Return-Path: <sentto-279987-4819-1023911480-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com> Delivered-To: fc@all.net Received: from 204.181.12.215 [204.181.12.215] by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.7.4) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:52:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 1418 invoked by uid 510); 12 Jun 2002 19:51:34 -0000 Received: from n35.grp.scd.yahoo.com (66.218.66.103) by all.net with SMTP; 12 Jun 2002 19:51:34 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-4819-1023911480-fc=all.net@returns.groups.yahoo.com Received: from [66.218.66.95] by n35.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Jun 2002 19:51:20 -0000 X-Sender: fc@red.all.net X-Apparently-To: iwar@onelist.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_0_3_2); 12 Jun 2002 19:51:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 14198 invoked from network); 12 Jun 2002 19:51:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m7.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 12 Jun 2002 19:51:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO red.all.net) (12.232.72.152) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Jun 2002 19:51:20 -0000 Received: (from fc@localhost) by red.all.net (8.11.2/8.11.2) id g5CJpQj15760 for iwar@onelist.com; Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:51:26 -0700 Message-Id: <200206121951.g5CJpQj15760@red.all.net> To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List) Organization: I'm not allowed to say X-Mailer: don't even ask X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net> X-Yahoo-Profile: fcallnet Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 12:51:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [iwar] [fc:Security.holes:.The.danger.within] Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=DIFFERENT_REPLY_TO version=2.20 X-Spam-Level: Security holes: The danger within By Vivienne Fisher, ZDNet Australia, 6/12/02 <a href="http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2111703,00.html">http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2111703,00.html> Employees continue to be overlooked as an IT security threat, despite the significant destruction they can cause, according to one white paper. A white paper released in the US by Web filtering vendor SurfControl found that more than 80 percent of security compromises faced by companies came from within. Charles Heunemann, managing director at SurfControl in Australia, estimates that about 90 percent of Australian companies' intellectual capital is held in digital format. Heunemann believes it's this which makes it a convenient target for unauthorised electronic transfer. The white paper also found that poor security policies and procedures and lack of staff education contributed to employees being an IT security risk. "Whether incidents are due to malicious intent or inadvertent employee error, the result is the same: loss of revenue, productivity, and potential liability," said author Jack McCullough in a statement about the white paper. "Many organisations only develop or update policies and procedures in reaction to a security compromise," McCullough said. "As a result companies are vulnerable, despite spending large sums on security products and consultants." ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Will You Find True Love? Will You Meet the One? Free Love Reading by phone! http://us.click.yahoo.com/Deo18C/zDLEAA/Ey.GAA/kgFolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2003-08-24 02:46:32 PDT