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.

Companies Continue to Grapple with Cyberrisk, Study Finds

Posted on by

As technology becomes more critical to company success, the number of cyberattacks has climbed.

As a result, cyberrisk has become one of the top risks for companies around the world, according to the Marsh-Microsoft Global Cyber Risk Perception Survey. Almost two-thirds of survey respondents identified cyberrisk as one of their organization’s top-five risk management priorities—almost double the percentage who rated cyber as a top risk in a 2016 study, Marsh said, adding that respondents whose organizations had been successfully attacked were slightly more likely to prioritize cyberrisk than those who had not.

Despite these concerns, however, the study notes that just one in five respondents said they are “highly confident in their organization’s ability to manage and mitigate cyberrisk or respond and recover from an attack.” This was especially the case among corporate directors, who play an important role in protecting their organization from cyber threats. While about 70% of respondents who identified as board members said they ranked cyberrisk as a top-five concern, only 14% said they were “highly confident” in their organization’s ability to respond to an attack.

Board Disconnect
While organizations have traditionally relied on IT staff to manage cyberrisks, the structure of oversight is evolving in many companies as risks accelerate. Stakeholders from across the enterprise are looking beyond prevention to include risk assessment, mitigation and cyber resilience.

Asked about cybersecurity structure, however, 70% of respondents named their IT department as a primary owner and decision-maker of the risk.

This was more often true for smaller companies, as larger organizations tended to spread the responsibility for cyberrisk—from a low of 13% in the smallest organizations (many of which may not have a separate risk management function) to 58% in the largest organizations with more than $5 billion in revenue, the study found.

Ideally, boards should view cyberrisk management as part of their overall perspective on enterprise risk management. In organizations where the board is involved, however, the study found a disconnect:

Corporate directors often appear to either not understand the information on cyberrisk they receive, or to not be receiving it all. For example, 53% of chief information security officers, 47% of chief risk officers, and 38% of chief technology/information officers said they provide reports to board members on cyber investment initiatives. Yet only 18% of board members said they receive such information.

This information gap illustrates a need to develop cyberrisk economic/business models that facilitate shared dialogue including common language among IT, the board, and other corporate departments.

This disconnect also reinforces the need for a cross-functional approach to cyber risk governance, according to the study.

2016 Drug Overdose Death Rate 3-Times Higher than in 1999

Posted on by

Deaths from drug overdose have reached crisis proportions in the United States, with more than 63,600 deaths in 2016—more than three times that of 1999.

buy synthroid online https://ozgurmd.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/synthroid.html no prescription pharmacy

The majority were males, whose deaths increased from 8.2 in 1999 to 26.2 in 2016; compared to females, whose rate rose from 3.9 in 1999 to 13.4 in 2016, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Authors of the report noted, “The pattern of drugs involved in drug overdose deaths has changed in recent years. The rate of drug overdose deaths involving synthetic opioids other than methadone (drugs such as fentanyl, fentanyl analogs, and tramadol) doubled in a single year from 3.1 per 100,000 in 2015 to 6.2 in 2016. Additionally, it’s important to note that many drug overdose deaths may involve multiple drugs.”
Of people age 15 and above:

• Rates of drug overdose deaths increased from 1999 to 2016 for all groups studied.

• Rates in 2016 were highest for people between the ages of 25 and 54.

• From 2015 to 2016, the drug overdose death rates for adults age 45-54, 55-64 and 65 and above went up 15%, 17% and 7% respectively, the CDC said.
In 2016, 22 states and the District of Columbia had overdose death rates that were statistically higher than the national rate. States with the highest number of overdose deaths were: West Virginia, with 52 per 100,000; Ohio with 39.1; New Hampshire with 39; District of Columbia with 38.8; and Pennsylvania, which had 37.9 deaths per 100,000.

States with the lowest age-adjusted drug overdose rates were: Iowa, which had 10.6 deaths; North Dakota, 10.6; Texas, 10; South Dakota, 8.4; and Nebraska, which had 6.4 deaths.
In it’s most recent study, Quest Diagnostics found that workforce use of illicit drugs across the board—including cocaine, marijuana and methamphetamine—has climbed to the highest rate in 12 years.

Overall positivity in urine drug testing among the combined U.S. workforce in 2016 was 4.2%, a 5% relative increase over last year’s rate of 4%—the highest annual positivity rate since 2004 (4.

buy suhagra online https://ozgurmd.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/suhagra.html no prescription pharmacy

5%), according to an analysis of more than 10 million workforce drug test results.

New Bill Would Toughen Calif. Dam Inspections

Posted on by

DWR Photo: Lake Oroville on Jan. 19, 2018 with lake levels at 707 feet.

A year after the spillway collapse at the Oroville Dam, leading to evacuations of almost 200,000 residents and a beat-the-clock patching job to avoid a break in the tallest dam in the United States, new legislation to strengthen inspections of dams awaits approval of California Gov. Jerry Brown.

The bill would require annual inspections for high hazard dams, raise inspection standards and require consultation with independent experts every 10 years, according to ABC News.

As reported by Risk Management Magazine, problems at the Oroville Dam began when the dam’s main sluice was damaged after a winter season of record rain and snowfall, following five years of drought. Torrential rainfall caused water levels to rise so quickly that large amounts needed to be released to prevent the dam from rupturing and sending a wall of water to the communities below.

