7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - Automated Vulnerability Testing Reports From External Security Labs
When buying business software online, it's crucial to assess its security thoroughly. Reports generated by external security labs can provide a valuable window into the software's vulnerabilities. These labs use automated tools to scan the software, networks, and systems, looking for things like misconfigurations or outdated components that attackers could exploit. Automated scans provide a much broader, faster, and often more accurate picture of potential weaknesses compared to manual methods.
By regularly analyzing these reports, businesses can understand the specific risks associated with a particular software package. This insight helps them prioritize security measures, tailoring their efforts to the most pressing threats. In today's environment, where security landscapes are constantly shifting, having a clear view of vulnerabilities is paramount. By including information from these external reports in their buying decisions, organizations can make more informed choices and reduce the chances of experiencing security issues after they've made a purchase.
When evaluating software security, especially when purchasing online, reports from independent security labs offering automated vulnerability testing can be quite valuable. These automated tests can uncover a substantial portion – up to 80% – of known vulnerabilities in a piece of software. This significantly speeds up the process of fixing those issues, decreasing the window of time where the software might be exposed.
Many of these labs employ sophisticated AI and machine learning techniques to find security weaknesses, potentially identifying intricate vulnerabilities that traditional security scans often miss. However, despite these advancements, a major hurdle with these automated tests is their tendency to generate a considerable number of false positives. Studies suggest these reports might contain anywhere from 30% to 50% false alarms, necessitating human experts to further validate them.
To make sense of these reports, many labs use the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS) to rank vulnerabilities based on their potential severity and how easily they might be exploited. This helps companies determine which issues need immediate attention. It's also important to understand that these reports are often dynamic; external labs usually provide periodic updates as new vulnerabilities are discovered over time, highlighting the importance of continuous monitoring.
Curiously, although these automated reports offer much helpful information, many organizations struggle to fully utilize them. Research suggests that a substantial portion – upwards of 60% – of identified vulnerabilities might remain unaddressed due to resource limitations or a lack of understanding of the reports.
This trend towards automated vulnerability testing is also leading to a greater reliance on external labs. This industry is predicted to expand at a healthy rate, exceeding 12% per year, indicating an increasing emphasis on software security during the purchase process.
Automated vulnerability scans cover a wide range of aspects, including not only examining the code for known weaknesses but also assessing configuration flaws and potential vulnerabilities within third-party libraries. These libraries are sometimes forgotten and a weak point.
As regulatory compliance frameworks are evolving, automated vulnerability assessments are becoming a mandatory element for compliance. Regulations like GDPR and PCI DSS are encouraging businesses to undergo regular assessments conducted by external labs.
Lastly, the accuracy and trustworthiness of the results from these automated vulnerability tests heavily hinge on the quality of the specific lab conducting the assessment. Therefore, when choosing an external lab, it's essential for businesses to thoroughly evaluate their methodologies and review their track record in order to gain a good sense of their competence.
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - Zero Trust Architecture Implementation Status Within Software
The adoption of Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) within software is becoming increasingly vital in today's intricate digital landscape. This architectural approach, fundamentally built on the idea of microsegmentation and continuous access verification, represents a departure from the older, perimeter-focused security models. Organizations are seeing the value in moving toward ZTA, particularly as guidance from groups like NIST and others outlines best practices for implementation. It's recommended that businesses use a planned and gradual approach, encouraging collaboration between security experts and business leaders to navigate the shift effectively.
However, while ZTA is gaining traction, many organizations continue to grapple with its complete integration. One of the key hurdles is shifting away from an assumption of trust for internal users and devices to a mindset where each access request is seen as potentially suspicious and must be validated. This transition isn't straightforward, and it requires a deep understanding of ZTA's core principles. With increased pressure to fortify security in software, a firm grasp on the nuances of Zero Trust will be essential for any business hoping to safeguard their digital assets and data.
Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) is gaining traction as a core security principle, particularly within software. Its foundation lies in the concept of microsegmentation, carving up networks into isolated zones to better manage access to vital data and resources. This approach marks a substantial departure from traditional security, which heavily relied on perimeter defenses. Instead, ZTA insists on verification at every access point.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has offered guidance on ZTA implementation, providing a structured path forward based on industry best practices. Achieving a fully implemented ZTA is increasingly viewed as essential for securing access to software, machines, and online services. Organizations are advised to gradually adopt ZTA, with collaboration between security teams and management being key to successful implementation.
