Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам.

How Does Google Face Global Challenges?

Posted on by

NEW YORK—Staying a step ahead of regulators around the world is challenging for any global business. For Google, it is a “significant challenge, to say the least,” said Andy Hinton, vice president of global ethics and compliance at Google, Inc. After organizing the world’s information and making it universally accessible, the company’s secondary mission is products that help users, he said.

“Google is boundary-less when it comes to what those products might be and what they might look like,” Hinton said during The Wall Street Journal’s Newsmaker’s Forum in April. “So trying to keep up with driverless cars, drones and providing internet service with floating balloons around the world (Project Loon) is a challenge.”

Google’s compliance program includes the company’s trade, bribery, internet security and privacy issues. While any number of issues may surface, he said, “one of them is to help the company respond to some of the criticism leveled against it, mostly in jurisdictions outside the United States, and to make sure responses are consistent with applicable laws.”

With Google Earth, for example, equipment must be moved around the world. Google Earth “enables people to get information access to the earth, where they otherwise might not be able to see those things,” Hinton said, noting that people can now view Mt. Everest and other places they may never get to see otherwise. This involves contact with customs officials and governments and also creates “lots of opportunities to do things wrong and get in trouble,” he said. “So we are always on top of that. Plus, the equipment we use is so unique that we show up in front of a customs official with a camera on top of a tripod on top of a car and they ask, ‘What is that? It’s not in the manual.’ You have to spend time explaining what it is and help them to be comfortable with it.

online pharmacy amoxicillin with best prices today in the USA

”

While some governments are more difficult to deal with than others, “there are definite challenges in all the continents and countries,” he said. “Obviously privacy is a challenge in Europe, because there is a different perspective around privacy and internet security than there is in the United States. With APAC [Asia Pacific] there is an integration of gift-giving and business that is relatively unique to the APAC region and can present challenges.”

An important part of its compliance strategy is the company’s diversity, which he added is also part of its mission. “Not just diversity in the traditional perspective, but in bringing on people who can understand the challenges in these regions,” he said.

online pharmacy prelone with best prices today in the USA

“So for gift-giving in the Middle East, sure I can sit in Mountain View trying to figure it out, but we hired an attorney who is in that culture and understands U.S. law and can, in that context, help us navigate the region—balancing expectations of the region with legal expectations in the United States.”

Company Strategy

In fact, Google’s overall hiring policies are part of its strategy to “do things differently, or do them better than other companies,” he said. “That requires us to be incredibly sharp in the way we do hiring.” Now that the company has about 60,000 employees, “it’s important to hire people who share your values and buy into your mission. Because if you are not going to have a lot of rules and you are not going to have an enormous compliance program and checkers following people around, there is a lot of trust and autonomy that you give to your Googlers.”

How does the company accomplish this? “When I interview people and they talk about winning and beating the competition, that’s a huge red flag to me,” he said. “When we started, Larry was very much about the users and we still are. If you build something good that users really like, you can figure out the rest. Revenue and everything else will come. People who have that backwards are tremendously dangerous to the company.”

Google also acquires staff through acquisitions, he said, adding that this talent is “much harder to manage. The larger the acquisition and the more the acquisition has its own culture, the greater the challenge.”

Is outside-in the “Next Gen” of Continuous Monitoring?

Posted on by

In late 2002, the U.S. Government enacted a new law that was designed to hold each federal agency accountable to develop, document, and implement an agency-wide information security program, including for its contractors. The Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA), was one of the first information security laws to require agencies to perform continuous assessments and develop procedures for detecting, reporting, and responding to security incidents.

With limited technological resources available for monitoring and assessing performance over time, however, agencies struggled to adhere to the law’s goals and intent. Ironically, although FISMA’s goal was to improve oversight of security performance, early implementation resulted in annual reviews of document based practices and policies. Large amounts of money were spent bringing in external audit firms to perform these assessments, producing more paper-based reports that, although useful for examining a wide set of criteria, failed to verify the effectiveness of security controls, focusing instead on their existence.

John Streufert, a leading advocate of performance monitoring at the State Department and later at DHS, estimated that by 2009, more than $440 million dollars per year was being spent on these paper-based assessments, with findings and recommendations becoming out of date before they could be implemented. Clearly, this risk assessment methodology was not yielding the outcomes the authors had in mind and in time, agencies began to look for solutions that could actually monitor their networks and provide real-time results.

