A new report from IBM Security today reveals that data breaches are costlier and more impactful than ever before.
IBM Security’s 2022 Cost of a Data Breach Report, based on analysis of real-world data breaches experienced by 550 organizations globally between March 2021 and March 2022, found that the average cost of a data breach has hit an all-time high of $4.35 million.
Figures relating to large companies and the cost involved in dealing with data breaches may seem academic to many, but interestingly the report suggests that the increasing cost of these incidents — up 13% over the last two years — is contributing to rising costs of goods and services. Sixty percent of studied organizations raised their product or service prices after experiencing a data breach. Those increases come at a time the cost of goods is already increasing from inflation and supply chain issues.
Data breaches were also found not to be one-offs, with 83% of studied organizations having experienced more than one data breach in their lifetime. Another factor rising over time is the after-effects of breaches on these organizations, which linger long after they occur, as nearly 50% of breach costs are incurred more than a year after the breach.
Whether companies are exclusively to blame for lax cybersecurity is arguable, but many were found lacking in adopting cutting-edge and more modern security practices. Eighty percent of critical infrastructure organizations studied were found to have not adopted zero-trust strategies, seeing average breach costs rise to $5.4 million – a $1.17 million increase compared with those that do.
Companies either in the early stages or who have not started applying security practices across their cloud environments were found to have $660,000 higher average breach costs than studied organizations with mature security across their cloud environments.
Conversely, organizations that have fully deployed security artificial intelligence and automation incurred $3.05 million less on average in breach costs compared to studied organizations that have not deployed the technology – the biggest cost saver observed in the study.
Ransomware victims in the study that opted to pay threat actors’ ransom demands saw only $610,000 less in average breach costs compared with those that chose not to pay – not including the cost of the ransom. Given the high price of ransom payments, the report notes, the financial toll may rise even higher, suggesting that paying the ransom may not be an effective strategy.
The most costly form of data breach among the companies studied was found to be phishing. Compromised credentials were the most common cause of a breach at 19% but phishing, accounting for 16% of breaches, led to average breach costs of $4.91 million.
Other highlights in the report included healthcare breath costs hitting double digits for the first time, with an average breach in the sector resulting in a cost of $10.1 million. Insufficient security staffing was noted to be a serious issue, with 62% of organizations saying they are not sufficiently staffed to meet their security needs, averaging $550,000 more in breach costs than those that state they are sufficiently staffed.
“Businesses need to put their security defenses on the offense and beat attackers to the punch,” Charles Henderson, global head of IBM Security X-Force, said in a statement. “It’s time to stop the adversary from achieving their objectives and start to minimize the impact of attacks.”
Were you unable to attend Transform 2022? Check out all of the summit sessions in our on-demand library now! Watch here.
While enterprises are setting records in cybersecurity spending, the cost and severity of breaches continue to soar. IBM’s latest data breach report provides insights into why there’s a growing disconnect between enterprise spending on cybersecurity and record costs for data breaches.
This year, 2022, is on pace to be a record-breaking year for enterprise breaches globally, with the average cost of a data breach reaching $4.35 million. That’s 12.7% higher than the average cost of a data breach in 2020, which was $3.86 million. It also found a record 83% of enterprises reporting more than one breach and that the average time to identify a breach is 277 days. As a result, enterprises need to look at their cybersecurity tech stacks to see where the gaps are and what can be improved.
Enhanced security around privileged access credentials and identity management is an excellent first place to start. More enterprises need to define identities as their new security perimeter. IBM’s study found that 19% of all breaches begin with compromised privileged credentials. Breaches caused by compromised credentials lasted an average of 327 days. Privileged access credentials are also bestsellers on the Dark Web, with high demand for access to financial services’ IT infrastructure.
The study also shows how dependent enterprises remain on implicit trust across their security and broader IT infrastructure tech stacks. The gaps in cloud security, identity and access management (IAM) and privileged access management (PAM) allow expensive breaches to happen. Seventy-nine percent of critical infrastructure organizations didn’t deploy a zero-trust architecture, when zero trust can reduce average breach losses by nearly $1 million.
Enterprises need to treat implicit trust as the unlocked back door that allows cybercriminals access to their systems, credentials and most valuable confidential data to reduce the incidence of breaches.
The report quantifies how wide healthcare’s cybersecurity gap is growing. IBM’s report estimates the average cost of a healthcare data breach is now $10.1 million, a record and nearly $1 million over last year’s $9.23 million. Healthcare has had the highest average breach cost for twelve consecutive years, increasing 41.6% since 2020.
The findings suggest that the skyrocketing cost of breaches adds inflationary fuel to the fire, as runaway prices are financially squeezing global consumers and companies. Sixty percent of organizations participating in IBM’s study say, they raised their product and service prices due to the breach, as supply chain disruptions, the war in Ukraine and tepid demand for products continue. Consumers are already struggling to meet healthcare costs, which will likely increase by 6.5% next year.
The study also found that nearly 30% of breach costs are incurred 12 to 24 months after, translating into permanent price increases for consumers.