NIST has also released a draft for public comment about a Zero Trust Architecture specification. It is based on real-world experiences with 24 different technology vendors. The Department of Defense has even created its own Zero Trust Reference Architecture, aimed at driving standardization in this developing area.
The growing complexities of modern digital environments are driving the adoption of Zero Trust models. Businesses are facing a critical decision point as they grapple with the need for stronger security practices, particularly in light of increasing cyber threats and governmental pressures. There's a clear push to move away from automatically trusting everyone inside the network – both users and devices. This includes taking a closer look at how Executive Order 14028 impacts software and cybersecurity, particularly aligning it with NIST's cybersecurity framework.
While ZTA holds promise, organizations are wrestling with a set of challenges. Implementing a full ZTA strategy often requires significant integration with older systems, which can be a source of friction and delay. The increased security comes at the price of a learning curve and some level of disruption to user experience. This is because ZTA often involves more frequent authentication to ensure continued access to resources. Furthermore, ZTA puts a spotlight on data protection over mere network control, making it critical to examine where data resides and how it is protected, especially in cloud and hybrid environments. It also requires a deeper level of third-party vendor due diligence, as organizations shift their focus to ensuring the security of external partnerships.
The future of ZTA involves the growing use of AI and automation to detect threats and fine-tune security rules in response to evolving patterns of attack. The expense is likely to be significant and may lead to around 10-15% of IT budgets being consumed by ZTA-related technologies. It is a dynamic landscape, and organizations must carefully assess their circumstances, prioritize security needs, and thoughtfully evaluate if ZTA is the appropriate direction.
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - Annual Security Audit History And Independent Certifications
When assessing business software, a critical aspect to evaluate is the software provider's track record of security audits and independent certifications. Regular, independent security audits – conducted by external experts – demonstrate the provider's commitment to upholding a robust security posture and adhering to industry standards. Certifications like ISO 27001 serve as a public sign that the company prioritizes data protection. Cyber Essentials and similar certifications can offer practical security guidelines for many types of businesses.
While seeking these certifications is important, it's equally important for buyers to investigate the frequency and scope of the audits themselves. They should look for evidence of audits that reveal potential weaknesses and confirm compliance with regulations. Additionally, the nature of the business and the sensitivity of the data involved might necessitate more frequent audits. This is especially true when a company experiences significant operational changes, like a merger or a data breach. Without a clear picture of how security audits are conducted and the results obtained, it's hard to evaluate a provider's commitment to cybersecurity.
When it comes to the security of business software, particularly when purchased online, the topic of annual security audits and independent certifications is a complex one. It's often tied to regulatory requirements, but there's a lot more to it than simply checking a box.
Many organizations are obligated to perform these audits yearly to meet specific industry standards. However, it's rather concerning that a large number of businesses don't keep up with this requirement. It suggests a potential gap in awareness of the importance of these checks, possibly because it's viewed as a tedious task or perhaps due to limited resources. This laxness could lead to critical vulnerabilities going unnoticed for extended periods, making the organization susceptible to security incidents.
The findings of these security audits are another fascinating point. While these assessments can unveil security weaknesses, the reality is that a significant number of these discovered flaws often languish without prompt remediation. This suggests either a lack of prioritization or perhaps limited capacity to handle the identified vulnerabilities in a timely manner. The issue here is that delaying fixes can prolong the window of exposure, leaving the system vulnerable to exploitation.
An aspect that is rarely discussed is the role of third-party vendors in these audit processes. It's noteworthy that a substantial portion of data breaches are directly attributable to weaknesses in third-party software or services. By requiring certifications from vendors, organizations can better ensure that these third parties are adhering to adequate security standards, thus bolstering the overall security posture of the entire system.
However, it's not enough to simply obtain these certifications. These certifications often have a specific lifespan, typically needing renewal every few years. The problem is that many companies seem to overlook this aspect, resulting in gaps in their compliance. It raises concerns about the perceived importance of these recurring certifications and potentially reflects a laxity in management. The consequences could be substantial, particularly in the aftermath of an incident, if the certification was out of date.
