Search This Blog

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Labels

Footer About

Footer About

Labels

Showing posts with label Compliance. Show all posts

Aadhaar Verification Rules Amended as India Strengthens Data Compliance


 

It is expected that India's flagship digital identity infrastructure, the Aadhaar, will undergo significant changes to its regulatory framework in the coming days following a formal amendment to the Aadhaar (Targeted Determination of Services and Benefits Management) Regulations, 2.0.

Introducing a new revision in the framework makes facial authentication formally recognized as a legally acceptable method of verifying a person's identity, marking a significant departure from traditional biometric methods such as fingerprinting and iris scans. 

The updated regulations introduce a strong compliance framework that focuses on explicit user consent, data minimisation, and privacy protection, as well as a stronger compliance architecture. The government seems to have made a deliberate effort to align Aadhaar's operational model with evolving expectations about biometric governance, data protection, and the safe and responsible use of digital identity systems as they evolved. 

In the course of undergoing the regulatory overhaul, the Unique Identification Authority of India has introduced a new digital identity tool called the Aadhaar Verifiable Credential in order to facilitate a secure and tamper-proof identity verification process. 

Additionally, the authority has tightened the compliance framework governing offline Aadhaar verification, placing higher accountability on entities that authenticate identities without direct access to the UIDAI system in real time. Aadhaar (Authentication and Offline Verification) Regulations, 2021 have been amended to include these measures, and they were formally published by the UIDAI on December 9 through the Gazette as well as on UIDAI's website. 

UIDAI has also launched a dedicated mobile application that provides individuals with a higher degree of control over how their Aadhaar data is shared, which emphasizes the shift towards a user-centric identity ecosystem which is also concerned with privacy. 

According to the newly released Aadhaar rules, the use of facial recognition as a valid means of authentication would be officially authorised as of the new Aadhaar rules, while simultaneously tightening consent requirements, purpose-limitations, and data-use requirements to ensure compliance with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act. 

In addition, the revisions indicate a substantial shift in the scope of Aadhaar's deployment in terms of how it is useful, extending its application to an increased range of private-sector uses under stricter regulation, so as to extend its usefulness beyond welfare delivery and government services. This change coincides with a preparation on the part of the Unique Identification Authority of India to launch a newly designed mobile application for Aadhaar. 

As far as officials are concerned, the application will be capable of supporting Aadhaar-based identification for routine scenarios like event access, registrations at hotels, deliveries, and physical access control, without having to continuously authenticate against a central database in real-time. 

Along with the provisions in the updated framework that explicitly acknowledge facial authentication and the existing biometric and one-time password mechanisms, the updated framework is also strengthening provisions governing offline Aadhaar verification, so that identity verification can be carried out in a controlled manner without direct connection to UIDAI's systems. 

As part of the revised framework, offline Aadhaar verification is also broadened beyond the limited QR code scanning that was previously used. A number of verification methods have been authorised by UIDAI as a result of this notification, including QR code-based checks, paperless offline e-KYC, Aadhaar Verifiable Credential validation, electronic authentication through Aadhaar, and paper-based offline verification. 

Additional mechanisms can be approved as time goes by, with the introduction of the Aadhaar Verifiable Credential, a digitally signed document with cryptographically secure features that contains some demographic data. This is the most significant aspect of this expansion. With the ability to verify locally without constantly consulting UIDAI's central databases, this credential aims to reduce systemic dependency on live authentication while addressing long-standing privacy and data security concerns that have arose. 

Additionally, the regulations introduce offline face verification, a system which allows a locally captured picture of the holder of an Aadhaar to be compared to the photo embedded in the credential without having to transmit biometric information over an external network. Furthermore, the amendments establish a formal regulatory framework for entities that conduct these checks, which are called Offline Verification Seeking Entities.

 The UIDAI has now mandated that organizations seeking to conduct offline Aadhaar verification must register, submit detailed operational and technical disclosures, and adhere to prescribed procedural safeguards in order to conduct the verification. A number of powers have been granted to the authority, including the ability to review applications, conduct inspections, obtain clarifications, suspend or revoke access in the case of noncompliance. 

In addition to clearly outlining grounds for action, the Enforcement provisions also include the use of verification facilities, deviation from UIDAI standards, failure to cooperate with audits, and facilitation of identity-related abuse. A particularly notable aspect of these rules is that they require affected entities to be provided an opportunity to present their case prior to punitive measures being imposed, reinforcing the idea of respecting due process and fairness in regulations. 

In the private sector, the verification process using Aadhaar is still largely unstructured at present; hotels, housing societies, and other service providers routinely collect photocopies or images of identity documents, which are then shared informally among vendors, security personnel, and front desk employees with little clarity regarding how they will retain or delete those documents. 

By introducing a new registration framework, we hope to replace this fragmented system with a regulated one, in which private organizations will be formally onboarded as Offline Verification Seeking Entities, and they will be required to use UIDAI-approved verification flows in place of storing Aadhaar copies, either physically or digitally.

With regard to this transition, one of the key elements of UIDAI's upcoming mobile application will be its ability to enable selective disclosure by allowing residents to choose what information is shared for a particular reason. For example, a hotel may just receive the name and age bracket of the guest, a telecommunication provider the address of the guest, or a delivery service the name and photograph of the visitor, rather than a full identity record. 

Aadhaar details will also be stored in the application for family members, biometric locks and unlocks can be performed instantly, and demographic information can be updated directly, thus reducing reliance on paper-based processes. As a result, control is increasingly shifting towards individuals, minimizing the risk of exposure that service providers face to their data and curbing the indefinite circulation of identity documents. 

UIDAI has been working on a broader ecosystem-building initiative that includes regulatory pushes, which are part of a larger effort. In November, the organization held a webinar, in which over 250 organizations participated, including hospitality chains, logistics companies, real estate managers, and event planners, in order to prepare for the rollout. 

In the midst of ongoing vulnerability concerns surrounding the Aadhaar ecosystem, there has been an outreach to address them. Based on data from the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre, Aadhaar Enabled Payment System transactions are estimated to account for approximately 11 percent of the cyber-enabled financial fraud of 2023, according to the Centre's data. 