“It is clear that cyberattacks are evolving into market stressors that are triggering chain reactions, [and] we see that these breaches are contributing to those inflationary pressures,” says John Hendley, head of strategy for IBM Security’s X-Force research team.
For healthcare providers with limited cybersecurity budgets, prioritizing these three areas can reduce the cost of a breach while making progress toward zero-trust initiatives. Getting identity access management (IAM) right is core to a practical zero-trust framework, one that can quickly adapt and protect human and machine identities are essential. IBM’s study found that of the zero-trust components measured in the study, IAM is the most effective in reducing breach costs. Leading IAM includes Akamai, Fortinet, Ericom, Ivanti, Palo Alto Networks and others. Ericom’s ZTEdge platform is noteworthy for its combining ML-enabled identity and access management, zero-trust network access (ZTNA), microsegmentation and secure web gateway (SWG) with remote browser isolation (RBI) and Web Application Isolation.
VentureBeat's mission is to be a digital town square for technical decision-makers to gain knowledge about transformative enterprise technology and transact. Learn more about membership.
Cybersecurity has always been a concern for every type of organization. Even in normal times, a major breach is more than just the data economy’s equivalent of a ram-raid on Fort Knox; it has knock-on effects on trust, reputation, confidence, and the viability of some technologies. This is what IBM calls the “haunting effect”.
A successful attack breeds more, of course, both on the same organization again, and on others in similar businesses, or in those that use the same compromised systems. The unspoken effect of this is rising costs for everyone, as all enterprises are forced to spend money and time on checking if they have been affected too.
But in our new world of COVID-19, disrupted economies, climate change, remote working, soaring inflation, and looming recession, all such effects are all amplified. Throw in a war that’s hammering on Europe’s door (with political echoes across the Middle East and Asia) and it’s a wonder any of us can get out of bed in the morning.
So, what are the real costs of a successful cyberattack – not just hacks, viruses, and Trojans, but also phishing, ransomware, and concerted campaigns against supply chains and code repositories?
According to IBM’s latest annual survey, breach costs have risen by an unlucky 13% over the past two years, as attackers, which include hostile states, have probed the systemic and operational weaknesses exposed by the pandemic.
The global average cost of a data breach has reached an all-time high of $4.35 million – at least, among the 550 organizations surveyed by the Ponemon Institute for IBM Security (over a year from March 2021). Indeed, IBM goes so far as to claim that breaches may be contributing to the rising costs of goods and services. The survey states:
Sixty percent of studied organizations raised their product or services prices due to the breach, when the cost of goods is already soaring worldwide amid inflation and supply chain issues.
Incidents are also “haunting” organizations, says the company, with 83% having experienced more than one data breach, and with 50% of costs occurring more than a year after the successful attack.
Cloud maturity is a key factor, adds the report:
Forty-three percent of studied organizations are in the early stages [of cloud adoption] or have not started applying security practices across their cloud environments, observing over $660,000 in higher breach costs, on average, than studied organizations with mature security across their cloud environments.
Forty-five percent of respondents run a hybrid cloud infrastructure. This leads to lower average breach costs than among those operating a public- or private-cloud model: $3.8 million versus $5.02 million (public) and $4.24 million (private).
That said, those are still significant costs, and may suggest that complexity is what deters attackers, rather than having a single target to hit. Nonetheless, hybrid cloud adopters are able to identify and contain data breaches 15 days faster on average, says the report.
However, with 277 days being the average time lag – an extraordinary figure – the real lesson may be that today’s enterprise systems are adept at hiding security breaches, which may appear as normal network traffic. Forty-five percent of breaches occurred in the cloud, says the report, so it is clearly imperative to get on top of security in that domain.
IBM then makes the following bold claim :
Participating organizations fully deploying security AI and automation incurred $3.05 million less on average in breach costs compared to studied organizations that have not deployed the technology – the biggest cost saver observed in the study.
Whether this finding will stand for long as attackers explore new ways to breach automated and/or AI-based systems – and perhaps automate attacks of their own invisibly – remains to be seen. Compromised digital employee, anyone?
But perhaps the most telling finding is that cybersecurity has a political dimension – beyond the obvious one of Russian, Chinese, North Korean, or Iranian state incursions, of course.
Concerns over critical infrastructure and global supply chains are rising, with threat actors seeking to disrupt global systems that include financial services, industrial, transportation, and healthcare companies, among others.
A year ago in the US, the Biden administration issued an Executive Order on cybersecurity that focused on the urgent need for zero-trust systems. Despite this, only 21% of critical infrastructure organizations have so far adopted a zero-trust security model, according to the report. It states:
Almost 80% of the critical infrastructure organizations studied don’t adopt zero-trust strategies, seeing average breach costs rise to $5.4 million – a $1.17 million increase compared to those that do. All while 28% of breaches among these organizations were ransomware or destructive attacks.
Add to that, 17% of breaches at critical infrastructure organizations were caused due to a business partner being initially compromised, highlighting the security risks that over-trusting environments pose.