Interestingly, the automation of security audits has demonstrably increased the detection rate of weaknesses, offering a more comprehensive assessment. However, this approach might come with a potential downside, especially in the area of human-factor considerations. A purely automated approach might neglect certain crucial aspects of risk assessment that only a skilled human operator can identify. There is a delicate balance between the advantages of automation and the need for nuanced human understanding.
The potential consequences of not maintaining a healthy culture of security audits are substantial, going beyond a simple inconvenience. Regulatory penalties for non-compliance can be a significant financial drain, often impacting profits dramatically. This underscores the significant importance of making regular audits a priority.
The benefits extend beyond avoiding fines, though. It appears that customers are increasingly attuned to security aspects and value the presence of third-party security certifications. This means that having a robust audit history and associated certifications could positively affect public perception and customer trust. In this manner, security audits are also a tool for building brand reputation.
When a major data breach occurs, it can significantly damage the reputation not just of the organization directly affected but also its business partners. This is called the "meltdown effect". This highlights the critical nature of proactive security measures like regular audits to avoid becoming entangled in such a catastrophic event.
Recently, the field of security audits has evolved with the concept of continuous auditing. It seems to be a promising development, as these real-time assessments provide more agility in threat detection.
Sadly, there's a notable shortage of individuals with the skills to carry out these security evaluations and assessments. This presents a significant obstacle to organizations seeking to bolster their defenses. The gap in talent creates an interesting paradox where security auditing is more crucial than ever but achieving a high standard of security may be difficult due to a lack of qualified personnel.
In essence, the realm of security audits and independent certifications is a critical element of overall business security, especially in a world where software purchases are becoming increasingly frequent. The insights here reveal that there are challenges and opportunities to consider, ranging from regulatory requirements to the subtle psychological impact on customer trust. Remaining vigilant and adopting best practices is crucial to staying ahead of the evolving threat landscape.
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - Multi Factor Authentication And Password Management Standards
When evaluating business software in 2024, a crucial security check involves understanding the software's approach to multi-factor authentication (MFA) and password management. MFA strengthens security by demanding two or more distinct verification methods to confirm a user's identity, significantly reducing the risk of unauthorized access through stolen passwords. Organizations are increasingly being urged to implement robust MFA, particularly those following guidelines from bodies like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). NIST's push for phishing-resistant MFA emphasizes the importance of stopping attackers from gaining access to credentials.
Furthermore, NIST's updated recommendations for password management in 2024 encourage a more practical approach by promoting password managers. These tools automate the creation of complex, random passwords, thereby simplifying password management for users without compromising security. This balanced approach helps reduce user frustration while improving security.
The landscape of cybersecurity is dynamic and constantly evolving. Therefore, the incorporation of MFA and strong password practices is no longer optional; they're becoming indispensable for organizations seeking to protect their sensitive data and digital assets. The future of secure business software will undoubtedly rely heavily on these critical elements.
In the realm of online software security, ensuring user access and data protection is paramount, and multi-factor authentication (MFA) and robust password management standards are playing an increasingly important role. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) strongly advises implementing robust MFA systems to bolster security across digital platforms. This is especially vital in light of government mandates like OMB M2209, which requires agencies, contractors, and partners to employ phishing-resistant MFA methods to protect authentication credentials.
While NIST's updated password guidelines for 2024 emphasize a more practical approach by encouraging organizations to combine MFA with strong password practices to alleviate user burden while enhancing security, simply relying on strong passwords isn't sufficient. The reality is that a significant number of data breaches still occur due to weak or reused passwords, making MFA a crucial piece of the security puzzle.
NIST's guidance emphasizes the use of password managers that create complex, randomized passwords to enhance overall password security and management. NIST Special Publication 80063B details the standards for MFA verifiers, indicating that the testing requirements for MFA are the same as for single-factor verification systems. Interestingly, a password coupled with a security token from the same category only counts as one factor. This highlights the importance of ensuring the chosen factors come from distinct categories.
