A Proofpoint divulgou nesta segunda-feira (28) o relatório Voice of the CISO 2026, com dados sobre o cenário de segurança cibernética no Brasil. O levantamento ouviu 1.600 diretores de segurança da informação (CISOs) em 16 países e aponta que, embora os índices de ataques e perdas de dados tenham recuado, o risco human…
A Proofpoint divulgou nesta segunda-feira (28) o relatório Voice of the CISO 2026, com dados sobre o cenário de segurança cibernética no Brasil. O levantamento ouviu 1.600 diretores de segurança da informação (CISOs) em 16 países e aponta que, embora os índices de ataques e perdas de dados tenham recuado, o risco human…
Em contexto
- Tema: Ciberseguridad — Riesgo, identidad, respuesta a incidentes y cumplimiento.
- Fonte: IT Forum
- Publicado: 28/09/2026
Continuar lendo na fonte original →
Trecho publicado automaticamente pelo radar do site. O texto completo pertence ao veículo e está vinculado acima.
Why it matters
Most incidents that end up being expensive did not start with a sophisticated technique. They started with an account that should have been closed when somebody resigned, a server nobody knew was still on, or a broad permission granted to unblock someone that then stayed forever.
I separate technical risk from business risk, because they do not always match. A critical vulnerability in an isolated system matters less than a medium one in the system that issues invoices. Prioritising by severity without looking at where the money is is an expensive way to work hard and protect little.
What usually goes wrong
Where it usually breaks is response, not prevention. There are tools, there are alerts, and when something real happens nobody knows who decides to disconnect, who gets called first, or what the customer is told. Valuable hours get lost arguing about that while the problem grows.
What to watch
- What could be restored and how fast — a backup that was never tested does not count.
- How it was communicated to customers and regulators, which is where reputational cost is decided.
- Whether third parties or suppliers were in the chain, because the perimeter now includes partners.
How I read this entry
If this happened near an organisation I advise, the conversation I would force is not about tools. It is about the rehearsal. How many times the incident was simulated, who calls whom, what gets said to customers and when. A plan never rehearsed is not a plan, it is a document.
The original story is published in another language; the excerpt is quoted as the publisher delivers it and the commentary is written in English.
Comments
No comments yet. Yours can be the first.
Living through this in your own team?
Open the chat and tell me how you're handling it. I'm interested in comparing notes.