That aside, one of the big stories over the past couple of years has been the rise of ransomware: malicious code that locks up data, enterprise systems, or individual computers, forcing users to pay a ransom to (they hope) retrieve their systems or data.
But according to IBM, there are no obvious winners or losers in this insidious practice. The report adds:
Businesses that paid threat actors’ ransom demands saw $610,000 less in average breach costs compared to those that chose not to pay – not including the ransom amount paid.
However, when accounting for the average ransom payment – which according to Sophos reached $812,000 in 2021 – businesses that opt to pay the ransom could net higher total costs, all while inadvertently funding future ransomware attacks.”
The persistence of ransomware is fuelled by what IBM calls the “industrialization of cybercrime”.
The risk profile is also changing. Ransomware attack times show a massive drop of 94% over the past three years, from over two months to just under four days. Good news? Not at all, says the report, as the attacks may be higher impact, with more immediate consequences (such as destroyed data, or private data being made public on hacker forums).
The key lesson in cybersecurity today is that all of us are both upstream and downstream from partners, suppliers, and customers in today’s extended enterprises. We are also at the mercy of reused but compromised code from trusted repositories, and even sometimes from hardware that has been compromised at source.
So, what is the answer? Businesses should ensure that their incident responses are tested rigorously and frequently in advance – along with using red-, blue-, or purple-team approaches (thinking like a hacker, a defender, or both).
Regrettably, IBM says that 37% of organizations that have IR plans in place fail to test them regularly. To paraphrase Spinal Tap, you can’t code for stupid.
Attack vector cost businesses 2.5% more in one year
Supply chain attacks on the rise, costing businesses more year on year as organizations failing to implement zero trust strategies.
This is according to IBM’s new Cost of a Data Breach report, which found that one in five breaches occurred because of a compromise at a business partner, with a supply chain breach taking on average 26 days longer to identify and contain than the global average.
The total cost of a supply chain compromise was $4.46 million – 2.5% higher than average.
The report also found that the global average cost of a data breach has hit an all-time high of $4.35 million – up nearly 13% over the last two years.
“Seventeen per cent of breaches in critical infrastructure organizations occurred due to a business partner being initially compromised – this shows us that organizations need to put more focus on the security controls that govern third party access,” John Hendley, head of strategy at IBM Security X-Force told The Daily Swig.
Critical infrastructure organizations such as financial services, industrial, transportation, and healthcare companies are a growing target for these attacks, says IBM, and zero trust is the best way to guard against attack.
“Organizations need to be more vigilant than ever and closely scrutinize these external points of access into their environment, whether that’s through direct network access, applications, or even physical access,” says Hendly.
“Supply chain attacks are of great concern, both because of how insidious they are and how extreme their impacts can be. We saw this play out with SolarWinds, and we’ll surely see more of these attacks in the future.”
Those organizations that had implemented a zero trust security approach saw breaches cost them less, with an average cost saving of $1.5 million.
However, critical infrastructure organizations in particular are failing to do this, with only one in five having adopted a zero trust model, compared with an overall global average of 41%.
Javvad Malik, lead security awareness advocate at KnowBe4, says that greater transparency is needed across the supply chain, along with greater technical assurance that all components are adequately secured.
“We’ve seen many organizations breached, not for the organization itself, but because it will provide a way into another. Popular examples of these include Target, RSA, and more recently SolarWinds,” he told The Daily Swig.
“While many organisations try to mitigate risks by sending out lengthy questionnaires to third parties it deals with to determine the level of security they employ, it is often not sufficient to cover the entire supply chain, and even if it was, it doesn’t provide technical assurance.”
Flash storage has historically had a reputation for delivering large amounts of storage capacity and high performance in a relatively small package. But with the current threat landscape, it has become important to focus on the resilience of flash.
IBM's 2021 Cost of a Data Breach Report found that the average cost of a customer data breach is more than four million dollars, and recovery from such an event can take days or even weeks. IBM is responding to the need for protection and rapid recovery from ransomware and other cyber threats by releasing new data resilience capabilities for its FlashSystem family of all-flash arrays.
Even if your company has a robust security strategy, you still need to be prepared if and when an attack succeeds. IBM empowers organizations to recover from this eventuality by enhancing its FlashSystem storage with IBM Safeguarded Copy.
Safeguarded Copy enables flash storage to play a role in recovery by automatically creating point-in-time snapshots on production storage on an administrator-defined schedule. Once snapshots have been created, they cannot be changed or deleted. These protections prevent malware and internal threats from tampering with backups.
With Safeguarded Copy, companies can recover from an attack quickly and completely. Safeguarded Copy snapshots reside on the same FlashSystem storage as operational data, which dramatically reduces recovery time when compared to tiered or offsite copy-based recovery solutions.
IBM has also enhanced its FlashSystem storage with IBM FlashSystem Cyber Vault to enable it to quickly perform all three stages of the recovery process: detection, response and recovery.