Executive Order 14028 underscores the importance of national cybersecurity by designating critical software and mandating enhanced security measures for its development and use. This broader focus on software security reflects the increasing risks posed by expanding digital footprints and the need to safeguard sensitive information. Biometrics are now broadly accepted as a valid component of multi-factor authentication, providing another layer of protection beyond traditional methods. However, it's crucial to recognize that, unlike passwords, compromised biometric data cannot be easily reset, creating a unique set of risks.
It's also important to acknowledge that user resistance to MFA can be a considerable challenge, as many people find it cumbersome and potentially disruptive. This can lead to a phenomenon called "authentication fatigue," where users become less likely to follow security protocols over time. This challenges the practical applicability of MFA in certain settings. Moreover, as the adoption of MFA increases, so does the sophistication of phishing tactics that aim to circumvent these security protocols, highlighting the necessity of user education.
Organizations grappling with multiple software platforms and authentication systems may also face challenges. Creating a cohesive and secure authentication environment across different platforms can be difficult and often leads to fragmented systems with potential security gaps. It's clear that in 2024, ensuring a strong security posture for business software hinges on a combination of technical safeguards, sound password management practices, and user awareness of evolving threats. The future of secure authentication looks to leverage tools such as machine learning for advanced password management and threat detection, and businesses will need to adjust their approaches to authentication to meet growing regulatory pressures and user expectations in the ever-evolving cybersecurity landscape.
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - Data Encryption Protocols At Rest And In Transit
When evaluating business software in 2024, it's crucial to examine how it handles data encryption, both while it's being stored (at rest) and while it's moving between systems (in transit). Data in motion, like when you're accessing software online, is especially vulnerable to being intercepted, so protocols like Transport Layer Security (TLS) are essential for maintaining confidentiality during these transfers. On the other hand, data that's stored on servers or in databases needs protection too, and methods like Full-Disk Encryption (FDE) and AES encryption are commonly used for this purpose. It's important to realize that the more sensitive the information your software handles, like financial records or health details, the more critical it is to have strong encryption safeguards in place. Given how commonplace it is for software to handle sensitive data these days, buyers should make verifying the software's encryption protocols a key part of their decision-making process. Failing to do so could leave your organization exposed to a wider range of security risks. It's a matter of establishing a robust defensive layer against potential data breaches and unauthorized access.
Data encryption protocols, like Transport Layer Security (TLS), are fundamental for protecting data while it's moving between servers and users. This "data in transit" is often more exposed compared to data that's stored. Protecting data at rest, meaning data stored in databases or file systems, is also crucial. Think about medical records in healthcare or credit card data in finance – that's data at rest.
Organizations strive to keep both kinds of data safe and private by encrypting them. Encryption essentially transforms sensitive data into a scrambled form that's meaningless to anyone without the proper decryption key. This scrambled data is only readable to authorized users with the correct key. Full-disk encryption (FDE) and techniques like AES-256 encryption at the file level are common for safeguarding data at rest.
Email is a particularly vulnerable communication channel, as it is prone to interception. So, it's vital to employ solid encryption practices when using email to safeguard sensitive information. The best approach to securing data is to consider its various states: at rest, in transit, and in use. This usually involves a combination of encryption methods and protocols to achieve the best level of protection.
Cryptography, which deals with techniques to secure information, plays a core role in securing data, both while it's stored and while it's being sent. Securely exchanging encryption keys is a critical piece of the puzzle. You want to ensure only the intended parties have access to the keys that unlock the encrypted data.
As business software is increasingly involved in the sharing of sensitive data, it's becoming increasingly important to look into how that software handles encryption of data both at rest and during transit. During the software buying process, these encryption protocols become a significant factor to consider when determining a software's overall suitability and security.
While many software solutions claim to use encryption, the level of security they provide can be deceiving. Understanding the nuances of encryption protocols like end-to-end encryption and how they are implemented in a software product is crucial. Furthermore, the performance impact and the complexity of managing encryption across various systems are aspects that are often overlooked but can have important implications for security and operational efficiency. The threat of quantum computing also adds another layer of complexity, driving research into next-generation encryption methods to ensure continued security. As data breaches are still prevalent, often stemming from issues in key management and user error, we need to be mindful of both the technological safeguards and the human element. Encryption is a valuable tool, but its implementation shouldn't be taken lightly. Businesses need to be cautious and thorough when evaluating the security posture of the software they use to manage their valuable data.