Several states have reported instances where cloned fingerprints associated with Aadhaar have been used to siphon beneficiary funds, most often after public records or inadequately secure computer systems have leaked data. Aadhaar-based authentication has been viewed as a systemic risk by some privacy experts, saying it could increase systemic risks if safeguards are not developed in parallel with its extension into private access environments. 

Researchers from civil society organizations have highlighted earlier this year that anonymized Aadhaar-linked datasets are still at risk of re-identification and that the current data protection law does not regulate anonymized data sufficiently, resulting in a potential breakdown in the new controls when repurposing and processing them downstream. 

As a result of the amendments, Aadhaar's role within India's rapidly growing digital economy has been recalibrated, with greater usability balanced with tighter governance, as the amendments take into account a conscious effort to change the status of the system. Through formalizing offline verification, restricting the use of data through selective disclosure, and imposing clearer obligations on private actors, the revised regulations aim to curb informal practices that have long contributed to increased privacy and security risks. 

The success of these measures will depend, however, largely on the disciplined implementation of the measures, the continued oversight of the regulatory authorities, and the willingness of industry stakeholders to abandon legacy habits of indiscriminate data collection. There are many advantages to the transition for service providers. They can reduce compliance risks by implementing more efficient, privacy-preserving verification methods. 

Residents have a greater chance of controlling their personal data in everyday interactions with providers. As Aadhaar leaves its open access environments behind and moves deeper into private circumstances, continued transparency from UIDAI, regular audits of verification entities, and public awareness around consent and data rights will be critical in preserving trust in Aadhaar and in ensuring that convenience doesn't come at the expense of security.

There has been a lot of talk about how large-scale digital identity systems can evolve responsibly in an era where data protection expectations are higher than ever, so if the changes are implemented according to plan, they could serve as a blueprint for future evolution.

Google’s New Update Allows Employers To Archive Texts On Work-Managed Android Phones

 




A recent Android update has marked a paradigm shifting change in how text messages are handled on employer-controlled devices. This means Google has introduced a feature called Android RCS Archival, which lets organisations capture and store all RCS, SMS, and MMS communications sent through Google Messages on fully managed work phones. While the messages remain encrypted in transport, they can now be accessed on the device itself once delivered.

This update is designed to help companies meet compliance and record-keeping requirements, especially in sectors that must retain communication logs for regulatory reasons. Until now, many organizations had blocked RCS entirely because of its encryption, which made it difficult to archive. The new feature gives them a way to support richer messaging while still preserving mandatory records.

Archiving occurs via authorized third-party software that integrates directly with Google Messages on work-managed devices. Once enabled by a company's IT, the software will log every interaction inside of a conversation, including messages received, sent, edited, or later deleted. Employees using these devices will see a notification when archiving is active, signaling their conversations are being logged.

Google's indicated that this functionality only refers to work-managed Android devices, personal phones and personal profiles are not impacted, and the update doesn't allow employers access to user data on privately-owned devices. The feature must also be intentionally switched on by the organisation; it is not automatically on.

The update also brings to the surface a common misconception about encrypted messaging: End-to-end encryption protects content only while it's in transit between devices. When a message lands on a device that is owned and administered by an employer, the organization has the technical ability to capture it. It does not extend to over-the-top platforms - such as WhatsApp or Signal - that manage their own encryption. Those apps can expose data as well in cases where backups aren't encrypted or when the device itself is compromised.

This change also raises a broader issue: one of counterparty risk. A conversation remains private only if both ends of it are stored securely. Screenshots, unsafe backups, and linked devices outside the encrypted environment can all leak message content. Work-phone archiving now becomes part of that wider set of risks users should be aware of.

For employees, the takeaway is clear: A company-issued phone is a workplace tool, not a private device. Any communication that originates from a fully managed device can be archived, meaning personal conversations should stay on a personal phone. Users reliant on encrypted platforms have reason to review their backup settings and steer clear of mixing personal communication with corporate technology.

Google's new archival option gives organisations a compliance solution that brings RCS in line with traditional SMS logging, while for workers it is a further reminder that privacy expectations shift the moment a device is brought under corporate management. 


China Announces Major Cybersecurity Law Revision to Address AI Risks

 



China has approved major changes to its Cybersecurity Law, marking its first substantial update since the framework was introduced in 2017. The revised legislation, passed by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress in late October 2025, is scheduled to come into effect on January 1, 2026. The new version aims to respond to emerging technological risks, refine enforcement powers, and bring greater clarity to how cybersecurity incidents must be handled within the country.

A central addition to the law is a new provision focused on artificial intelligence. This is the first time China’s cybersecurity legislation directly acknowledges AI as an area requiring state guidance. The updated text calls for protective measures around AI development, emphasising the need for ethical guidelines, safety checks, and governance mechanisms for advanced systems. At the same time, the law encourages the use of AI and similar technologies to enhance cybersecurity management. Although the amendment outlines strategic expectations, the specific rules that organisations will need to follow are anticipated to be addressed through later regulations and detailed technical standards.

The revised law also introduces stronger enforcement capabilities. Penalties for serious violations have been raised, giving regulators wider authority to impose heavier fines on both companies and individuals who fail to meet their obligations. The scope of punishable conduct has been expanded, signalling an effort to tighten accountability across China’s digital environment. In addition, the law’s extraterritorial reach has been broadened. Previously, cross-border activities were only included when they targeted critical information infrastructure inside China. The new framework allows authorities to take action against foreign activities that pose any form of network security threat, even if the incident does not involve critical infrastructure. In cases deemed particularly severe, regulators may impose sanctions that include financial restrictions or other punitive actions.

Alongside these amendments, the Cyberspace Administration of China has issued a comprehensive nationwide reporting rule called the Administrative Measures for National Cybersecurity Incident Reporting. This separate regulation will become effective on November 1, 2025. The Measures bring together different reporting requirements that were previously scattered across multiple guidelines, creating a single, consistent system for organisations responsible for operating networks or providing services through Chinese networks. The Measures appear to focus solely on incidents that occur within China, including those that affect infrastructure inside the country.