Cyber Vault runs continuously and monitors snapshots as Safeguarded Copy creates them and uses standard database tools and other software to ensure Safeguarded Copy snapshots haven't been compromised. If Cyber Vault finds the snapshots have been corrupted, it interprets that as a sign of an attack. Cyber Vault can reduce recovery time from days to hours by quickly determining which snapshots to use.
IBM has added members to its FlashSystem family that are built to deliver on performance while also providing resilience: FlashSystem 9500 and 7300.
The FlashSystem 9500 is IBM's flagship enterprise storage array, designed for environments that need the highest capability and resilience. It offers twice the performance, connectivity and capacity of its predecessor and 50 percent more cache. The 9500 also provides data resilience with numerous safeguards, including multi-factor authentication (MFA) and secure boot to help ensure only IBM-authorized software runs on the system. Additionally, IBM's FlashCore Modules (FCMs) offer real-time hardware-based encryption and up to 7x increase in endurance compared to commodity SSDs.
The IBM FlashSystem 7300 offers about 25 percent better performance than the previous generation of FlashSystem storage. It has a smaller footprint than the 9500 but runs the same software and features, including 3:1 real-time compression and hardware encryption. The FlashSystem 7300 supports up to 2.2PB effective capacity per 2U control enclosure.
The IBM FlashSystem family offers two- and three-site replication along with configuration options that can include an optional 100 percent data availability guarantee for business continuity.
The IBM FlashSystem family is continuously evolving with expanded capabilities around capacity, performance and data protection.
WWT can help your company evaluate and choose the right flash storage solution to meet your needs. WWT is an IBM-designated global and regional systems integrator (SI) and solution provider, and we know how important data protection is for modern companies. We encourage your organization to take a holistic approach to data resilience.
Sixty percent of breaches have resulted in companies recouping the cost of fines, clean-up, and technological improvements by increasing prices, essentially making consumers pay for breaches and companies' lack of preparedness, according to an annual report published on July 27.
The "Cost of Data Breach Report 2022" report, based on a survey of executives and security professionals at 550 companies, says the average cost of a data breach continued to rise in 2022, reaching an average of $4.4 million globally (up 13% since 2020) and $9.4 million in the United States. On average, companies required 277 days to identify and contain data breaches, down from 287 days in 2021, and 83% of companies had suffered more than one breach.
"It is clear that cyberattacks are evolving into market stressors that are triggering chain reactions, [and] we see that these breaches are contributing to those inflationary pressures," says John Hendley, head of strategy for IBM Security's X-Force research team. "We have to think about cyber events as factors that are capable of straining the economy, similar to COVID, the war in Ukraine, gas prices, all of that."
The annual report, based on surveys conducted by the Ponemon Institute, is not the first attempt to gauge the impact of breaches on businesses' balance sheets. Last year, a survey by security-operations firm IronNet found that most companies were affected by the supply chain attack on network management firm SolarWinds, with the average firm seeing an 11% drop in revenue due to dealing with the incident.
Overall, experts estimated that the incident would cost SolarWinds itself about about $18 million. As for the 18,000 affected businesses and government agencies (and the approximately 100 organizations that were ultimately compromised), they have faced as much as $100 billion in clean-up costs, according to analysis.
While cybersecurity experts have increasingly urged companies to count on having their systems compromised, they continue to have problems stopping attackers, and they are passing costs onto consumers, Hendley notes. This suggests that data breaches and cyberattacks are creating a cyber tax, he argues, increasing costs for downstream consumers and clients.
"When you think about the fact that 83% of businesses have been breached at least once in their lifetime, I think it becomes difficult to say that we need to apply punitive damages to help prevent breaches," Hendley says. "There is always going to be a way in, so I think the best investment that we can have is to try to shift the line from protecting the perimeter to thinking like the attacker."
In addition to the labeling of breaches and fines as a cyber tax, the report highlighted various trends among industries dealing with cyberattacks. Companies that could reduce the overall breach detection and response time to less than 200 days saved $1.1 million, or 23% of the cost of the average breach.
The cost of a single data breach varied significantly based on the type of industry affected. The heavily regulated healthcare sector continued to pay out the highest amount for compromises of data, reaching an average of $10 million per breach in 2022, compared with financial firms that paid an average of $6 million per breach, the second most expensive breach cost. Pharmaceutical companies and technology firms essentially tied for third place, paying about $5 million for each breach.
Ransomware continued to have a significant impact on business, despite signs that — so far this year — ransomware attacks have declined somewhat. The survey found that companies that pay ransoms spend less on clean-up costs, but high ransom totals negate most savings. In addition, 80% of companies that pay ransoms are attacked again, according to the "Ransomware: The True Cost to Business" report published by security firm Cybereason last year.
Other research has highlighted the impact of ransomware on companies that have not adequately prepared for destructive attacks. Two-thirds of global firms hit with ransomware suffered a significant revenue loss, they said, as did 58% of those surveyed at US companies specifically. The attacks overall have led to 31% of global companies shuttering some part of their businesses.
