unusual applications, or downloading files that an employee has never touched before.

But don’t forget the need to protect the privacy of your employees. Conversations with the legal and HR departments are critical to ensure your plan abides by the legal and ethical limits on gaining insight into user activity.

buy vilitra online www.gcbhllc.org/scripts/html/vilitra.html no prescription pharmacy

Be sure the efforts to stamp out an insider threat don’t come at the expense of the rights of the rest of your workforce.

How Does This Affect the Enterprise?

Whether driven by a careless user, a disgruntled employee looking for quick monetary gain or state-backed espionage, insider threats can have a huge and devastating impact on an organization. Enterprises are beginning to realize they need to understand not only their networks and systems but also their employees and their activities. Historically, a majority of businesses ignored the issue. The most recent Vormetric Insider Threat Report shows 89% of organizations feel vulnerable to the risk of insider threats, but organizations taking a proactive approach still remain in the minority.

Your best bet is to adhere to the philosophy of “trust, but verify.” Rather than focus on locking down certain applications and limiting access to many or all users at the network perimeter, organizations must gain broad visibility into behavior across the company to identify the most pressing vulnerabilities. Not until that has become a widespread practice will enterprises have a true handle on the insider threat.

Automation: The Key to More Effective Cyberrisk Management

cybersecurity automation

In a perfect cybersecurity world, people would only have access to the data they need, and only when they need it. However, IT budgets are tighter than ever and, in most organizations, manually updating new and existing employees’ access levels on a consistent basis is a time-consuming productivity-killer. As a result, there’s a good chance an employee may accidentally have access to a group of files that they should not. As one can imagine, security that is loosely managed across the enterprise is a breeding ground for malware.

The velocity of cyberattacks has accelerated as well. It is easier than ever for cyber criminals to access exploits, malware, phishing tools, and other resources to automate the creation and execution of an attack. Digitization, Internet connectivity, and smart device growth are creating more vectors for attackers to gain an entry point into an organization’s network, and this trend only gets worse as you think about the Internet of Things, which could have concrete impact on machines from production equipment to planes and cars.

One way IT departments can help mitigate the cyberrisk of employee access overload is through automating security policies and processes such as the monitoring, detection and remediation of threats. In the past, organizations have spent a lot on prevention technologies: disparate point solutions such as anti-virus software and firewalls that try to act before an attack occurs. Prevention is important but not 100% effective. And how could technology used for prevention stop a cyber-attacker that has already infiltrated the network? If prevention were the end-all, be-all in security tools, we wouldn’t be reading about cyberattacks on a daily basis.

buy isofair online shadidanin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/isofair.html no prescription pharmacy

As more companies realize this, a spending shift to detection and response is being driven.

To help determine cyberrisk—or better yet, safely manage your cyberrisk—you must look at the threat (which is ever growing due to constant hackers and advanced techniques), vulnerability (how open your data is to cyberattacks), and consequence (the amount of time threats are doing damage in your network). Or, more simply put: risk = threat X vulnerability X consequence time.

To manage your cyberrisk, you need to optimize at least one of the aforementioned variables. Unfortunately, threat is the one variable that cannot be optimized because hackers will never stop attacking and are creating malware at an escalating rate. In fact, a G DATA study showed that 6 million new malware strains were found by researchers in 2014—almost double the number of new strains found the previous year. Instead, what organizations can focus on is investing in the right solutions that target the remaining two variables: vulnerability and consequence.

  • Step One: Organizations must make sure they know their environments well (such as endpoints, network, and access points) and know where their sensitive information lives. It’s always a good idea to rank systems and information in terms of criticality, value and importance to the business.
    buy cymbalta online shadidanin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/cymbalta.html no prescription pharmacy

  • Step Two: Organizations must gain increased visibility into potential threat activity occurring in the environment. As is often said, there are two types of companies: those that have been attacked and those that have been attacked and don’t know it. A way to increase visibility is through the deployment of behavior-based technology on the network, like sandboxes. Organizations are now shifting their focus to the endpoint. Today’s attacks require endpoint and network visibility, including correlation of this activity. The challenge with visibility is that it can be overwhelming.
  • Step Three: There needs to be some process or mechanism to determine which alerts matter and which ones should be prioritized. In order to gain increased visibility into environments and detect today’s threats, organizations clearly need to deploy more contemporary detection solutions and advanced threat analytics.
  • Step Four: Invest more in response and shift the mindset to continuous response. If attacks are continuous and we are continuously monitoring, then the next logical step is to respond continuously. Historically, response has been episodic or event-driven (“I’ve been attacked – Do something!
    buy zithromax online shadidanin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/zithromax.html no prescription pharmacy

    ”). This mindset needs to shift to continuous response (“I’m getting attacked all the time – Do something!”).  A key ingredient to enable continuous incident response will be the increasing use of automation. Why? Automation is required to keep up with attackers that are leveraging automation to attack. It’s also required to address a key challenge that large and small companies face: the significant cybersecurity skills shortage.

Advanced threat analytics should be important to any organization that takes its security posture seriously. The majority of threats being faced today are getting more advanced by the minute. If an organization relies solely on legacy, signature-based detection, their defenses will be easily breached. It’s important for teams to understand that the cyber defense and response capabilities of an organization must constantly evolve to match the evolving threat landscape. This includes both automatic detection and remediation. Automatic remediation dramatically reduces the time that malware can exist on a network and also reduces the amount of time spent investigating the issue at hand. With automated security defenses, IT teams are given a forensic view of every packet that moves through the network and allows teams to spot anomalies and threats before they have a chance to wreak havoc. And since these tools are automated and work at machine speed, they can deal with a high volume of threats without necessitating human intervention, taking some of the load off overburdened security teams, and ultimately freeing them to act decisively and quickly, before network damage is done.