The reporting rules introduce a clear structure for categorising incidents. Events are divided into four levels based on their impact. Under the new criteria, an incident qualifies as “relatively major” if it involves a data breach affecting more than one million individuals or if it results in economic losses of over RMB 5 million. When such incidents occur, organisations must file an initial report within four hours of discovery. A more complete submission is required within seventy-two hours, followed by a final review report within thirty days after the incident is resolved.

To streamline compliance, the regulator has provided several reporting channels, including a hotline, an online portal, email, and the agency’s official WeChat account. Organisations that delay reporting, withhold information, or submit false details may face penalties. However, the Measures state that timely and transparent reporting can reduce or remove liability under the revised law.



EU Accuses Meta of Breaching Digital Rules, Raises Questions on Global Tech Compliance

 




The European Commission has accused Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, of violating the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) by making it unnecessarily difficult for users to report illegal online content and challenge moderation decisions.

In its preliminary findings, the Commission said both platforms lack a user-friendly “Notice and Action” system — the mechanism that allows people to flag unlawful material such as child sexual abuse content or terrorist propaganda. Regulators noted that users face multiple steps and confusing options before they can file a report. The Commission also claimed that Meta’s interface relies on “dark patterns”, which are design features that subtly discourage users from completing certain actions, such as submitting reports.

According to the Commission, Meta’s appeal process also falls short of DSA requirements. The current system allegedly prevents users from adding explanations or submitting supporting evidence when disputing a moderation decision. This, the regulator said, limits users’ ability to express why they believe a decision was unfair and weakens the overall transparency of Meta’s content moderation practices.

The European Commission’s findings are not final, and Meta has the opportunity to respond before any enforcement action is taken. If the Commission confirms these violations, it could issue a non-compliance decision, which may result in penalties of up to 6 percent of Meta’s global annual revenue. The Commission may also impose recurring fines until the company aligns its operations with EU law.

Meta, in a public statement, said it “disagrees with any suggestion” that it breached the DSA. The company stated that it has already made several updates to comply with the law, including revisions to content reporting options, appeals procedures, and data access tools.

The European Commission also raised similar concerns about TikTok, saying that both companies have limited researchers’ access to public data on their platforms. The DSA requires large online platforms to provide sufficient data access so independent researchers can analyze potential harms — for example, whether minors are exposed to illegal or harmful content. The Commission’s review concluded that the data-access tools of Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok are burdensome and leave researchers with incomplete or unreliable datasets, which hinders academic and policy research.

TikTok responded that it has provided data to almost 1,000 research teams and remains committed to transparency. However, the company noted that the DSA’s data-sharing obligations sometimes conflict with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), making it difficult to comply with both laws simultaneously. TikTok urged European regulators to offer clarity on how these two frameworks should be balanced.

Beyond Europe, the investigation may strain relations with the United States. American officials have previously criticized the EU for imposing regulatory burdens on U.S.-based tech firms. U.S. FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson recently warned companies that censoring or modifying content to satisfy foreign governments could violate U.S. law. Former President Donald Trump has also expressed opposition to EU digital rules and even threatened tariffs against countries enforcing them.

For now, the Commission’s investigation continues. If confirmed, the case could set a major precedent for how global social media companies manage user safety, transparency, and accountability under Europe’s strict online governance laws.


Why Businesses Must Act Now to Prepare for a Quantum-Safe Future

 



As technology advances, quantum computing is no longer a distant concept — it is steadily becoming a real-world capability. While this next-generation innovation promises breakthroughs in fields like medicine and materials science, it also poses a serious threat to cybersecurity. The encryption systems that currently protect global digital infrastructure may not withstand the computing power quantum technology will one day unleash.

Data is now the most valuable strategic resource for any organization. Every financial transaction, business operation, and communication depends on encryption to stay secure. However, once quantum computers reach full capability, they could break the mathematical foundations of most existing encryption systems, exposing sensitive data on a global scale.


The urgency of post-quantum security

Post-Quantum Cryptography (PQC) refers to encryption methods designed to remain secure even against quantum computers. Transitioning to PQC will not be an overnight task. It demands re-engineering of applications, operating systems, and infrastructure that rely on traditional cryptography. Businesses must begin preparing now, because once the threat materializes, it will be too late to react effectively.

Experts warn that quantum computing will likely follow the same trajectory as artificial intelligence. Initially, the technology will be accessible only to a few institutions. Over time, as more companies and researchers enter the field, the technology will become cheaper and widely available including to cybercriminals. Preparing early is the only viable defense.


Governments are setting the pace

Several governments and standard-setting bodies have already started addressing the challenge. The United Kingdom’s National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) has urged organizations to adopt quantum-resistant encryption by 2035. The European Union has launched its Quantum Europe Strategy to coordinate member states toward unified standards. Meanwhile, the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has finalized its first set of post-quantum encryption algorithms, which serve as a global reference point for organizations looking to begin their transition.

As these efforts gain momentum, businesses must stay informed about emerging regulations and standards. Compliance will require foresight, investment, and close monitoring of how different jurisdictions adapt their cybersecurity frameworks.

To handle the technical and organizational scale of this shift, companies can establish internal Centers of Excellence (CoEs) dedicated to post-quantum readiness. These teams bring together leaders from across departments: IT, compliance, legal, product development, and procurement to map vulnerabilities, identify dependencies, and coordinate upgrades.

The CoE model also supports employee training, helping close skill gaps in quantum-related technologies. By testing new encryption algorithms, auditing existing infrastructure, and maintaining company-wide communication, a CoE ensures that no critical process is overlooked.


Industry action has already begun

Leading technology providers have started adopting quantum-safe practices. For example, Red Hat’s Enterprise Linux 10 is among the first operating systems to integrate PQC support, while Kubernetes has begun enabling hybrid encryption methods that combine traditional and quantum-safe algorithms. These developments set a precedent for the rest of the industry, signaling that the shift to PQC is not a theoretical concern but an ongoing transformation.


