|
|
 |
|
Viewing report
|
|
|
|
2010 Data Breach Prevention and Response: Causes, Consumer Consequences, and Tools for Layered Defense (DLP and SIEM)
Javelin Strategy & Research, June 2010, Pages: 37
Data breaches have become commonplace – 26% of U.S. consumers have received data breach notifications. Global criminal networks continue to evolve quickly to develop more sophisticated capabilities. Data loss and breach containment will be an ongoing challenge for businesses. Layered defenses such as data loss prevention (DLP) and security incident and event management (SIEM), covered in this report, can help. This report lists best practices for organizations before, during, and after a data breach. Should an incident occur, the organization needs to take specific actions quickly to minimize losses and curtail the impact to customer relationship. Long term, organizations need to provide not just notification but a complete resolution process.
Primary Questions
- How do customers react to data breaches?
- What increased risks of identity fraud do data breach victims have?
- How does a notification letter affect a consumer’s relationship with a financial institution?
- How are data breaches being perpetrated?
- How does a security reissue affect consumer use of a credit and/or a debit card?
- What steps should an organization take in advance of a data breach?
- Are there services for monitoring sensitive data?
- What steps should any breached company take first?
- Are there companies that provide data breach services?
Methodology
This report is based on data collected online from a random-sample panel of 3,294 online consumers collected in November 2009, with an overall margin of sampling error of ±1.71 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. Data from a September 2009 telephone survey with 5,000 U.S. adults, including 703 identity fraud victims, was also used in this report. For questions answered by all 5,000 respondents, the maximum margin of sampling error is +/- 1.4% at the 95% confidence level. For questions answered by all 703 identity fraud victims, the maximum margin of sampling error is +/- 3.7% at the 95% confidence level. For questions answered by a proportion of all identity fraud victims, the maximum margin of sampling error varies and is greater than +/- 3.7% at the 95% confidence level. The surveys targeted respondents based on representative proportions of gender, age, ethnicity and income compared to the overall U.S. online population. Rounding (in the underlying numbers) in the figures included in this report accounts for the slight differences in totals. Secondary data from publicly available online sources have also been included in this report.
Product samples
A sample for this product is available. Please Login/Register to download this sample.
Customers who bought this item also bought
2010 Annual Identity Protection Services Scorecard: Market Challenges, Consolidations and the Move Toward
2011 Identity Fraud Survey Report: Identity Fraud Decreases – but Remaining Frauds Cost Consumers More Time & Money
2010 Identity Fraud Survey Report: Identity Fraud Continues to Rise – New Accounts Fraud Drives Increase; Consumer Costs at an All-Time Low
Security and ID Theft in the United States 2006
End to End Encryption, Tokenization & EMV in the U.S. Vendor Analysis of Emerging Technologies and Best Hybrid Solutions
ATM & PIN Fraud: Bank and Consumer Losses are More Severe (and the Problem is Growing)
Sixth Annual Card Issuer’s Safety Scorecard: Red Flags Rule Shows Signs of Success as Criminals Shift Methods
Payment Card Issuer Strategies 2010: The Rise of The Cautious Consumer
10 Trends That Will Transform Banking, Payments, Mobility and Security in 2012
10 Trends That Will Transform Banking, Payments, Mobility and Security in 2012
|
|
|
|
