Cracking Down on Cyber Crime

Description: CNN’s Maggie Lake discusses how companies are combating cyber crime scams.

Source: CNN.com

Date: Feb 8, 2013

1. What are government companies doing to prevent cyber crime?

2.  Why don’t organizations like to report when they are a victim of cyber crime?

Advertisements

22 thoughts on “Cracking Down on Cyber Crime

  1. Oyinkan Bakinson

    From a civil perspective, it may seem that government companies are not doing enough to prevent cyber-crime but how can we really tell. They may or may not be taking steps to prevent occurrences of cyber-crime. Technology advances at a very rapid rate. What is new today may be old tomorrow so steps have to be taken to always be ahead of the hackers. These companies need to be willing to spend the time and money to prevent such issues occurring. They also need to realize that it is a dynamic world we live in and they can’t keep using the same techniques after all you don’t study the same way you did in elementary school.
    Organizations will never want to admit that they have been hacked due to reputation. After all it only take one little thing to take down years of trust and loyalty. If you heard that you bank had been hacked, I’m sure the first thought you would have would be to move all your money to another bank. It would tarnish an image that they have worked hard to build as well as sow doubts within their customers’ minds. I highly doubt that any company today would willingly put it out there that they had been hacked.

    Reply
  2. Lindsey

    Companies do not like report when they have been the victims of cyber crime because they fear losing customers’ confidence. If a customer does not feel their information is safe with your organization, or if they are constantly hearing that your organization is a victim of cyber crime, they may choose to do business elsewhere. Privacy is becoming a larger concern to customers and they don’t want to risk their personal information or purchasing information, so they may choose to go to your competitors if they appear to be better protected. Anonymous also has a fairly positive perception in the public, particularly with younger demographics, as younger people generally view Anonymous as a vigilante cyber group. Depending on your customer’s political views, they could view your association with this group as a negative affiliation.

    Reply
  3. shaunagregus

    Companies don’t like to report when when they are a victim of cyber crime because it makes them look weak. If a bank’s computer system gets attacked, their clients are not going to feel safe having their money and information stored there. I think that for the most part people are pretty ignorant as to the security that is in place in organizations to keep their information safe. We blindly trust these companies to carry our information, and believe that it will be protected. When a company admits to being infiltrated by a cyber attack the consumer no longer trusts the company, regardless of the level of effort they placed on keeping their information safe.
    That being said, companies need to ensure that their security is as thorough as possible. We as consumers place our trust in them with personal information. We are helping them by giving them our business, and it is therefore their job to ensure the private information we supply them with remains private. Companies that think they can take the cheap way out and then just sit there and keep their fingers crossed that no one will notice are taking a huge risk. The benefits of ensuring a strong security system is in place far outweigh the risks associated with being cheap.

    Reply
  4. Alexi Kubeczek

    1. What are government companies doing to prevent cyber crime?
    In all truth, government companies are doing all that they can to prevent it but, it’s just like anything else, there will be gaps or holes sometimes. And, as the reporter said it, there only needs to be one mistake and cyber criminals are in. They keep updating their systems, purchasing the services from corporate lawyers, likely going to seminars, etc. But the truth is, as time goes by, new programs are developed and it’s impossible to stay ahead of everything. It’s just like snow. You hope that it doesn’t fall so that you can play soccer outside but eventually, it’ll happen. And you’ll be playing indoor soccer until the snow is gone. Or, if your coach is like mine, you’ll play even when it’s still there. Basically, you just hope that you can stay ahead of it but there will be gaps because nothing can ever be perfect.

    2. Why don’t organizations like to report when they are a victim of cyber crime?
    Case and point: Look at the DOW. Banker’s info was leaked and the DOW drops to -30 more or less? Now, I’m no savvy investor, but, at that point in time, I would liquidate as much of my assets as I can. At least until some of the hype has been reduced. Customers will do the same to companies. It’s like everyone thinks the events that occurred in ”Live Free or Die Hard” are imminent and they start to panic all at the same time and suddenly, people start scavenging for resources. Well, that’s a little dramatic, but, they will be more careful with where they spend/place their hard-earned income.