The time to prepare is now

Transitioning to a quantum-safe infrastructure will take years, involving system audits, software redesigns, and new cryptographic standards. Organizations that begin planning today will be better equipped to protect their data, meet upcoming regulatory demands, and maintain customer trust in the digital economy.

Quantum computing will redefine the boundaries of cybersecurity. The only question is whether organizations will be ready when that day arrives.


The Price of Cyberattacks: Why the Real Damage Goes Beyond the Ransom

 




When news breaks about a cyberattack, the ransom demand often steals the spotlight. It’s the most visible figure, millions demanded, negotiations unfolding, and sometimes, payment made. But in truth, that amount only scratches the surface. The real costs of a cyber incident often emerge long after the headlines fade, in the form of business disruptions, shaken trust, legal pressures, and a long, difficult road to recovery.

One of the most common problems organizations face after a breach is the communication gap between technical experts and senior leadership. While the cybersecurity team focuses on containing the attack, tracing its source, and preserving evidence, the executives are under pressure to reassure clients, restore operations, and navigate complex reporting requirements.

Each group works with valid priorities, but without coordination, efforts can collide. A system that’s isolated for forensic investigation may also be the one that the operations team needs to serve customers. This misalignment is avoidable if organizations plan beyond technology by assigning clear responsibilities across departments and conducting regular crisis simulations to ensure a unified response when an attack hits.

When systems go offline, the impact ripples across every department. A single infected server can halt manufacturing lines, delay financial transactions, or force hospitals to revert to manual record-keeping. Even after the breach is contained, lost time translates into lost revenue and strained customer relationships.

Many companies underestimate downtime in their recovery strategies. Backup plans often focus on restoring data, but not on sustaining operations during outages. Every organization should ask: Can employees access essential tools if systems are locked? Can management make decisions without their usual dashboards? If those answers are uncertain, then the recovery plan is incomplete.

Beyond financial loss, cyber incidents leave a lasting mark on reputation. Customers and partners may begin to question whether their information is safe. Rebuilding that trust requires transparent, timely, and fact-based communication. Sharing too much before confirming the facts can create confusion; saying too little can appear evasive.

Recovery also depends on how well a company understands its data environment. If logs are incomplete or investigations are slow, regaining credibility becomes even harder. The most effective organizations balance honesty with precision, updating stakeholders as verified information becomes available.

The legal consequences of a cyber incident often extend further than companies expect. Even if a business does not directly store consumer data, it may still have obligations under privacy laws, vendor contracts, or insurance terms. State and international regulations increasingly require timely disclosure of breaches, and failing to comply can result in penalties.

Engaging legal and compliance teams before a crisis ensures that everyone understands the organization’s obligations and can act quickly under pressure.

Cybersecurity is no longer just an IT issue; it’s a core business concern. Effective protection depends on organization-wide preparedness. That means bridging gaps between departments, creating holistic response plans that include legal and communication teams, and regularly testing how those plans perform under real-world pressure.

Businesses that focus on resilience, not just recovery, are better positioned to minimize disruption, maintain trust, and recover faster if a cyber incident occurs.



Google to Confirm Identity of Every Android App Developer

 







Google announced a new step to make Android apps safer: starting next year, developers who distribute apps to certified Android phones and tablets, even outside Google Play, will need to verify their legal identity. The change ties every app on certified devices to a named developer account, while keeping Android’s ability to run apps from other stores or direct downloads intact. 

What this means for everyday users and small developers is straightforward. If you download an app from a website or a third-party store, the app will now be linked to a developer who has provided a legal name, address, email and phone number. Google says hobbyists and students will have a lighter account option, but many independent creators may choose to register as a business to protect personal privacy. Certified devices are the ones that ship with Google services and pass Google’s compatibility tests; devices that do not include Google Play services may follow different rules. 

Google’s stated reason is security. The company reported that apps installed from the open internet are far more likely to contain malware than apps on the Play Store, and it says those risks come mainly from people hiding behind anonymous developer identities. By requiring identity verification, Google intends to make it harder for repeat offenders to publish harmful apps and to make malicious actors easier to track. 

The rollout is phased so developers and device makers can prepare. Early access invitations begin in October 2025, verification opens to all developers in March 2026, and the rules take effect for certified devices in Brazil, Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand in September 2026. Google plans a wider global rollout in 2027. If you are a developer, review Google’s new developer pages and plan to verify your account well before your target markets enforce the rule. 

A similar compliance pattern already exists in some places. For example, Apple requires developers who distribute apps in the European Union to provide a “trader status” and contact details to meet the EU Digital Services Act. These kinds of rules aim to increase accountability, but they also raise questions about privacy, the costs for small creators, and how “open” mobile platforms should remain. Both companies are moving toward tighter oversight of app distribution, with the goal of making digital marketplaces safer and more accountable.

This change marks one of the most significant shifts in Android’s open ecosystem. While users will still have the freedom to install apps from multiple sources, developers will now be held accountable for the software they release. For users, it could mean greater protection against scams and malicious apps. For developers, especially smaller ones, it signals a new balance between maintaining privacy and ensuring trust in the Android platform.


Can AI Be Trusted With Sensitive Business Data?

 



As artificial intelligence becomes more common in businesses, from retail to finance to technology— it’s helping teams make faster decisions. But behind these smart predictions is a growing problem: how do you make sure employees only see what they’re allowed to, especially when AI mixes information from many different places?

Take this example: A retail company’s AI tool predicts upcoming sales trends. To do this, it uses both public market data and private customer records. The output looks clean and useful but what if that forecast is shown to someone who isn’t supposed to access sensitive customer details? That’s where access control becomes tricky.


Why Traditional Access Rules Don’t Work for AI

In older systems, access control was straightforward. Each person had certain permissions: developers accessed code, managers viewed reports, and so on. But AI changes the game. These systems pull data from multiple sources, internal files, external APIs, sensor feeds, and combine everything to create insights. That means even if a person only has permission for public data, they might end up seeing results that are based, in part, on private or restricted information.