"It is interesting to see the cost difference between ransomware victims who chose to pay and those who chose not to," Nicole Hoffman, senior cyber-threat intelligence analyst at Digital Shadows, a digital-risk protection firm. "Those who pay are often targeted again within months of the original attack, which would increase financial losses significantly. These factors are important to consider when making the challenging business decision of whether or not to pay."
That said, the initial vector of the attack also had a significant impact on cost. Business email compromise (BEC) and phishing attacks led to the highest average breach costs — about $4.9 million per incident — with third-party vulnerabilities and compromised credentials accounting for damages of approximately $4.5 million per incident.
The IBM-Ponemon report also highlighted technologies that could have the largest impact on data breach costs. Companies that use artificial intelligence and machine learning (AI/ML) technologies, DevSecOps processes, and formed an incident-response team saved about $300,000, $276,000, and $253,000 per incident, respectively.
In contrast, companies that suffered from security system complexity, were migrating the business to the cloud, and had compliance failures saw the largest increases in cost per incident.
The report is based on more than 3,600 interviews with individuals from 550 companies of various sizes, focusing on breaches that involved anywhere from 2,200 to 102,000 records. Breaches outside that range were not included.
Computers have helped people wade through their tax returns for decades. Preparers at H&R Block this season will get some help, too. But a computer won’t just crunch the numbers. Rather, it will probe your return and ask questions along the way--trying to make sure you don’t pay a penny more than necessary to Uncle Sam. H&R Block has “hired” IBM’s Watson--a powerful artificial intelligence system--to act as a cyberguide in preparing taxes.
To study for the job, Watson digested the federal tax code (more than 74,000 pages) and absorbed thousands of conversations between H&R Block’s tax preparers and clients. Its objective is to analyze conversational patterns to determine whether taxpayers may be missing opportunities for savings. Now, when a tax preparer and client go through the paperwork, Watson can follow along, and the system will issue prompts on computer screens if it detects a potential deduction or credit they may be missing. “Watson will ask questions that we might not think about on our own,” says Ed Harbour, a vice president at IBM.
With H&R Block expecting Watson to assist with processing 11 million returns this year, the system should get smarter as it absorbs more data and conversational patterns, making it a more useful tool, says Harbour. For example, IBM says the system should eventually provide taxpayers with “increasingly personalized tips” to help lower their tax bills in the future.
Watson isn’t the only AI technology playing a greater role in our lives. If you use Facebook, Google or Amazon.com, for instance, AI is behind the scenes, guiding you through the site. Meanwhile, Watson is expanding into scientific research, robotics and other fields, and IBM hopes it will push to the forefront of several major technology trends, such as the Internet of Things, cloud computing and personalized medicine. (For more companies cashing in on these trends, see 13 Stocks for the Tech Revolution.)
For now, Watson doesn’t appear to be a big moneymaker for IBM. But investors seem impressed with its potential, seeing it as a way for IBM to reverse a long period of falling sales and profits. IBM’s stock (symbol IBM) returned 25% in 2016, after three straight years of declines. One shareholder who should be pleased: Warren Buffett, whose Berkshire Hathaway owns an 8.5% stake in Big Blue, worth $14.2 billion.
CHICAGO, July 29, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- Digital Transformation Market size is expected to grow from USD 521.5 billion in 2021 to USD 1247.5 billion by 2026, at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 19.1% during the forecast period, according to a new report by MarketsandMarkets. Various factors such as increasing spending on marketing and advertising activities by enterprises, changing landscape of customer intelligence to drive the market, and proliferation of customer channels are expected to drive the adoption of digital transformation technologies and services.
Download PDF Brochure: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/pdfdownloadNew.asp?id=43010479
Browse in-depth TOC on "Digital Transformation Market"
208 - Tables
55 - Figures
283 - Pages
Scope of the Report:
Market size available for years
Base year considered
Technology, Deployment Mode, Organization Size, Industry Vertical, and Region
North America, Europe, APAC, MEA, and Latin America
Digital Transformation Market Size in 2026
USD 1247.5 billion
Microsoft(US), IBM(US), SAP(Germany), Oracle(US), Google(US), Cognizant(US), HPE(US), Adobe(US), Accenture(Ireland), HCL Technologies(India), Broadcom(US), Equinix(US), Dell(US), Tibco(US), Marlabs(US), Alcor Solutions(US), Smart Stream(UK), Yash Technologies(US), Interfacing(Canada), Kissflow(India), Emudhra(India), Process Maker(US), Process Street(US), Happiest Minds(India), Scoro(UK), Brillio(US), and Aexonic Technologies(US).
Digital transformation is the outcome of changes that occur with the application of digital technologies. The use of digital transformation across business and organizational activities, processes, competencies, and business models leverages the changes and opportunities of a mix of digital technologies and their impact on society. Digital transformation helps enterprises Strengthen the customer experience, optimize the workforce, enhance the operational activities, and transform the products and services of the organization. The evolution of digital technologies, such as cloud computing, big data and analytics, mobility/social media, blockchain, Artificial Intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), robotics, and cybersecurity, has created the need for digitalization across several industries. These technologies are used by enterprises to Strengthen or add more features to their traditional business processes while also helping enhance customer relationships.