    Reply
  5. Janelle M

    With the criminals being technologically more advanced than their victims, it becomes incredibly difficult to track down and stop this kind of crime. Government companies are doing their best to stay on top of the attacks, but the job becomes daunting when companies hesitate to report these crimes. Companies would avoid reporting for a number of reasons. The first would be to avoid any repercussions from their customer base. If customers are aware of database hacks, they will lose they could trust in the company. Customers could also point the blame on the company itself for not staying on top of new technologies or hiring the right people to avoid these attacks. This could cost companies a great deal in the long run. They could also avoid reporting due to a lack of understanding and knowledge about how the technology works. If the information is unclear to the company, it becomes difficult to know what to do to avoid being the target. Companies are also constantly weighing the pros and cons to whether the costs are worth the effort. Securing their database could become costly. Often times the victims in these crimes are not the companies themselves, but rather the customers. With the customer’s information being targeted, companies may not feel as obliged to spend more financially to protect this information.

    Reply
  6. Andrew Garlock

    According to the video, the companies and governments are employing more and more IT specialists to keep track of all of the ins and outs of the system, and so that if there is a breach in security, the good guys can find it before anyone outside the system is able to exploit it. They can improve firewalls and increase security at entry points with more passwords and even biological security measures. At the MWC this past few days, there has been talk from companies developing facial recognition and biometric measures for cell phones. Although no one has implemented it yet as far as I know, it seems like a major selling feature that companies are trying to capitalize on. However, cameras have been pushed on almost every new phone to be released this upcoming year as 13 megapixels are becoming the norm and Nokia going above and beyond with a ludicrous 41mp sensor. In addition to this, companies are employing high quality lenses, flashes, and improved software to reduce shake. Phone security using these high power cameras as well as voice recognition will be a major selling feature of these new models in the upcoming months.

    As far as why companies don’t like it when there is news of them being hacked, it is quite obvious: when a person hears that there is a major breach at, say, amazon.com, and that person was just about to give that site their credit card and all of their personal information, that person is going to think twice before going through with the transaction. This sort of news can severely hurt a company’s brand image, so often the best thing to do is to just shut up about it and downplay it as much as possible.

    Reply
  7. Haley

    The government and private sector corporations got by for the past years by just implementing the bare minimum security for their computers and networks, but as the years go on we have seen numerous hacks into big time businesses that I think are making the companies think twice about there level of protection. Now that it is becoming a serious threat companies are starting to understand that they do indeed need to do more but still haven’t done enough!! Even if they were to spend millions of preventing cyber crime, the hackers will learn the new fire walls or new anti virus protection and simply hack in. These hackers are very intelligent people and spend their days gaining restricted access. So I believe there has to be more done than just individual companies spending more money on prevention, they all have to come together and be smart, figuring out ways to reduce the risk of cyber crime.
    Companies do not want to release when they have been hacked for one obvious reason: customer loyalty. If you found out wal mart got hacked and the hackers walk away with a bunch of credit card numbers, and identitys would you feel safe to shop there again, knowing you could be at risk for credit card theft. It would have a huge impact on a companies reputation and I believe would impact then negatively.

    Reply
  8. Edward Agyapong

    Well I believe that government agencies are doing all in their power to put an end to cyber crimes. It seems that the more they put up stumbling blocks for these cyber criminals the more they seem to develop means and ways to combat these blocks from the government. Just like the Malaria virus, the more you try to prevent it with one malaria medication the virus develops a resistance to that particular medication so then you’d have to change and the cycle continues. Even with the multiple folds of firewalls created by the pentagon and other top government secret agencies these hackers seem to have a way into their systems once a in while. The point is we are never really safe because if we closed one door another will be opened by just a mistake we make. And as human as we are mistakes are bound to occur. Organizations dont like to report when the are victims of cyber crime because they know the implications of such an activity. Reporting such and activity will by all means cripple the company. Nobody wants be where he or she isn’t safe, especially with finances. If you are a firm and me a customer has trusted you with my detailed financial information; be it my credit cards, bank information and many more and I hear on the news that your systems holding my personal information has been hacked. Am definitely leaving your for some where i will feel safe. And that is why these organizations and the government normally fails to report such activities. Like I said earlier there is no where safer, the best is to always keep your double guard up.