Why It Matters

Security Concerns: If sensitive data ends up in the wrong hands even indirectly, it can lead to data leaks. A 2025 study showed that over two-thirds of companies had AI-related security issues due to weak access controls.

Legal Risks: Privacy laws like the GDPR require clear separation of data. If a prediction includes restricted inputs and is shown to the wrong person, companies can face heavy fines.

Trust Issues: When employees or clients feel their data isn’t safe, they lose trust in the system, and the business.


What’s Making This So Difficult?

1. AI systems often blend data so deeply that it’s hard to tell what came from where.

2. Access rules are usually fixed, but AI relies on fast-changing data.

3. Companies have many users with different roles and permissions, making enforcement complicated.

4. Permissions are often too broad, for example, someone allowed to "view reports" might accidentally access sensitive content.


How Can Businesses Fix This?

• Track Data Origins: Label data as "public" or "restricted" and monitor where it ends up.

• Flexible Access Rules: Adjust permissions based on user roles and context.

• Filter Outputs: Build AI to hide or mask parts of its response that come from private sources.

• Separate Models: Train different AI models for different user groups, each with its own safe data.

• Monitor Usage: Keep logs of who accessed what, and use alerts to catch suspicious activity.


As AI tools grow more advanced and rely on live data from many sources, managing access will only get harder. Businesses must modernize their security strategies to protect sensitive information without slowing down innovation.

Pentera Report: 67% of Companies Hit by Data Breaches in Past Two Years

 

A new study by Pentera reveals that 67% of organizations have experienced a data breach in the last 24 months — with 24% affected in the past year, and 43% reporting incidents within the previous 12 months.

The most common consequence of these breaches was unplanned downtime, affecting 36% of companies. In addition, 30% faced data compromise, while 28% incurred financial losses, emphasizing the growing risk and impact of security failures.

Among the organizations that shared the breach aftermath, a startling 76% said the incidents affected the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of their data. Only 24% reported no significant consequences.

Confidence in government-led cybersecurity efforts is also alarmingly low. Just 14% of cybersecurity leaders said they trust the support provided. Although 64% of CISOs acknowledged receiving some level of help, many feel it’s not enough to safeguard the private sector.

To strengthen cyber defenses, U.S. enterprises are spending an average of $187,000 a year on penetration testing, which simulates cyberattacks to uncover system vulnerabilities. This figure makes up just over 10% of the overall IT security budget, yet over 50% of CISOs plan to increase this allocation in 2025.

Still, companies are making system changes — such as new users, configuration updates, and permission modifications — much more frequently than they validate security. The report highlights that 96% of U.S. organizations update infrastructure quarterly, but only 30% test their defenses at the same pace.

“The pace of change in enterprise environments has made traditional testing methods unsustainable,” said Jason Mar-Tang, Field CISO at Pentera.
“96% of organizations are making changes to their IT environment at least quarterly. Without automation and technology-driven validation, it's nearly impossible to keep up. The report’s findings reinforce the need for scalable security validation strategies that meet the speed and complexity of today’s environments.”

North Korean Operatives Posing as Remote IT Workers Infiltrate U.S. Tech Firms

 

A rising number of top-tier tech companies in the U.S. have unknowingly employed North Korean cyber agents disguised as remote IT professionals, with the operatives channeling lucrative tech salaries back to Pyongyang to support the regime's weapons program.

Cybersecurity leaders warn that the scope of the deception is broader than previously believed, impacting numerous Fortune 500 firms. The trend is driven by a national shortage of cybersecurity talent and the ongoing popularity of remote work arrangements following the pandemic.

These North Korean agents are constantly refining their tactics—using advanced AI tools and enlisting U.S.-based collaborators to set up operations across the country—raising serious concerns among Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) and technology executives.

Though it's hard to pinpoint the exact number of companies affected, many industry leaders are now publicly sharing their experiences. Law enforcement agencies continue to investigate and expose the intricate tactics being used.

“I’ve talked to a lot of CISOs at Fortune 500 companies, and nearly every one that I’ve spoken to about the North Korean IT worker problem has admitted they’ve hired at least one North Korean IT worker, if not a dozen or a few dozen,”
— Charles Carmakal, CTO, Google Cloud’s Mandiant

Interviews with a dozen leading cybersecurity experts reveal that the threat is serious and growing. Several experts acknowledged that their own companies had been targeted and were struggling to contain the damage. During the same briefing, Iain Mulholland, Google Cloud’s CISO, confirmed that North Korean operatives had been spotted “in our pipeline,” although he didn’t specify whether they had been screened out or hired.

SentinelOne, a cybersecurity firm, has been vocal about its experience. In a recent report, the company revealed it had received nearly 1,000 job applications tied to the North Korean scheme.

“The scale and speed of this operation, as used by the North Korean government to generate funds for weapons development, is unprecedented,”
— Brandon Wales, former executive director at CISA and current VP at SentinelOne

Experts outline a repeated pattern: Operatives build fake LinkedIn profiles, impersonate U.S. citizens using stolen data such as addresses and Social Security numbers, and apply for high-paying roles in bulk. At the interview stage, they deploy AI-powered deepfake technology to mimic the real person in real-time.

“There are individuals located around the country who work in software development whose personas are being used,”
— Alexander Leslie, Threat Intelligence Analyst, Recorded Future

Once hired, these agents navigate onboarding using stolen credentials and request laptops to be shipped to U.S. addresses. These addresses often lead to "laptop farms"—homes filled with dozens of work devices operated by Americans paid to assist the scheme.

CrowdStrike began tracking this infiltration trend in 2022 and identified 30 affected companies within the first week of launching a monitoring program. Since early 2024, advancements in AI have only strengthened these operatives’ capabilities. According to an interagency advisory from the FBI, Treasury, and State Department, each operative can earn as much as $300,000 annually.

“This money is directly going to the weapons program, and sometimes you see that money going to the Kim family,”
— Meyers

In one significant case, American citizen Christina Chapman pleaded guilty in February to collaborating with North Korean agents for three years, helping them steal identities and manage a $17 million laptop farm operation that employed North Koreans at more than 300 U.S. companies.