Thanks to efforts by Streufert and others, it wasn’t long before “continuous monitoring” solutions existed. But, just as with all breakthrough technologies, early attempts at continuous monitoring were limited by high costs, difficult implementations and a lack of staffing resources. As continuous monitoring solutions made it into IT security budgets, organizations and agencies were challenged to make optimal use of tools that required tuning and constant maintenance to show value. False positives and missed signals led many IT teams to feel like they were drinking from a fire hose of data and the value of continuous monitoring in many cases was lost.

However, solutions today offer a number of benefits including easy operationalization, lower costs and reduced resource requirements.

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

Many options, such as outside-in performance rating solutions, require no hardware or software installation and have been shown to produce immediate results. These tools continuously analyze vast amounts of external data on security behaviors and generate daily ratings for the network being monitored, with alerts and detailed analytics available to identify and remediate security issues.

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

The ratings are objective measures of security performance, with higher ratings equaling a stronger security posture.

Used in conjunction with other assessment methods, organizations can use ratings to get a more comprehensive view of security posture, especially as they provide ongoing visibility over time instead of being based on a point in time result. The fidelity of “outside-in” assessments is very good when compared to the results of manual questionnaires and assessments because outside-in solutions eliminate some of the bias and confusion that may be seen in personnel responses. Additionally, outside-in performance monitoring can be used to quickly and easily verify effectiveness of controls, not just the existence of policies and procedures that may or may not be properly implemented.

These changes have made continuous performance monitoring and security ratings more appealing to organizations across the commercial and government space.  Organizations have learned that real-time, continuous performance monitoring can allow them to immediately identify and respond to issues and possibly avoid truly catastrophic events, as research has shown a strong correlation between performance ratings and significant breach events. Furthermore, as it becomes easier to monitor internal networks, organizations are beginning to realize the security benefits that can be gained through monitoring vendors and other third parties that are part of the business ecosystem.

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

Being able to monitor and address third party risk puts us squarely in the realm of next generation continuous monitoring, something many regulators are pushing to see addressed in current risk management strategies.

Cyberbreach and Reputation Woes Hack Away at Bottom Line for 44% of Financial Firms

Posted on by

According to the 2015 Makovsky Wall Street Reputation Study, released Thursday, 42% of U.S. consumers believe that failure to protect personal and financial information is the biggest threat to the reputation of the financial firms they use. What’s more, three-quarters of respondents said that the unauthorized access of their personal and financial information would likely lead them to take their business elsewhere. In fact, security of personal and financial information is much more important to customers compared to a financial services firm’s ethical responsibility to customers and the community (23%).

Executives from financial services firms seem to know this already: 83% agree that the ability to combat cyber threats and protect personal data will be one of the biggest issues in building reputation in the next year.

The study found that this trend is already having a very real impact: 44% of financial services companies report losing 20% or more of their business in the past year due to reputation and customer satisfaction issues. When asked to rank the issues that negatively affected their company’s reputation over the last 12 months, the top three “strongly agree” responses in 2015 from communications, marketing and investor relations executives at financial services firms were:

  • Financial performance (47%), up from 27% in 2014
  • Corporate governance (45%), up from 24% in 2014
  • Data breaches (42%), up from 24% in 2014

Earning consumer trust will take some extraordinary effort, as a seemingly constant stream of breaches in the news and personal experiences have clearly made customers more skeptical of data security across a range of industries. When asked which institution they trust more with their personal information and safeguarding privacy, today’s consumers ranked traditional financial institutions—including insurers—higher by a wide margin over new online providers, but a larger percentage of consumers do not trust any organization to be able to protect their data:

  • Bank/brokerage, insurance, or credit card company (33%)
  • U.S. Government (IRS, Social Security) or U.S. Postal Service (13%)
  • Current healthcare company (4%)
  • Online wallets (PayPal, Google Wallet, Apple Pay) (4%)
  • Retail chain or small businesses (4%)
  • All other (3%)
  • None of these organizations or companies can be trusted (39%)

 

Windows Server 2003 Expiration Brings Defense in Depth to Life

Posted on by

windows server 2003

The termination of support for Windows Server 2003 (WS2003) is less than four months away, leaving many enterprises in a race against the clock before the system’s security patches cease. In fact, 61% of businesses have at least one instance of WS2003 running in their environment, which translates into millions of installations across physical and virtual infrastructures. While many of these businesses are well aware of the rapidly approaching July 14 deadline and the security implications of missing it, only 15% have fully migrated their environment. So why are so many enterprises slow to make the move?