Request trial Pages: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/requestsampleNew.asp?id=43010479
By deployment mode, the Digital Transformation Market has been segmented into on-premises and cloud. The CAGR of the on-premises deployment mode is estimated to be the largest during the forecast period. On-premises solutions are deployed with a one-time license fee and an annual service agreement, which includes free upgrades after a specified time. On-premises software solutions are depreciable assets and are affordable for companies that have the budget to make the initial investment.
The Digital Transformation Market has been segmented by organization size into large enterprises and SMEs. The market for SMEs is expected to register a higher CAGR during the forecast period. These enterprises are early adopters of digital transformation solutions. They are faced with the troublesome task of effectively managing security because of the diverse nature of IT infrastructure, which is complex in nature.
The Digital Transformation Market by vertical has been categorized into banking, financial services, and insurance, retail and eCommerce, media and entertainment, IT and telecom, healthcare and life sciences, government and defense, manufacturing, and education. The healthcare and life sciences vertical is expected to witness the highest growth rate, while the BFSI vertical is expected to have the largest market size during the forecast period. The larger market size of the BFSI vertical can be attributed to the increasing usage of mobile devices to access banking services is driving the adoption of digital transformation solutions in the BFSI vertical.
Get 10% Free Customization on this Report: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/requestCustomizationNew.asp?id=43010479
The Digital Transformation Market has been segmented into five major regions: North America, Europe, APAC, Latin America, and MEA. APAC is expected to grow at a good pace during the forecast period. The region will be booming, as it is experiencing a lot of new entrepreneur setups, which would be looking forward to acquiring new customers and gaining customer trust by involving new paradigms of digital technologies to have a competitive advantage over the established players. Digital transformation vendors in this region focus on innovations related to their product line. China, Japan, and India have displayed ample growth opportunities in the Digital Transformation Market.
The major vendors in the global digital transformation market include Microsoft (US), IBM (US), SAP (Germany), Oracle (US), Google (US), Cognizant (US), HPE (US), Adobe (US), Accenture (Ireland), HCL Technologies (India), Broadcom (US), Equinix (US), Dell (US), Tibco (US) and Marlabs (US).
Browse Adjacent Markets: Software & Services Research Reports & Consulting
Artificial Intelligence Market by Offering (Hardware, Software, Services), Technology (Machine Learning, Natural Language Processing), Deployment Mode, Organization Size, Business Function (Law, Security), Vertical, and Region - Global Forecast to 2026
Big Data Market by Component, Deployment Mode, Organization Size, Business Function (Operations, Finance, and Marketing and Sales), Industry Vertical (BFSI, Manufacturing, and Healthcare and Life Sciences), and Region - Global Forecast to 2025
MarketsandMarkets provides quantified B2B research on 30,000 high growth niche opportunities/threats which will impact 70% to 80% of worldwide companies' revenues. Currently servicing 7500 customers worldwide including 80% of global Fortune 1000 companies as clients. Almost 75,000 top officers across eight industries worldwide approach MarketsandMarkets for their painpoints around revenues decisions.
Our 850 fulltime analyst and SMEs at MarketsandMarkets are tracking global high growth markets following the "Growth Engagement Model - GEM". The GEM aims at proactive collaboration with the clients to identify new opportunities, identify most important customers, write "Attack, avoid and defend" strategies, identify sources of incremental revenues for both the company and its competitors. MarketsandMarkets now coming up with 1,500 MicroQuadrants (Positioning top players across leaders, emerging companies, innovators, strategic players) annually in high growth emerging segments. MarketsandMarkets is determined to benefit more than 10,000 companies this year for their revenue planning and help them take their innovations/disruptions early to the market by providing them research ahead of the curve.
MarketsandMarkets's flagship competitive intelligence and market research platform, "Knowledge Store" connects over 200,000 markets and entire value chains for deeper understanding of the unmet insights along with market sizing and forecasts of niche markets.
Mr. Aashish Mehra
630 Dundee Road
Northbrook, IL 60062
Research Insight: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/ResearchInsight/digital-transformation-market.asp
Visit Our Website: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com
Content Source: https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/PressReleases/digital-transformation.asp
A month after the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) revealed the first quantum-safe algorithms, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and IBM have swiftly moved forward. Google was also quick to outline an aggressive implementation plan for its cloud service that it started a decade ago.
It helps that IBM researchers contributed to three of the four algorithms, while AWS had a hand in one. Google is also among those who contributed to SPHINCS+.
A long process that started in 2016 with 69 original candidates ends with the selection of four algorithms that will become NIST standards, which will play a critical role in protecting encrypted data from the vast power of quantum computers.
NIST's four choices include CRYSTALS-Kyber, a public-private key-encapsulation mechanism (KEM) for general asymmetric encryption, such as when connecting websites. For digital signatures, NIST selected CRYSTALS-Dilithium, FALCON, and SPHINCS+. NIST will add a few more algorithms to the mix in two years.