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - Supply Chain Security Documentation And Third Party Dependencies
When acquiring business software in 2024, understanding the intricacies of the software's supply chain and its reliance on external components is essential for maintaining security. The software supply chain, encompassing a wide range of elements like libraries and third-party software, presents a complex security challenge. While using external components can speed up development, it also exposes the software to vulnerabilities outside the direct control of the purchasing organization. These external dependencies, whether proprietary software or open-source options, need to be carefully evaluated and managed, as they represent potential pathways for attackers.
The core concept here is software supply chain security (SSCS). SSCS provides a framework for recognizing, assessing, and minimizing the security risks introduced by these dependencies. Since vulnerabilities in third-party software can compromise the security of your own systems, thorough due diligence is crucial. This involves having a clear understanding of how these external components are vetted and maintained. It's important to note that relying on outside resources for software components requires a different approach to security than if you were developing and controlling every aspect of the software yourself.
In a world of interconnected software, it's become vital for organizations to have detailed documentation related to supply chain security. This is a way to demonstrate a commitment to robust security practices. Having a well-defined process for choosing and managing these third-party components also helps reduce risks over the long term. As the nature of software development becomes more complex, and dependencies on external components increase, this area of security has become critically important to safeguard business operations and data integrity.
### Supply Chain Security Documentation and Third-Party Dependencies
When evaluating software, especially when it relies heavily on external components, it's crucial to consider the security implications of its supply chain. It's become clear that modern software often weaves together a complex tapestry of dependencies, with a large percentage of applications incorporating open-source components. This complex web of interconnections can be a double-edged sword. While it speeds up development and fosters innovation, it also creates a potential pathway for vulnerabilities. If a weakness exists within one of these interconnected elements, it can spread like wildfire, jeopardizing the security of the whole system.
One worrying trend is that a substantial portion of data breaches seem to stem from issues within these third-party components, indicating a need for more rigorous vetting during the software selection process. It's akin to a chain reaction – a security lapse in one vendor can have ripple effects throughout the entire supply chain.
Things get even more complex when you consider that software frequently receives updates and upgrades, often changing how it's configured. This continuous evolution of software is essential for patching vulnerabilities, but it also can create inconsistencies in the security documentation. A mismatch between documented security practices and actual implementations can create unexpected openings that hackers might exploit. This is an area that warrants a great deal of attention because it can lead to situations where, despite best efforts, a piece of software may become more vulnerable with each update rather than more secure.
This situation highlights the growing importance of regulatory compliance. Bodies like the GDPR and the NIST have emphasized that organizations can no longer afford to ignore the security risks posed by their vendor relationships. It's not enough to simply ensure your own software is secure – you also need to have a system in place for evaluating and managing the security of the components that make up that software. Unfortunately, a significant portion of organizations still haven't caught up to this new reality, which often leads to compliance issues and potential legal problems.
Another issue is that security documentation isn't always readily available or reliable. We see that in many cases, organizations struggle to obtain detailed and reliable security documentation from their vendors. This lack of transparency presents a major obstacle to understanding the potential risks associated with a particular piece of software. It can also strain the trust relationship between buyers and sellers.
Even when documentation is available, it isn't always a straightforward process. Often, the security practices documented by a company don't perfectly align with those of its vendors. This mismatch creates inconsistencies that can complicate risk assessments and create blind spots.
Adding to these concerns, we've seen a rise in supply chain attacks, which specifically target vendors. It's not uncommon for companies to experience at least one attack of this nature. These kinds of attacks demonstrate the need for a diligent and structured approach to vendor security and documentation management.
Interestingly, a surprisingly large number of these successful attacks can be traced back to human errors related to managing relationships with vendors or handling security documentation. This highlights a key factor – while technologies and tools are important, ensuring human teams follow appropriate protocols and are trained is critical.
It's essential to understand that the threat landscape is constantly evolving. New vulnerabilities arise all the time, demanding ongoing monitoring and revision of security documentation. But surprisingly, a substantial portion of organizations do not keep their security documentation current, potentially leaving them susceptible to newly discovered exploits.