Migration Déjà Vu

The looming support deadline, the burst of security anxiety, the mad rush to move off a retiring operating system… sound familiar? This scenario is something we’ve seen before, coming just 12 months after expiration of Windows XP support.

While there may be fewer physical 2003 servers in an organization than there were XP desktops, a server migration is more challenging and presents a higher degree of risk. From an endpoint perspective, replacing one desktop with the latest version of Windows affects only one user, while a server might connect to thousands of users and services. Having a critical server unavailable for any length of time could cause major disruption and pose a threat to business continuity.

Compared to the desktop, server upgrades are significantly more complex, especially when you then add hardware compatibility issues and the need to re-develop applications that were created for the now outdated WS2003. Clearly, embarking on a server migration can be a very daunting process – much more so than the XP migration – which seems to be holding many organizations back.

Cost of Upgrading versus Staying

Moving off WS2003 can be a drain on time resources. While most IT administrators understand how to upgrade an XP operating system, the intricacy of server networks means many migrations will require external consultancy, especially if they are left to the last minute. It’s no wonder that companies this year are allocating an average of $60,000 for their server migration projects. Still, it’s a fair price to pay when you consider the cost of skipping an upgrade entirely. Legacy systems are expensive to maintain without regular fixes to bugs and performance issues.

And without security support, organizations will be left exposed to new and sophisticated threats. Meanwhile, hackers will be looking to these migration stragglers as their prime targets. For those who fall victim to exploits as a result, it’s not just financial losses they will have to deal with, but a blow to their reputation as well. It also means that companies continuing to run on WS2003 after support ends will be removed from the scope of compliance, adding other penalties that could further damage the business.

If they haven’t already, businesses still running on the retiring system should be thinking now about making an upgrade to Windows Server 2012. It’s easier said than done, of course. A server migration can take as long as six months, so even if businesses start their migration now, there could still be a two month period during which servers run unsupported. This means that organizations should be putting defenses in place to secure their datacenters for the duration of the migration and beyond.

Control Admin Rights

While sysadmins are notorious for demanding privileged access to applications, the reality is, allocating admin rights to sys-admins is extremely risky, since malware often seeks out privileged accounts to gain entry to a system and spread across the network. Plus, humans aren’t perfect, and the possibilities for accidental misconfigurations when logging onto a server are endless. In fact, research has shown that 80% of unplanned server outages are due to ill-planned configurations by administrators.

Admin rights in a server environment should be limited to the point where sysadmins are given only the privileges they need, for example to respond to urgent break-fix scenarios. Doing so can reduce exploit potential significantly. In an analysis of Patch Tuesday security bulletins issued by Microsoft throughout 2014, the risk of 98% of Critical vulnerabilities affecting Windows operating systems could be mitigated by removing admin rights.

Application Control

Application Control (whitelisting) adds more control to a server environment, including those that are remotely administered, by applying simple rules to manage trusted applications. While trusted applications run through configured policies, unauthorized applications and interactions may be blocked. This defense is particularly important for maintaining business continuity as development teams are rewriting and refactoring apps.

Sandboxing

Limiting privileges and controlling applications sets a solid foundation for securing a server migration, but even with these controls, the biggest window of opportunity for malware to enter the network – the Internet – remains exposed. Increasingly, damage is caused by web-borne malware, such as employees unwittingly opening untrusted pdf documents or clicking through to websites with unseen threats. Vulnerabilities in commonly used applications like Java and Adobe Reader might be exploited by an employee simply viewing a malicious website.

Sandboxing is the third line of defense that all organizations should have in place, at all times. By isolating untrusted content, and by association any web-borne threats or malicious activity in a separate secure container, sandboxing empowers individuals to browse the Internet freely, without compromising the network.

buy symbicort inhaler online www.scottsdaleweightloss.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/symbicort-inhaler.html no prescription pharmacy

Having instant web access is expected in modern workplaces, so sandboxing is ideal for securing Internet activity without disrupting productivity and the user experience.

Windows Server 2003 Migration: A Window of Opportunity

It shouldn’t take an OS end of life to spur change – especially security change. Organizations and their IT teams need to be thinking about how they can adapt their defenses, ensuring that they are primed to handle the new and sophisticated threats we see emerging every day. A migration is often the perfect time to revitalize an organization’s security strategy. With a migration process as a catalyst for reinvention, IT can lean on solutions like Privilege Management, Application Control and Sandboxing to not only lock down the migration, but carry beyond it as well, providing in-depth defense across the next version of Windows.