Cybersecurity is slowing down my business, say majority of chief execs by Kat Hall.
From the post:
Cisco Live Chief execs polled in a major survey have little time for their cybersecurity folk and believe complying with security regulations hampers business.
Some 71 per cent of 1,000 top bosses surveyed by Cisco feel that efforts to shore up IT defences slows the pace of commerce. The study is due to be published next month.
Big cheeses cheesed off with security staff getting in the way of profit may well rid themselves of their troublesome priests, though: Craig Williams, senior technical leader at Cisco’s security biz Talos, believes quite a few bods working in computer security will not be in the sector in the next five years.
…
The profit motive is responsible for vulnerable software. Fitting the profit motive is responsible for a lack of effective efforts to protect against vulnerable software.
Does it seem odd that the business community views cybersecurity, both in terms of original software vulnerabilities and efforts to guard against them in the balance sheet of profit and loss?
That is even though data breaches can and do occur, if they are reasonable in scope and cost, it is easier to simply roll on and keep making a profit.
If you think about it, only the government and the uninformed (are those different groups?) think cybersecurity should be free and that it should never fail.
Neither one of those is the case nor will they ever be the case.
Security is always a question of how much security can you afford and for what purpose?
At the next report of a data breach, ask how do the costs of the breach compare to the cost to prevent the breach?
And to who? If a business suffers a data breach but the primary cost is to its customers, how does ROI work in that situation for the business? Or for the consumer? Am I going to move because the State of Georgia suffers data breaches?
I don’t recall that question ever being asked. Do you?