Vadim Lyubashevsky, a cryptographer who works in IBM's Zurich Research Laboratories, contributed to the development of CRYSTALS-Kyber, CRYSTALS-Dilithium, and Falcon. Lyubashevsky was predictably pleased by the algorithms selected, but he had only anticipated NIST would pick two digital signature candidates rather than three.
Ideally, NIST would have chosen a second key establishment algorithm, according to Lyubashevsky. "They could have chosen one more right away just to be safe," he told Dark Reading. "I think some people expected McEliece to be chosen, but maybe NIST decided to hold off for two years to see what the backup should be to Kyber."
After NIST identified the algorithms, IBM moved forward by specifying them into its recently launched z16 mainframe. IBM introduced the z16 in April, calling it the "first quantum-safe system," enabled by its new Crypto Express 8S card and APIs that provide access to the NIST APIs.
IBM was championing three of the algorithms that NIST selected, so IBM had already included them in the z16. Since IBM had unveiled the z16 before the NIST decision, the company implemented the algorithms into the new system. IBM last week made it official that the z16 supports the algorithms.
Anne Dames, an IBM distinguished engineer who works on the company's z Systems team, explained that the Crypto Express 8S card could implement various cryptographic algorithms. Nevertheless, IBM was betting on CRYSTAL-Kyber and Dilithium, according to Dames.
"We are very fortunate in that it went in the direction we hoped it would go," she told Dark Reading. "And because we chose to implement CRYSTALS-Kyber and CRYSTALS-Dilithium in the hardware security module, which allows clients to get access to it, the firmware in that hardware security module can be updated. So, if other algorithms were selected, then we would add them to our roadmap for inclusion of those algorithms for the future."
A software library on the system allows application and infrastructure developers to incorporate APIs so that clients can generate quantum-safe digital signatures for both classic computing systems and quantum computers.
"We also have a CRYSTALS-Kyber interface in place so that we can generate a key and provide it wrapped by a Kyber key so that could be used in a potential key exchange scheme," Dames said. "And we've also incorporated some APIs that allow clients to have a key exchange scheme between two parties."
Dames noted that clients might use Dilithium to generate digital signatures on documents. "Think about code signing servers, things like that, or documents signing services, where people would like to actually use the digital signature capability to ensure the authenticity of the document or of the code that's being used," she said.
During Amazon's AWS re:Inforce security conference last week in Boston, the cloud provider emphasized its post-quantum cryptography (PQC) efforts. According to Margaret Salter, director of applied cryptography at AWS, Amazon is already engineering the NIST standards into its services.
During a breakout session on AWS' cryptography efforts at the conference, Salter said AWS had implemented an open source, hybrid post-quantum key exchange based on a specification called s2n-tls, which implements the Transport Layer Security (TLS) protocol across different AWS services. AWS has contributed it as a draft standard to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).
Salter explained that the hybrid key exchange brings together its traditional key exchanges while enabling post-quantum security. "We have regular key exchanges that we've been using for years and years to protect data," she said. "We don't want to get rid of those; we're just going to enhance them by adding a public key exchange on top of it. And using both of those, you have traditional security, plus post quantum security."
Last week, Amazon announced that it deployed s2n-tls, the hybrid post-quantum TLS with CRYSTALS-Kyber, which connects to the AWS Key Management Service (AWS KMS) and AWS Certificate Manager (ACM). In an update this week, Amazon documented its stated support for AWS Secrets Manager, a service for managing, rotating, and retrieving database credentials and API keys.
While Google didn't make implementation announcements like AWS in the immediate aftermath of NIST's selection, VP and CISO Phil Venables said Google has been focused on PQC algorithms "beyond theoretical implementations" for over a decade. Venables was among several prominent researchers who co-authored a technical paper outlining the urgency of adopting PQC strategies. The peer-reviewed paper was published in May by Nature, a respected journal for the science and technology communities.
"At Google, we're well into a multi-year effort to migrate to post-quantum cryptography that is designed to address both immediate and long-term risks to protect sensitive information," Venables wrote in a blog post published following the NIST announcement. "We have one goal: ensure that Google is PQC ready."
Venables recalled an experiment in 2016 with Chrome where a minimal number of connections from the Web browser to Google servers used a post-quantum key-exchange algorithm alongside the existing elliptic-curve key-exchange algorithm. "By adding a post-quantum algorithm in a hybrid mode with the existing key exchange, we were able to test its implementation without affecting user security," Venables noted.
Google and Cloudflare announced a "wide-scale post-quantum experiment" in 2019 implementing two post-quantum key exchanges, "integrated into Cloudflare's TLS stack, and deployed the implementation on edge servers and in Chrome Canary clients." The experiment helped Google understand the implications of deploying two post-quantum key agreements with TLS.
Venables noted that last year Google tested post-quantum confidentiality in TLS and found that various network products were not compatible with post-quantum TLS. "We were able to work with the vendor so that the issue was fixed in future firmware updates," he said. "By experimenting early, we resolved this issue for future deployments."
