Reputational costs due to leakage of your data easy to survive. Examples are enough.
In October of this year, Google decided to close Google+ social network because large-scale security issues. The social network has provided third-party developers access to users ‘ confidential data, which were not marked as “public”. Has been compromised the data of more than 500 thousand users. Of the latest attacks was remembered for a leak in Facebook, affecting 29 million users.
Informed victims of hackers have become a health insurer Anthem, Internet giant eBay, JPMorgan Chase Bank, retailers Home Depot and retailer Target Corporation Yahoo, Adobe and others.
In April this year, the Commission on securities and exchange, the US fined Yahoo for the management of the Corporation had not notified investors of a major leak of 2014. Then the hackers got access to personal data of 500 million people. Information about hacking became public only in 2016, the Commission fined Yahoo not for the fact of leakage, but for the fact that the management company did not disclose information about it to its investors or auditors. The Board members were aware of the incident, but chose to remain silent.
Later, the management of Yahoo acknowledged another, larger leak from 2013, when hackers stole according to preliminary information data billion, and according to some sources — three billion users. In fact, leaked the data of all customers Yahoo.
It is clear that the hackers improve their methods, but why so irresponsible corporations relate to their customers? Motherboard experts believe that companies are at risk for the sake of profit, and when collateral damage is small, they are willing to take the risk again and again.
Experts research cent Ponemon Institute in its report “2018 Cost of a Data Breach Study”, commissioned by IBM, has estimated that the average cost of a data leak in the world is about 3.86 million dollars, including the cost of it services, insurance payments, notification of affected users and loss of customers. In the US, the average loss is estimated at 7.91 million dollars. The study looked at 477 companies with staff from 1 thousand to 100 thousand employees a year receive revenues from 100 million to 25 billion dollars. So the damage from the leak for them — no more than a rounding error, says founder and President of the Ponemon Institute Larry Ponemon (Larry Ponemon).
In addition, users themselves have a very short memory, and the problem of privacy they do not care about in the first place. The Ponemon study showed that after the leak, Facebook’s credibility one of the major companies fell from 78 percent to 25 percent, but very soon the numbers were back up to 30, and then rose to 60 percent. After a couple of months the values returned to normal, as if nothing had happened. People prefer not to think about the problem, because I want to continue to use usual services and products, to find a replacement which often can be difficult.
Often corporations themselves are confidential information of users like their product. Not so long ago the developers of browser with ad blocking Brave has filed a formal complaint against Google. The company accused the search engine in spying on users, reports Reuters. Brave believes that Google violates European Union regulations on data protection (GDPR). The company, founded by the creators of Mozilla releases a browser that blocks banners and does not allow search engines, social networks and service providers to track the search history and personal data of users. According to experts, is based on data on ethnicity, location and political beliefs of users, which is a gross violation of the GDPR.
The government is trying to regulate relations between users and corporations, but not always for the good first. We all remember the scandals with surveillance being perpetrated by the NSA against millions of users around the world, including members of European intelligence services, members of the European Parliament and top officials. The practice continued in the West now. The Ministry of internal Affairs of Germany has recently approved the use of the software FinSpy to monitor encrypted communications on mobile devices; officially, the software is called “Software sources monitoring of telecommunications”, but is actually a Trojan. FinSpy needs to assist the Federal criminal police office to read the encrypted message in messengers like WhatsApp, Telegram or Signal. The program is secretly installed by investigators on a mobile device of a suspect invisibly records encrypted chats and sends them to law enforcement.
In June 2017, the Bundestag adopted a reform of the criminal procedure code allowed the police to use such surveillance program, but only on the basis of a judicial decision. It is expected that this will help the fight against terrorism, drug trafficking, and also in cases of tax evasion.
Sometimes, the States asserted their sovereignty in matters of storing digital data of its citizens. So, Apple officially announced that on February 28 transmits the management data of Chinese iCloud users of a local company on the Cloud Guizhou Big Data (GCBD) that is associated with the Chinese authorities. This step is required by the Chinese laws that require companies to store data about Chinese users in the country. The rules came into force in the summer of 2017.
In turn, in Russia, users accustomed to a new digital culture — to share their data voluntarily and on the basis of mutual benefit.
So, in the national programme “Digital economy” may be the regulation on incentives for the Russians, the data of which is used by banks, logistics and transport companies, insurers and other organizations, RBC reports. Curator of the direction “regulation” in nutsprogramme Dmitry Ter-Stepanov compared the accrual of incentives for users in receipt of benefits the authors of the works. In what form will encourage the Russians, is still under discussion. It can be money, bonuses, discounts, or something else. The discussions involved officials and businessmen. Market participants user data along with its volume at 3.3 billion rubles. They believe that legislative regulation of the turnover of data collection and processing more transparent, and will allow people to monitor how they are treated.
Read more •••