“It’s hard for us to say how many humans are actually operating these personas, but somewhere in the thousands of unique personas,”
— Greg Schloemer, Senior Threat Analyst, Microsoft

In January, the U.S. Justice Department charged two Americans for enabling another North Korean scheme that brought in over $800,000 from more than 60 companies over six years.

FBI Special Agent Elizabeth Pelker explained at the RSA Conference in San Francisco that once one operative is in, they often refer others, leading to networks of up to 10 imposters within the same organization.

Even after dismissal, many operatives leave behind malware or backdoor access, extorting companies for ransom or stealing sensitive data.

“This is very adaptive,” Pelker said. “Even if [the hackers] know they’re going to get fired at some point, they have an exit strategy for them to still … have some sort of monetary gain.”

Authorities are targeting U.S.-based "laptop farm" operators as a key strategy to dismantle the scam’s infrastructure.

“If the FBI goes and knocks on that door and puts that person in cuffs and takes all the laptops away, they’ve lost 10 to 15 jobs, and they’ve lost a person who they’ve already invested in that relationship with,”
— Schloemer

The scheme is expanding internationally. CrowdStrike reports similar patterns in the U.K., Poland, Romania, and other European nations. Recorded Future has also traced activity in South Asian regions.

Still, legal and compliance fears prevent many companies from speaking up.

“That North Korean IT worker has access to your whole host of web development software, all the assets that you’ve been collecting. And then that worker is being paid by you, funneled back into the North Korean state, and is conducting espionage at the same time,”
— Leslie

“We don’t want there to be a stigma to talking about this,”
— Wales
“It is really important that everyone be open and honest, because that is the way that we’re going to deal with this, given the scale of what we are facing.”

DaVita Faces Ransomware Attack, Disrupting Some Operations but Patient Care Continues

 

Denver-headquartered DaVita Inc., a leading provider of kidney care and dialysis services with more than 3,100 facilities across the U.S. and 13 countries, has reported a ransomware attack that is currently affecting parts of its network. The incident, disclosed to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), occurred over the weekend and encrypted select portions of its systems.

"Upon discovery, we activated our response protocols and implemented containment measures, including proactively isolating impacted systems," DaVita stated in its SEC filing.

The company is working with third-party cybersecurity specialists to assess and resolve the situation, and has also involved law enforcement authorities. Despite the breach, DaVita emphasized that patient care remains ongoing.

"We have implemented our contingency plans, and we continue to provide patient care," the company noted. "However, the incident is impacting some of our operations, and while we have implemented interim measures to allow for the restoration of certain functions, we cannot estimate the duration or extent of the disruption at this time," the company said.

With the investigation still underway, DaVita acknowledged that "the full scope, nature and potential ultimate impact on the company are not yet known."

Founded 25 years ago, DaVita reported $12.82 billion in revenue in 2024. The healthcare giant served over 281,000 patients last year across 3,166 outpatient centers, including 750+ hospital partnerships. Of these, 2,657 centers are in the U.S., with the remaining 509 located in countries such as Brazil, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, and the United Kingdom, among others. DaVita also offers home dialysis services.

Security experts warn that the scale of the incident could have serious implications.

"There is potential for a very large impact, given DaVita’s scale of operations," said Scott Weinberg, CEO of cybersecurity firm Neovera. "If patient records were encrypted, sensitive data like medical histories and personal identifiers might be at risk. DaVita has not reported data exfiltration, so it’s not clear if data was stolen or not."

Weinberg added, "For dialysis patients needing regular treatments to survive, this attack is extremely serious. Because of disrupted scheduling or inaccessible records, this could lead to health complications. Ransomware disruptions in healthcare may lead to an increase in mortality rates, especially for time-sensitive treatments such as dialysis."

The breach may also bring regulatory challenges due to DaVita’s international footprint.

"Regulations can differ with respect to penalties and reporting requirements after a breach based on the country and even the state in which the patients live or were treated," said Erich Kron, security awareness advocate at KnowBe4.

"A serious cybersecurity incident that affects individuals in multiple countries can be a legal nightmare for some organizations," Kron said. "However, this is something that organizations should plan for and be prepared for prior to an event ever happening. They should already know what will be required to meet regulatory standards for the regions in which they operate."

In a separate statement to Information Security Media Group, DaVita added, "We have activated backup systems and manual processes to ensure there's no disruption to patient care. Our teams, along with external cybersecurity experts, are actively investigating this matter and working to restore systems as quickly as possible."

This cyberattack mirrors similar recent disruptions within the healthcare industry, which continues to be a frequent target.

"The healthcare sector is always considered a lucrative target because of the serious sense of urgency whenever IT operations are disrupted, not to mention potentially disabled," said Jeff Wichman, director of incident response at Semperis. "In case of ransomware attacks, this serves as another means to pressure the victim into paying a ransom."

He added, "At this time, if any systems administering dialysis have been disrupted, the clinics and hospitals within DaVita’s network are most certainly operating machines manually as a last resort and staff are working extremely hard to ensure patient care doesn’t suffer. If any electronic machines in their network are down, the diligence of staff will fill the gaps until electronic equipment is restored."

DaVita joins a growing list of specialized healthcare providers facing cybersecurity breaches in 2025. Notably, Community Care Alliance in Rhode Island recently reported a hack that impacted 115,000 individuals.

In addition, DaVita has previously disclosed multiple health data breaches. The largest, in July 2024, affected over 67,000 individuals due to unauthorized server access linked to the use of tracking pixels in its patient-facing platforms.

Ethical Hacking: The Cyber Shield Organizations Need

 

Ethical hacking may sound paradoxical, but it’s one of the most vital tools in modern cyber defence. Known as white hat hackers, these professionals are hired by companies to simulate cyberattacks, uncover vulnerabilities, and help fix them before malicious actors can strike.

“Ethical hackers mimic real-world threats to identify and patch security flaws. It’s about staying a step ahead of the bad guys,” says a cybersecurity expert.