The four algorithms NIST announced are an important milestone in advancing PQC, but there's other work to be done besides quantum-safe encryption. The AWS TLS submission to the IETF is one example; others include such efforts as Hybrid PQ VPN.
"What you will see happening is those organizations that work on TLS protocols, or SSH, or VPN type protocols, will now come together and put together proposals which they will evaluate in their communities to determine what's best and which protocols should be updated, how the certificates should be defined, and things like things like that," IBM's Dames said.
Dustin Moody, a mathematician at NIST who leads its PQC project, shared a similar view during a panel discussion at the RSA Conference in June. "There's been a lot of global cooperation with our NIST process, rather than fracturing of the effort and coming up with a lot of different algorithms," Moody said. "We've seen most countries and standards organizations waiting to see what comes out of our nice progress on this process, as well as participating in that. And we see that as a very good sign."
This press release was orginally distributed by SBWire
New Jersey, USA — (SBWIRE) — 07/09/2022 — Advance Market Analytics published a new research publication on "Cyber Crisis Management Market Insights, to 2027" with 232 pages and enriched with self-explained Tables and charts in presentable format. In the Study you will find new evolving Trends, Drivers, Restraints, Opportunities generated by targeting market associated stakeholders. The growth of the Cyber Crisis Management market was mainly driven by the increasing R&D spending across the world.
Get Free Exclusive PDF trial Copy of This Research @ https://www.advancemarketanalytics.com/sample-report/169766-global-cyber-crisis-management-market
Some of the key players profiled in the study are:
IBM (United States), Cisco Systems, Inc. (United States), Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company (United States), Optiv Security, Inc. (United States), Palo Alto Networks, Inc. (United States), Immersive Labs (United Kingdom), Rapid7, Inc. (United States), McAfee Corp. (United States), Konfidas (Israel), Symantec (United States).
Scope of the Report of Cyber Crisis Management
Cyber crisis management aims at minimizing the threat and impact of cyber threats on companies and business operations as it helps in restoring data, credibility, and security. It provides rapid detection of cyber incidents and offers structured recovery plans to limit the damages. It manages the crisis and threat to operations protecting from the potential consequences. It is widely used in various industries and all sizes of organizations to prepare themselves fr managing cyber incidents effectively and efficiently.
The titled segments and sub-section of the market are illuminated below:
by Components (Software, Services), Industry Verticals (BFSI, IT and Telecom, Healthcare, Retail, Media and Entertainment, Aerospace and defense, Others), Cyber Crisis (Phishing, Hacking, Ransomware), Organisation Size (Large Size Enterprise, Small-medium Enterprise)
The popularity of Improved Information Security and Business Continuity Management
Growing Spendings of Organisation on Cyber Crisis Management in Developing Economies
Rising Cyber Security Concerns Like Phishing and Malware Attacks
Need to Protect the Networks and Data in Business Operations From Unauthorized Access
Region Included are: North America, Europe, Asia Pacific, Oceania, South America, Middle East & Africa
Country Level Break-Up: United States, Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, South Africa, Nigeria, Tunisia, Morocco, Germany, United Kingdom (UK), the Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Belgium, Austria, Turkey, Russia, France, Poland, Israel, United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, China, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, India, Australia and New Zealand etc.
Have Any Questions Regarding Global Cyber Crisis Management Market Report, Ask Our [email protected] https://www.advancemarketanalytics.com/enquiry-before-buy/169766-global-cyber-crisis-management-market
Strategic Points Covered in Table of Content of Global Cyber Crisis Management Market:
Chapter 1: Introduction, market driving force product Objective of Study and Research Scope the Cyber Crisis Management market
Chapter 2: Exclusive Summary – the basic information of the Cyber Crisis Management Market.
Chapter 3: Displaying the Market Dynamics- Drivers, Trends and Challenges & Opportunities of the Cyber Crisis Management
Chapter 4: Presenting the Cyber Crisis Management Market Factor Analysis, Porters Five Forces, Supply/Value Chain, PESTEL analysis, Market Entropy, Patent/Trademark Analysis.
Chapter 5: Displaying the by Type, End User and Region/Country 2015-2020
Chapter 6: Evaluating the leading manufacturers of the Cyber Crisis Management market which consists of its Competitive Landscape, Peer Group Analysis, BCG Matrix & Company Profile
Chapter 7: To evaluate the market by segments, by countries and by Manufacturers/Company with revenue share and sales by key countries in these various regions (2021-2027)
Chapter 8 & 9: Displaying the Appendix, Methodology and Data Source
finally, Cyber Crisis Management Market is a valuable source of guidance for individuals and companies.
Read Detailed Index of full Research Study at @ https://www.advancemarketanalytics.com/reports/169766-global-cyber-crisis-management-market
Thanks for memorizing this article; you can also get individual chapter wise section or region wise report version like North America, Middle East, Africa, Europe or LATAM, Southeast Asia.
For more information on this press release visit: http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/cyber-crisis-management-market-set-for-explosive-growth-ibm-cisco-systems-optiv-security-1360300.htm