    Reply
  9. Greg Goodwin

    Companies are not investing enough and are not doing enough to prevent cyber crime attacks. Corporations in the private sector and in the government sector are not coordinating their efforts, but if they did, they “might be able to … get further along, or get a leg up.”
    Organizations do not like to report when they are a victim of cyber crime because they do not want to “lose face” with their customers. It makes them look vulnerable and weak, thus not very good hands to trust a consumer relationship in, let alone a long lasting one in which the company has access to some of your most personal information. Some companies, especially government organizations also have an issue with transparency. From a business perspective, some things are better left out of the public eye, therefore they do not maintain an organizational structure that allows transparency. Also, some organizations do not take cyber attacks seriously. That is to say, if vulnerabilities are not continuously searched for, there is bound to be one at some point which could enable an attack to happen.

    Reply
  10. Matt Gough

    Government company’s dont seem to be doing enough to help prevent the spread of cyber crimes. Increasing the protection that a company has can be very expensive so several companies are trying to get by without the protection they need. People who commit cyber crimes are getting smarter and their technology is always advancing so companies would be required to be making changes on a regular basis in order to keep up. If a corporation as powerful as the pentagon is making huge changes in combating cyber crimes then you can only imagine how important it is for other organizations (with lower security) to make those same changes. A lot of our personal information is given to the places we spend our money and it is their responsibility to keep it safe and secure. Just like was mentioned in the video, companies dont like to admit when they fall victim to cyber crimes because they fear that their customers will no longer trust the systems that they have in place and take their business elsewhere. It seems that if a company is willing to spend money on protection then they dont have to worry about losing customers if they fall victim to cyber crimes.

    Reply
  11. Jordan Gibson

    1. What are government companies doing to prevent cyber crime?
    Government companies had once thought that they were doing everything they possibly could to prevent cyber crime, however as we all know that is simply not the case. Companies were always going with the bare-minimum protection/securities systems and it is finally catching up with them. Hackers are very smart, calculated individuals. If you think by only setting up one blockade or wall will prevent them from hacking into the system, you must be a fool. These individuals make this their daily craft and have mastered these practices by trying and trying over and over again. Now after all of this we are finally seeing companies go to stronger security methods to protect precious data and intel, because if it somehow fell into the hands of a stranger they could become extremely vulernable to an attack. Hopefully this starts to see results, otherwise customers will become very skeptical about trusting them with their precious information.
    2.Why don’t organizations like to report when they are a victim of cyber crime?
    It’s pretty easy to see why companies and large corporations don’t like to report incidents when they are victims of cyber crime. For one, it is extremely embarrassing to say that you could of done more, but you didn’t, and then have all your data lost into all together. Second, if your customers ever found out would they trust you again? Would they take there business somewhere else? Probably. So I definitely understand why companies would hide this and keep it private. For myself personally, if the company that I had trusted to keep my information had been hacked I would immediately take my business elsewhere. When it comes down to personal, sacred information that involves you and your family you simply cannot take the chance of staying.

    Reply
  12. Helen Reina

    1. What are government companies doing to prevent cyber crime?
    Government companies try to prevent cyber crime but they effort is not enough. Corporations are not doing anything to prevent cyber crime, even though they have been warn by government institutions but they still are not investing enough in protecting themselves from cyber crimes that can affect information or data bases they might have. Also, we have heard that cyber crime is something that happens often everyday, so they need to take in consideration that in order to avoid cyber crime, because just one mistake and they can take advantage.
    2. Why don’t organizations like to report when they are a victim of cyber crime?
    First of all, they do not have any idea of where this cyber criminals come from and If they do not have information they think customers could think that it is not sure to make business or been client of this corporation. That is one of the reasons of why corporations do not admit their systems have been violated by cyber criminals, also because they are afraid of customers consequences for this incident but it is not the right decision transparency is the best way they can choose, after that they will find a way to protect more their systems, corporations and institutions need to take this problem seriously.

    Reply
  13. Ida Draper

    I can understand why major corporations would want to avoid publically discussing any information when they are the victim of a cybercrime. There is the possibility to lose a great deal of business when their reputation is damaged. The damaged reputation is hard to repair and it is hard to impossible to convince the customers to return to your business. Admitting that you did make a mistake and a cybercriminal did get in could be an advantage to your competitors if you were to make the information public. There can be entire marketing campaigns based around the concept of “your information is safer with us rather than…”
    The lack of transparency between the businesses when it comes to sharing information about the cybercrimes slows the process and ability to not only capture the cybercriminals but to improve the technology to defend against the crimes. Corporations are unwilling to work together in my opinion because if they do work together on sharing information that could help boost your security you could be making one of your competitors to knowledgeable about your company. There is always the fear that if you are going to another corporation for help that it might show that you are the weaker company.

