Too Fast for Comfort? Cloud-Based App Deployment Outpacing Security Abilities
The 2018 Enterprise Cloud Trends report found that most organizations' IT staff are struggling to keep up with the demand for cost-effective enterprise cloud applications.
April 11, 2018 at 01:35 PM
4 minute read
|
Organizations are deploying cloud-based applications faster than they can secure them, according to the 2018 Enterprise Cloud Trends report, a survey of 200 IT decision-makers in U.S. corporations with at least 500 employees.
The report, commissioned by IT company iboss, found that the move to cloud-based applications is set to increase in the months and years to come. While an average of only 21 percent of respondents' applications are currently cloud-based, respondents expect that to rise to 28 percent over the next year and 33 percent over the next one to two years.
What's more, though organizations currently spend an average of 26 percent of their IT budget on cloud applications, respondents also expect that to rise to 31 percent over the next year, and 39 percent over the next two years.
Most organizations are able to handle the technical challenges of moving to cloud-based solutions, with 83 percent of IT decision-makers noting they were comfortable with supporting the change. But while they can support cloud applications, securing them is another story. Almost two-thirds, 64 percent, said their organizations' adoption of cloud-based applications is outpacing their ability to properly secure them.
So why are companies moving to cloud-based apps faster than they can potentially secure them? For most, it's about capital. Fifty-five percent of respondents cited cost-savings as the biggest benefit they experience from moving to cloud-based applications, while 54 percent also cited increased revenue.
What's more, almost half, 49 percent, of IT decision-makers said they will make all of their investment back from a cloud-based application, while 35 percent pegged their return on investment (ROI) at 150 percent, and 15 percent expected to double their investment.
To be sure, there are a number of potential security issues facing cloud application deployments, including the prospect of sensitive data being uploaded to, or accessed through, cloud services.
“Employees may not know that they're not allowed to upload [sensitive data] into their sanctioned cloud storage app and cause a compliance violation, or they may share confidential client documents through an unsanctioned app that isn't secure and trigger a violation that way,” Jervis Hui, product marketing manager at Netskope, previously told Legatech News.
Implementing strict access control on all cloud applications, therefore, is pivotal to a company's compliance and security needs. But oftentimes, it is not enough. Given the ability of malware to quickly spread through cloud-connected devices, it is also vital for companies to ensure their cloud provider has significant cybersecurity protocols in place.
However, many will erroneously assume cloud vendors have such security controls in place. “You have this false sense of security when we're using a cloud service provider that they are going to be thinking about security, and oftentimes that is not how it works,” Holly Brady, senior counsel at Altria Client Services, told ALM Media's 2017 cyberSecure conference in New York.
Even large well-known cloud providers, such as Amazon, have experienced breaches in the past. “It seems that not a week goes by that we don't see a headline about an insecure Amazon web service [exploit],” Brady said.
The need for cloud security is essential, given that many organizations use cloud-based apps to store potentially sensitive data. The survey found that almost two-thirds, 63 percent, used or planned to use cloud-based applications for email, while 59 percent used or planned to use them for file sharing, 57 percent for human resources work, and 55 percent for customer relationship management programs.
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 AllTrending Stories
- 1Connecticut Movers: Year-End Promotions, Hires and an Office Opening
- 2Luigi Mangione Defense Attorney Says NYC Mayor’s Comments on Case Raise Fair Trial Concerns
- 3Revisiting the Boundaries Between Proper and Improper Argument: 10 Years Later
- 4Hochul Vetoes 'Grieving Families' Bill, Faulting a Lack of Changes to Suit Her Concerns
- 5Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Customers: Developments on ‘Conquesting’ from the Ninth Circuit
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