As cyber threats surge globally, ethical hackers are in high demand. A recent Check Point Software report revealed a staggering 44% rise in global cyberattacks. From ransomware gangs to state-sponsored intrusions, the risks are growing—and the need for skilled defenders is greater than ever.

The ethical hacking process begins with reconnaissance—mapping a company’s digital infrastructure. Next comes scanning and vulnerability testing, using the same techniques as criminal hackers. Once issues are identified, they’re reported, not exploited. Some ethical hackers work independently, participating in bug bounty programs for companies like Google and Microsoft.

Industries like finance, healthcare, and tech—where sensitive data is a prime target—rely heavily on ethical hackers. Their techniques include penetration testing, system and network hacking, internal assessments, and web application testing.

In 2019, a team at Positive Technologies uncovered a Visa card flaw that could’ve allowed contactless payments to exceed set limits—just one example of ethical hacking saving the day.

Penetration testing simulates real breaches, such as injecting code, overloading systems, or intercepting data. System hacking targets devices with tools to crack passwords or exploit system weaknesses. Internal testing flags human errors, like weak credentials or poor security training. Web app testing scans for issues like XSS or SQL injections before launch. Network hacking exposes flaws in protocols, open ports, or wireless vulnerabilities.

The biggest advantage? Ethical hackers reveal blind spots that internal teams might miss. They prevent data breaches, build customer trust, and ensure compliance with regulatory standards—saving organizations from reputational and financial harm.

“Finding flaws isn’t enough. Ethical hackers offer the roadmap to fix them—fast,” a security analyst shares.

With the right skills, anyone can break into this field—often with significant rewards. Major companies offer million-dollar payouts through bug bounty programs. Many ethical hackers hold certifications like CEH, OSCP, or CySA+, with backgrounds ranging from military service to degrees in computer science.

The term “hacker” doesn’t always mean trouble. Ethical hackers use the same tools as their criminal counterparts—but to protect, not exploit. In today’s digital battlefield, they’re the unsung heroes safeguarding the future.


Google Rolls Out Simplified End-to-End Encryption for Gmail Enterprise Users

 

Google has begun the phased rollout of a new end-to-end encryption (E2EE) system for Gmail enterprise users, simplifying the process of sending encrypted emails across different platforms.

While businesses could previously adopt the S/MIME (Secure/Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) protocol for encrypted communication, it involved a resource-intensive setup — including issuing and managing certificates for all users and exchanging them before messages could be sent.

With the introduction of Gmail’s enhanced E2EE model, Google says users can now send encrypted emails to anyone, regardless of their email service, without needing to handle complex certificate configurations.

"This capability, requiring minimal efforts for both IT teams and end users, abstracts away the traditional IT complexity and substandard user experiences of existing solutions, while preserving enhanced data sovereignty, privacy, and security controls," Google said today.

The rollout starts in beta with support for encrypted messages sent within the same organization. In the coming weeks, users will be able to send encrypted emails to any Gmail inbox — and eventually to any email address, Google added.

"We're rolling this out in a phased approach, starting today, in beta, with the ability to send E2EE emails to Gmail users in your own organization. In the coming weeks, users will be able to send E2EE emails to any Gmail inbox, and, later this year, to any email inbox."

To compose an encrypted message, users can simply toggle the “Additional encryption” option while drafting their email. If the recipient is a Gmail user with either an enterprise or personal account, the message will decrypt automatically.

For users on the Gmail mobile app or non-Gmail email services, a secure link will redirect them to view the encrypted message in a restricted version of Gmail. These recipients can log in using a guest Google Workspace account to read and respond securely.

If the recipient already has S/MIME enabled, Gmail will continue to use that protocol automatically for encryption — just as it does today.

The new encryption capability is powered by Gmail's client-side encryption (CSE), a Workspace control that allows organizations to manage their own encryption keys outside of Google’s infrastructure. This ensures sensitive messages and attachments are encrypted locally on the client device before being sent to the cloud.

The approach supports compliance with various regulatory frameworks, including data sovereignty, HIPAA, and export control policies, by ensuring that encrypted content is inaccessible to both Google and any external entities.

Gmail’s CSE feature has been available to Google Workspace Enterprise Plus, Education Plus, and Education Standard customers since February 2023. It was initially introduced in beta for Gmail on the web in December 2022, following earlier launches across Google Drive, Docs, Sheets, Slides, Meet, and Calendar.

Cyfox Launches OmniSec vCISO: Harnessing GenAI for Comprehensive Compliance and Cybersecurity Management


Cysecurity News recently interviewed CYFOX (https://www.cyfox.com/) to gain an in-depth understanding of their new platform, OmniSec vCISO (https://www.cyfox.com/omnisec). The platform, designed to simplify compliance and bolster security operations, leverages advanced generative AI (genAI) and aims to transform what was traditionally the manual processes of compliance into a seamless, automated workflow.

GenAI-Powered Automated Compliance Analysis

One of the platform’s most innovative features is its use of genAI to convert complex regulatory texts into actionable technical requirements. OmniSec vCISO digests global frameworks such as ISO and GDPR, as well as regional mandates, and distills them into clear, prioritized compliance checklists.

Bridging the Data Gap with Dual Integration

For years, security teams have contended with disparate data sources and laborious manual assessments. OmniSec vCISO addresses these challenges through a dual-integration approach: lightweight, agent-based data collection across endpoints and API-driven connections with existing EDR/XDR systems. This method delivers a unified view of network activities, vulnerabilities, and overall security posture, enabling organizations to rapidly identify and address risks while streamlining day-to-day operations.

The system is designed to work with multiple compliance standards simultaneously, allowing organizations to manage overlapping or similar requirements across different regulatory frameworks. Notably, once an issue is resolved in one compliance area, OmniSec vCISO aims to automatically mark corresponding items as fixed in other frameworks with similar criteria. Additionally, the platform offers the flexibility to add new compliance measures—whether they are externally mandated or internal standards—by letting users upload or define requirements in a straightforward manner. This approach keeps organizations current with evolving legal landscapes and internal policies, significantly reducing the time and effort typically required for gap analysis and remediation planning.