    Reply
  14. Jordan Slemp

    The government is putting more and more money into combating cyber crime. Each year the Pentagon increases its funding to preventing cyber crime. The unfortunate fact is this is not enough. Cyber criminals are constantly coming out with new tricks and techniques to hack into a system. Combating these techniques which as of now do not exist is extremely challenging. If the Pentagon is not fool proof then I am sure many corporations will be taking serious hits.
    There are a few reasons a company would want to hide the fact it was attacked by a cyber criminal. One being the trust of consumers. If a customer were to find out the company it does business with may not be protected from cyber fraud, that consumer would most likely discontinue business. This makes me wonder how safe our credit card or banking information really is. The store we make purchases at may have recently been attacked and we don’t even know it.

    Reply
  15. James Perry

    Government companies are not doing enough to prevent the ongoing problem of cyber crime. I realize the costs involved with integrating such programs and securities to eliminate these types of crimes but at the same time its the personal information of the clients that trust doing business with you and trust that you have their best interests and security of their personal information in mind. With that being said and the image and reputation of your company being on the line, I personally think that I would take all precautions and make all the nessisary changes to insure the security of the company and of the customers that ultimately keep the cash flow coming in. Organizations most likely would not like to admit weakness in being hacked or a victim of cyber crime. This would tarnish the image of the company and would most ikely lose the credibility that the customers have in the organization. Let alone the lawsuits that would arise from unhappy customers that have had their personal information compromised

    Reply
  16. Prashant malik

    Cyber crime is a criminal activity which is done using computers and the internet. It includes monetary as well as non monetary offences. The most prominent form of cyber crime is identity theft, in which criminals use the Internet to steal personal information from other users.It is a problem that the companies have to tackle on daily basis. I don.t think, that the companies are doing enough to prevent cyber crime.Only Pentagon in the US has increased its protection five fold inorder to combat such attacks , but other govt. organisations have not taken any steps towards it. I know, that spending on such security measures can be quite expensive and time consuming , but if they ignore this problem completely , the companies ends up in loosing more money and even their customers when they are the victims of such attacks.

    Organizations don’t like to report when they have been victims of cyber crime because of the Repercussions from the customers. They worry that when the customers would come to know about such attacks , they would probably like to change their business.However, I think that customers would welcome more transparency as mentioned in the video clip. Organisations should install protection software and should change their passwords regularly in order to minimize such attacks. Also , organisations should educate their employees on basic security measures, such as how to recognize potential threats and why it’s important always to take precautions. Last thing i would like to say is that no matter how hard an organisation try, it will never be completely safe from cybercrime. So one need a last line of defense. One of the best is an insurance policy

    Reply
  17. Nicole Freeman

    Well it doesn’t seem that the government is doing much besides sending out warnings that agencies need to be diligent about cyber criminals getting a hold of sensitive information. In fact, according to this broadcast, the only government agency doing anything substantial about the threat is the Pentagon who has increased their cyber command fivefold. I think it is increasingly difficult to anticipate every single threat that could potentially disable a system or anticipate what methods could be used to access information. Companies do not want to admit if they have been hacked. It suggests that the company is weak and lacking the computer savvy to keep their customers safe. When consumers no longer trust a company, they will find another company to do business with; devastating a company overnight. If cooperation, transparency and coordination are required to ward off this threat, I think it will be a very long time coming. The reporter said that in order to stay safe from cybercrime companies need to be “right all the time”. Coordinating efforts between the private and public sector could potentially lead to finger pointing if there were to be a serious breach. I can imagine if, after combining their efforts, a hacker were to find his way into the system through let’s say the Bank of America, all other companies would be lined up to throw the Bank of America under the bus to save their own skins, their reputations and their own stock prices.