This is an area where new technologies, like blockchain, may offer promising solutions. Early experiments suggest that blockchain can improve the transparency and traceability of supply chain activities, which could potentially reduce vulnerabilities arising from third-party components.
In conclusion, managing third-party dependencies and associated security documentation is a significant aspect of modern software security. The issues are complex and multifaceted, ranging from the difficulty of assessing risk to the need for robust human processes and oversight. Staying vigilant about emerging trends in supply chain security and continuously evaluating vendor security practices will be increasingly critical for minimizing vulnerabilities in this connected world.
7 Critical Security Checks When Purchasing Business Software Online in 2024 - API Security Features And Access Control Frameworks
When acquiring business software in 2024, a crucial security aspect to consider is how well the software handles its Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and manages access to them. APIs frequently serve as pathways to sensitive data within software, making it crucial that the software you buy has the right security features.
A key area of concern is implementing fine-grained access control mechanisms. Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) is a common approach that restricts access to APIs based on a user's assigned role. This helps prevent unauthorized access and data exposure, particularly important if the software manages sensitive data like financial details or personal information.
Additionally, it's wise to ensure the software vendor follows established security best practices and guidelines. The OWASP API Security Top 10, for example, offers a recognized checklist of common API vulnerabilities that software developers should address. Adherence to these standards indicates a commitment to security.
However, it's crucial to note that a strong API security posture goes beyond just access control. Measures like encryption, which scrambles sensitive information, are vital. Rate limiting, which helps prevent malicious actors from overwhelming the API with requests, is another key safeguard. And, given the dynamic nature of cybersecurity threats, continuous monitoring is essential to identify and respond to potential exploits.
Ultimately, the more a business depends on API integrations within the software it uses, the more important it becomes to ensure adequate API security is built in. By rigorously evaluating these security aspects of software, organizations can significantly improve their overall cybersecurity posture and safeguard valuable data against evolving attack techniques and malicious actors.
When acquiring business software in 2024, it's crucial to understand the security surrounding Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) and how they manage access. It's surprising how often APIs become a vulnerability, given they are often overlooked in the design and security testing phases. In fact, a considerable chunk of organizations, around 80%, have faced security incidents tied to APIs within the last year. This indicates that, due to reduced visibility and control, APIs can be more vulnerable than conventional application interfaces.
It's even more startling that about 70% of developers don't routinely test their APIs for security risks. This suggests a serious gap in proactive security practices compared to how web or mobile applications are typically tested. Many organizations erroneously think their existing perimeter defenses are sufficient to protect APIs. Unfortunately, attackers frequently target APIs directly, completely bypassing these traditional defenses.
Properly implemented access control frameworks are a key part of the solution, but only about half of companies use them for their APIs. This exposes their systems to unauthorized access, leading to potential compliance issues, particularly concerning regulations like GDPR. As software becomes more intricate with the rise of microservices, the number of APIs increases. This complexity can easily lead to oversight, as nearly all large enterprises have at least one misconfigured API, placing sensitive data at risk.
Furthermore, OAuth protocols, commonly used to authorize access, are often misconfigured in over 60% of cases, potentially granting third-party apps access to sensitive user data. This underscores the critical need for rigorous testing and configuration of these protocols. Rate limiting, a valuable security feature to prevent abuse and denial-of-service attacks, is surprisingly neglected, with fewer than 30% of APIs using it.
While automated tools for API security vulnerability detection are available, they frequently have a high false-positive rate—up to 50%. This underscores the necessity for incorporating manual testing and expert review into an API security strategy. It turns out that dynamic, context-aware security policies are incredibly effective at lowering unauthorized access incidents in about 80% of organizations. This indicates that a shift away from static policies towards more adaptable security measures in API management is likely a good direction.
Finally, it's alarming that external vendors often pose a security risk, as close to 70% of breaches involve third-party components. This emphasizes the importance of meticulous vendor vetting and consistent monitoring of vendor access protocols. The insights here highlight the need to consider both API security features and access control frameworks as core components for safeguarding modern software against an evolving threat landscape. It’s no longer sufficient to rely on legacy security controls. A proactive and comprehensive approach is essential for companies that handle sensitive data online.
More Posts from :