Report: Disconnection Between Security Officials and Employees on Data Breaches
In a new survey, 49 percent of information technology leaders say employees have accidentally put sensitive data at risk between one to 10 times in the past year while 61 percent believe employees put out this data maliciously.
April 01, 2019 at 05:38 PM
3 minute read
There is a disconnect between rank-and-file employees and chief security officers on who is to blame in the event of a data breach, according to a report published last week by Egress Software Technologies Ltd. and Opinion Matters.
The survey was commissioned by Egress and received responses from 4,000 U.S. and U.K. employees to determine the root causes of employee-driven data breaches. The organization also reached out 500 U.S.- and U.K.-based information technology leaders.
From the perspective of the information technology leaders, 49 percent of respondents indicated that employees have accidentally put sensitive data at risk between one to 10 times in the past year. Sixty-one percent of information technology officials that responded believe that employees have put out information maliciously.
“IT leaders are rightfully concerned by insider data breaches and believe that there is a likelihood of them occurring in the near future at their organization,” the report says. “Despite this recognition and understanding of the root causes, they still can't seem to prevent them from actually happening. The result is loss of brand equity; heavy compliance fines; and potentially lost revenue, lost customers and lost competitive advantages.”
According to the report, 38 percent of respondents believe that the greatest impact of a data breach caused by employee negligence.
Edward McAndrew, a cybersecurity partner at DLA Piper in Wilmington, Delaware, and Washington, D.C., said it is understandable that security executives at companies believe leaks come from employees over infrastructure.
“Employees are the most common attack vector into any organization by a malicious actor,” McAndrew said. “They [also] engage in non-malicious conduct on systems that result in potential data compromise or leakage.”
When it comes to the employee side, 94 percent of U.S. employees and 87 percent of U.K. employees responded that they have not intentionally broken company data-sharing policies.
“When employees do recognize that they may have caused a breach, they attribute it to a high-pressure work environment, rushing to get a job done, and poor training,” the report said.
CEO and co-founder of Egress, Tony Pepper, said in the report that security executives could be doing more to help employees prevent breaches.
“While IT leaders seem to expect employees to leak data—they're not providing the tools and training required to stop the data breach from happening,” Pepper said.
McAndrew said companies should focus on promoting a culture of cybersecurity. He said often employees are not seeing what the information security team is seeing when it comes to data events or breaches elsewhere.
“I don't think it's hard to do and I think it something that resonates with employees because these issues don't just apply to the employees sitting behind a desk or utilizing a smartphone on behalf of his or her employer,” McAndrew explained. “They apply to everybody at home as well. The best practices around identity and access controls apply to us as individuals at home.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHow Marsh & McLennan's Small But Mighty Legal Innovation Team Builds Solutions That Bring Joy
Aggressive FTC May Force Merging Companies to Bolster Legal Defenses
4 minute readBest Legal Departments: How Blackstone's Legal and Compliance Team Got the All-Clear to Grow Business
CEOs Want Data-Based Risk Management; GCs Lack the Tech to Do So.
Trending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250