    Reply
  18. Tayler Orban

    Government companies are not doing enough to prevent cyber crime because it is a problem that is increasing on a daily basis. Prevention is going to be extremely expensive and will have to be updated quite frequently because for every prevention software created there is a hacker who can figure it out. Presently, the government is increasing their protection fivefold in order to combat these cyber crimes but I think this is only the beginning of a long and extensive process. Most organizations do not like to spend the money on protection and when they are a victim of cyber crime they don’t like to report it or admit it because they are embarrassed. This has happened quite a few times and they are worried that their customers will react negatively and take their business elsewhere but how can they blame them? No customer wants to shop at a place or give their information to a company that has little protection of their personal information. Organizations should be installing protection software and spending the money in the first place because it is costing them even more after they are hacked and are losing some of their customer base. I believe they would benefit more by having protection and they would not have to be embarrassed or fail to report if they did get hacked.

    Reply
  19. Jessi Chrapko

    According to this particular video, it doesn’t appear that governments are doing much to combat cyber crime. Yes the Pentagon in the US has increased their cyber security, but other governmental institutions don’t seem to have taken such steps. As discussed in the video clip, it would be beneficial to governments and corporations if they coordinate and work together, coming up with a set of standards for at least a minimum level of security. While it is difficult to have a sufficient budget, cyber crime is obviously an area where some money and time need to be spent to try to keep up with this issue.

    Organizations don’t like to report when they have been victims of cyber crime because of “repercussions from customers”. They worry they won’t keep their customers once they find out that there has been a security breach. However, I think that customers would welcome more transparency as mentioned in the video clip. I believe people would appreciate knowing that governments and corporations are at least trying to have better cyber security. They should also be informed of any breaches in organizations where their personal information is stored, it is essentially a right.

    Reply
  20. Lanre Paulissen

    Truth be told, IT systems are expensive to deploy and maintain. With the deployment of this system comes the issue of security; companies have proprietary data, customer information, and various other sorts of data that need to be kept private. The challenge is that cyber criminals are also daily evolving new ways to circumvent security protocols and systems.
    Government companies are doing the best they can to prevent cybercrime. An example is a statement from the video that states that in the U.S. the Pentagon has increased five-fold the cyber command at the Pentagon. Which other organization if not the Pentagon should take cyber-crime very serious? A break into their systems would be catastrophic; it would actually be a case of national security.
    On the other hand, private corporations do not have an unending pool of funds to allocate to security systems and as such their management could only try the best they can based on the limited resources at their disposal. The ethical dilemma comes to play when company executives blow the trumpet of how secure their internal information is but then only to be hit by a hack the week after. The actions of the executives are understandable but inexcusable. Understandable because they want to portray a good image to the public but inexcusable because most times the company does not have sufficient and up-to-date security systems in place to prevent against a break-in. Furthermore, after an infiltration corporation try to curb the damage because of the fear of repercussions from their clients and possible litigation.

    Reply
  21. mark schmitz

    Companies usually see fit to do what the budget dictates. Many good companies adhere to strict spending protocols that don’t include a lot of preventative measures. Unfortunately this is the case for how the general population goes about daily activities. From personal, corporate, and government finance to your own overall health; waiting before it’s too late seems to be the trend.
    While a CEO will stand before you and boast about how well prepared they are for any sort of system infiltration, it is only to uphold the image for the organizations’ shareholder. Panic prevention is on the main agenda. The prettier the painted picture the better shareholders can sleep at night. To answer the question “what are companies doing to prevent cyber-crime?” –they are not doing enough. They do the very minimum until something bad happens to their system.
    Organizations choose to withhold cyber-crime incidences from the public to keep from escalating their situation. From the companies perspective, why make a bad problem worse? In light of past corporate corruption cases all organizations should have a duty to report to all stakeholders no matter if the reports are good or bad.

    Reply
  22. Justeen Kolody

    Government companies are doing all they can to prevent the cyber criminals to get in, as mentioned in the clip the Pentagon had increased security five fold. But why haven’t other corporation done the same? With many peoples identities stored in these databases why has it not becomes the companies number one priority to protect customers information. And why has the government not implemented at least minimum standards, I suppose if standards were applied that the hackers will just evolve and find another way around it. But if consumers saw the due diligence put forward by the companies people would see that they are at least making a effort to protect ones identity it might help make the company more transparent.
    As for companies not reporting when they do become a victim of cyber crime I think that they do not want the hassle of damage control. What I mean by this is if the company does become hacked they then have to contact every one in their database that their identity has been compromised. What there would be many unhappy and angry people to deal with, but as companies just ignore it they feel that doing nothing is the easiest way out.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s