Act Of Human Error Or Failure
Contents |
10’s new Quick Assist app Review: Office 365's Delve, Sway, and Planner fall flat How UPS delivers predictive analytics HackerOne CEO: 'We’re building the world’s biggest security talent agency' More potential acts of human error or failure Insider Sign Out Search for Suggestions for you Insider email Big Data CIO deliberate acts of information extortion 100 Symposium and Awards Careers/Staffing Cloud Computing Consumer Technology Developers Hardware Healthcare IT Industry IT Strategy All IT Strategy CIO Role
What Is Human Error In Computers
CMO Role Innovation Leadership and Management Outsourcing Infrastructure All Infrastructure Data Center Networking Storage Virtualization Insider Threats Internet All Internet Marketing Mobile All Mobile Mobile Apps Mobile Management Smartphones Tablets Wearables Operating Systems
Human Error Threat To Information Security
All Operating Systems Linux Windows Security All Security Cybersecurity Disaster Recovery Malware Privacy Regulation Software Contact Us Magazine Subscription Services Archive News Opinion Resources Slideshows Video More CIO Executive Council CIO Events Newsletters RSS Blogs × Close Home IT Strategy News Human Error Tops the List of Security Threats More like this The Future of Information Security: 2008 and Beyond Can Mid-Market Merchants Comply with PCI Standards In human error in information technology Time? Trendlines: New, Hot, Unexpected Majority of companies list "human error" as root cause of security failures, well ahead of operations and technology, new Deloitte survey says. Email a friend To Use commas to separate multiple email addresses From Privacy Policy Thank you Your message has been sent. Sorry There was an error emailing this page. Comments By Diann Daniel Follow CIO | Feb 5, 2008 7:00 AM PT RELATED TOPICS IT Strategy Comments When it comes to security, human threats score much higher than those posed by technology. So says a new survey by consulting firm Deloitte of more than 100 technology, media and telecommunications companies worldwide. Seventy-five percent of companies listed human error as the leading cause of security failures such as breakdowns and systems outages. Forty-eight percent also cited operations and technology lapses as key causes of security failures. Problems resulting from third parties such as contractors and business partners, meanwhile, received 28 percent of the votes as a root cause of security failures. Misbehaving employees also figure prominently in IT fears: Ninety-one percent of respondents say the risk
Search twitter Login Toggle navigation Events Popular articles About Login Register Newsfeed Navigator Analytics Track Discover Newsfeed Navigator Analytics Track Discover Events Popular articles About Login Register Back Forward
Data Breach Human Error
View original Forward Print Read Later ShareFacebookTwitterGoogle PlusLinked In Follow Please login to follow examples of human error in information technology content. Register now for your free, tailored, daily legal newsfeed service. Questions? Please contact customerservices@lexology.com Register Deeper Dive: Human Error ________ involves accomplishing job tasks during failure. Is to Blame for Most Breaches Blog Data Privacy Monitor Baker & Hostetler LLP USA April 25 2016 Each year, as companies implement the latest security technologies, attackers develop and launch new tactics, techniques, http://www.cio.com/article/2437201/it-strategy/human-error-tops-the-list-of-security-threats.html and procedures to circumvent those technologies. While investment in security defense and detection technologies is an essential component to building an effective defense-in-depth strategy, the reality is that most breaches can be traced back to human error. In our 2016 Data Security Incident Response Report, we looked back at the more than 300 incidents that we handled in 2015 to identify the top causes. Identifying and understanding http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=625e7188-833b-4e70-a3bd-2c25d1b8b5ce the constantly evolving causes of security incidents, which vary among industries, allows us not only to better advise organizations on how to proactively become what we call “compromise ready,” but also enables us to use these “lessons learned” to help organizations effectively respond to incidents when they do occur. Last year, we identified human error as the leading cause of incidents (37 percent), followed by phishing/malware (25 percent), external theft of a device (22 percent), and employee theft (16 percent). This year, however, phishing/hacking/malware took the top spot, accounting for approximately 31 percent of incidents. The other top causes were employee action/mistake (24 percent), external theft (17 percent), vendors (14 percent), internal theft (8 percent), and lost or improper disposal (6 percent). From an industry perspective, these top causes were relatively consistent with phishing/hacking/malware as the leading cause, with the exception of healthcare, in which human error remained the top cause of incidents by a significant margin. (Click here to view graphic) Taking a Closer Look When we took a closer look at the underlying issues that allowed the phishing/hacking/malware incidents to occur, however, they could often be attributed to human error in some way. Attackers are increasingly relying on phishi
Health Search databasePMCAll DatabasesAssemblyBioProjectBioSampleBioSystemsBooksClinVarCloneConserved DomainsdbGaPdbVarESTGeneGenomeGEO DataSetsGEO ProfilesGSSGTRHomoloGeneMedGenMeSHNCBI Web SiteNLM CatalogNucleotideOMIMPMCPopSetProbeProteinProtein ClustersPubChem BioAssayPubChem CompoundPubChem SubstancePubMedPubMed HealthSNPSRAStructureTaxonomyToolKitToolKitAllToolKitBookToolKitBookghUniGeneSearch termSearch Advanced Journal list Help Journal ListBMJv.320(7237); 2000 Mar http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1117770/ 18PMC1117770 BMJ. 2000 Mar 18; 320(7237): 768–770. PMCID: PMC1117770Human error: models and managementJames Reason, professor of psychologyDepartment of Psychology, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PLku.ca.nam.ysp@nosaerAuthor information ► Copyright and License information ►Copyright © 2000, British Medical JournalThis article has been cited by other articles in PMC.The human error problem can be viewed in two ways: the person human error approach and the system approach. Each has its model of error causation and each model gives rise to quite different philosophies of error management. Understanding these differences has important practical implications for coping with the ever present risk of mishaps in clinical practice. Summary pointsTwo approaches to the problem of human fallibility exist: the person and of human error the system approachesThe person approach focuses on the errors of individuals, blaming them for forgetfulness, inattention, or moral weaknessThe system approach concentrates on the conditions under which individuals work and tries to build defences to avert errors or mitigate their effectsHigh reliability organisations—which have less than their fair share of accidents—recognise that human variability is a force to harness in averting errors, but they work hard to focus that variability and are constantly preoccupied with the possibility of failurePerson approachThe longstanding and widespread tradition of the person approach focuses on the unsafe acts—errors and procedural violations—of people at the sharp end: nurses, physicians, surgeons, anaesthetists, pharmacists, and the like. It views these unsafe acts as arising primarily from aberrant mental processes such as forgetfulness, inattention, poor motivation, carelessness, negligence, and recklessness. Naturally enough, the associated countermeasures are directed mainly at reducing unwanted variability in human behaviour. These methods include poster campaigns that appeal to people's sense of fear, writing another procedure (or adding to existing ones), disciplinary measur
be down. Please try the request again. Your cache administrator is webmaster. Generated Fri, 30 Sep 2016 01:57:12 GMT by s_hv1000 (squid/3.5.20)