A recent report of the root-cause of the spillway failure by the Independent Forensic Team (IFC), which includes members of the Association of State Dam Safety Officials and the United States Society of Dams, notes that:

There was no single root cause of the Oroville Dam spillway incident, nor was there a simple chain of events that led to the failure of the service spillway chute slab, the subsequent overtopping of the emergency spillway crest structure, and the necessity of the evacuation order. Rather, the incident was caused by a complex interaction of relatively common physical, human, organizational, and industry factors, starting with the design of the project and continuing until the incident. The physical factors can be placed into two general categories:

  • Inherent vulnerabilities in the spillway designs and as-constructed conditions, and subsequent chute slab deterioration

  • Poor spillway foundation conditions in some locations

The IFC report concludes that all dam owners in the state need to “reassess current procedures” in light of its findings.

According to the IFC:

“The fact that this incident happened to the owner of the tallest dam in the United States, under regulation of a federal agency, with repeated evaluation by reputable outside consultants, in a state with the leading dam safety regulatory program, is a wake-up call for everyone involved in dam safety. Challenging current assumptions on what constitutes ‘best practice’ in our industry is overdue.”

Initial response to the spillway failure included erosion mitigation for both spillways during the incident, sediment removal and installation of temporary transmission lines at a cost of $160 million, According to the DWR. Phase-two includes removal of the original 730 feet of the upper chute, replacing it with structural concrete.

Prepare Now for Ransomware

Posted on by

In 2017, a company was hit with ransomware every 40 seconds. Organizations in all industry sectors were subject to ransomware attacks, as these attacks often opportunistically take advantage of security shortcomings. The average ransom demand was more than $1,000.00—greater than three times the average in 2015. What’s more, one in five business that paid ransom never got its data back.

So, how do you protect your business? First, make sure you are insured. While traditional policies provide little, if any, coverage for damage to electronic data—and none for other costs associated with cyber extortion—they are covered by cyber extortion insurance. This is available under many cyber liability policies. Cyber extortion provisions typically cover ransom payments and extortion-related expenses such as costs incurred in negotiating the ransom and restoring or replacing data or software.

But insurance is just one aspect of the protection your business should have. Companies also need to prepare an Incident Response Plan (IRP), that establishes responses to ransomware attacks. An IRP should be a “living, breathing” document that is consistently updated to ensure that its information and procedures are accurate and up-to-date. Typical topics addressed by an IRP are:

  • The Incident Response Team. The IRP must identify the team in charge of responding to ransomware attacks. This team should include an executive and inside counsel, and should provide back-ups in case first-line members cannot be reached. The IRP should contain 24-7 contact information for all team members, including means of contact that do not rely on the business-provided phones or email that may be affected by the attack.

Additionally, the IRP should identify team members’ specific responsibilities, such as implementing security measures, investigating the attack, communicating with the extortionists, communicating with customers or the public, and notifying insurance carriers and law enforcement.

  • Detecting an Incident. The IRP should identify steps for employees to take if they suspect or detect a ransomware attack.
    buy robaxin online dentalhacks.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/robaxin.html no prescription pharmacy

  • Approved Vendors. As you will likely need outside assistance to respond to an attack, your IRP should identify approved vendors such as outside coverage counsel, investigative and cybersecurity firms, and a PR firm to assist with external communications.
  • Reporting to Law Enforcement. The IRP should define when and how ransomware attacks must be reported to which law enforcement agencies. It should also address what evidence should be collected and preserved, and how.  Ideally, these issues should be discussed with the relevant agencies ahead of time, which also helps build a cooperative relationship with them.
    buy lexapro online familyvoicesal.org/resources/images/jpg/lexapro.html no prescription pharmacy

  • Notifying Insurance Carriers. The IRP should identify all insurance policies that could provide coverage for a ransomware attack and detail steps to comply with each policy’s notification requirements.
    buy celexa online familyvoicesal.org/resources/images/jpg/celexa.html no prescription pharmacy

    Outside coverage counsel can assist with both identifying relevant policies and provisions, and following notification requirements.

  • Responding to Extortionists. The IRP must identify who communicates with the extortionists and who decides whether and how to respond to their demands. This should include steps for how to make potentially required electronic currency payments.
  • Investigating the Incident. The IRP should define who is responsible for investigating a ransomware attack and include a checklist detailing specific response steps. It should also establish procedures to increase the chances of identifying the extortionists, and to detect and address security vulnerabilities.
  • Documenting the Response. The IRP should set forth steps to document both your response to and your investigation of the attack, including contacts with the extortionists, the decision-making process resulting in a response, and the technical response and investigation, including the preservation of evidence. Such documentation may be required by regulatory agencies or insurers.
  • Public Relations. To facilitate communications about the attack with customers or the public, the IRP should assign responsibility for doing so and define steps for preparing and releasing such communications.
  • User Training. End-user training of all employees, including management, is key to preventing ransomware attacks. The IRP needs to contain procedures to ensure that all employees receive such training periodically, as common threats change over time.

Appropriate insurance coverage; an IRP that is consistently updated, including through “post mortem” evaluations following attacks; and up-to-date systems security are critical to prepare your business for—and to the extent possible, protect it from—potential ransomware attacks.