Intuitive Interface and Real-Time Reporting

OmniSec vCISO is built with the end user in mind. Its intuitive Q&A dashboard allows security leaders to ask direct questions about their organization’s cybersecurity status—whether querying open vulnerabilities or reviewing asset inventories—and receive immediate, data-backed responses. 

Detailed visual reports and compliance scores facilitate internal risk assessments and help convey security statuses clearly to executive teams and stakeholders. Furthermore, the platform incorporates automated, scheduled reporting features that aim to ensure critical updates are delivered promptly, supporting proactive security management.

Future-Forward Capabilities and Broader Integration

During the interview, CYFOX representatives outlined ambitious future enhancements for OmniSec vCISO. Upcoming integrations include support for pulling employee data from systems such as Active Directory and Google Workspace. These enhancements are intended to enable the incorporation of user behavior analytics and risk scoring, thereby extending the platform’s functionality beyond asset management. By evolving into a single hub for all tasks a CISO faces—from compliance remediation to cybersecurity training and awareness—the platform seeks to simplify and centralize the complex landscape of modern cybersecurity operations.

Data Security and Operational Simplicity

OmniSec vCISO is engineered with robust data security at its core. All information is transmitted and stored on CYFOX-managed servers using stringent encryption protocols, ensuring that sensitive data remains secure and under the organization’s control. The platform’s automated, genAI-driven approach aims to reduce manual intervention, allowing organizations to achieve and maintain compliance with minimal operational overhead.

A Measured Step Forward

OmniSec vCISO represents a practical response to the evolving challenges in cybersecurity management. By automating compliance gap analysis, offering the flexibility to add both new and internal compliance frameworks, and managing multiple standards concurrently—with automatic cross-compliance updates when issues are resolved—the platform delivers a balanced solution to the everyday needs of CISOs and compliance officers. The insights shared during the Cysecurity News interview highlight how CYFOX is addressing real-world challenges in modern cybersecurity.

 By Cysecurity Staff – March 10, 2025

Cybersecurity Threats Are Evolving: Seven Key OT Security Challenges

 

Cyberattacks are advancing rapidly, threatening businesses with QR code scams, deepfake fraud, malware, and evolving ransomware. However, strengthening cybersecurity measures can mitigate risks. Addressing these seven key OT security challenges is essential.

Insurance broker Howden reports that U.K. businesses lost $55 billion to cyberattacks in five years. Basic security measures could save $4.4 million over a decade, delivering a 25% ROI.

Experts at IDS-INDATA warn that outdated OT systems are prime hacker entry points, with 60% of breaches stemming from unpatched systems. Research across industries identifies seven major OT security challenges.

Seven Critical OT Security Challenges

1. Ransomware & AI-Driven Attacks
Ransomware-as-a-Service and AI-powered malware are escalating threats. “The speed at which attack methods evolve makes waiting to update your defences risky,” says Ryan Cooke, CISO at IDS-INDATA. Regular updates and advanced threat detection systems are vital.

2. Outdated Systems & Patch Gaps
Many industrial networks rely on legacy systems. “We know OT is a different environment from IT,” Cooke explains. Where patches aren’t feasible, alternative mitigation is necessary. Regular audits help address vulnerabilities.

3. Lack of OT Device Visibility
Limited visibility makes networks vulnerable. “Without visibility over your connected OT devices, it’s impossible to secure them,” says Cooke. Asset discovery tools help monitor unauthorized access.

4. Growing IoT Complexity
IoT expansion increases security risks. “As more IoT and smart devices are integrated into industrial networks, the complexity of securing them grows exponentially,” Cooke warns. Prioritizing high-risk devices is essential.

5. Financial & Operational Risks
Breaches can cause financial losses, production shutdowns, and life-threatening risks. “A breach in OT environments can cause financial loss, shut down entire production lines, or, in extreme cases, endanger lives,” Cooke states. A strong incident response plan is crucial.

6. Compliance with Evolving Regulations
Non-compliance with OT security regulations leads to financial penalties. Regular audits ensure adherence and minimize risks.

7. Human Error & Awareness Gaps
Misconfigured security settings remain a major vulnerability. “Investing in cybersecurity awareness training for your OT teams is critical,” Cooke advises. Security training and monitoring help prevent insider threats.

“Proactively addressing these points will help significantly reduce the risk of compromise, protect critical infrastructure, ensure compliance, and safeguard against potentially severe disruptions,” Cooke concluded. 

Moreover, cyberattacks will persist regardless, but proactively addressing these challenges significantly improves the chances of defending against them.

The Need for Unified Data Security, Compliance, and AI Governance

 

Businesses are increasingly dependent on data, yet many continue to rely on outdated security infrastructures and fragmented management approaches. These inefficiencies leave organizations vulnerable to cyber threats, compliance violations, and operational disruptions. Protecting data is no longer just about preventing breaches; it requires a fundamental shift in how security, compliance, and AI governance are integrated into enterprise strategies. A proactive and unified approach is now essential to mitigate evolving risks effectively. 

The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence has introduced new security challenges. AI-powered tools are transforming industries, but they also create vulnerabilities if not properly managed. Many organizations implement AI-driven applications without fully understanding their security implications. AI models require vast amounts of data, including sensitive information, making governance a critical priority. Without robust oversight, these models can inadvertently expose private data, operate without transparency, and pose compliance challenges as new regulations emerge. 

Businesses must ensure that AI security measures evolve in tandem with technological advancements to minimize risks. Regulatory requirements are also becoming increasingly complex. Governments worldwide are enforcing stricter data privacy laws, such as GDPR and CCPA, while also introducing new regulations specific to AI governance. Non-compliance can result in heavy financial penalties, reputational damage, and operational setbacks. Businesses can no longer treat compliance as an afterthought; instead, it must be an integral part of their data security strategy. Organizations must shift from reactive compliance measures to proactive frameworks that align with evolving regulatory expectations. 

Another significant challenge is the growing issue of data sprawl. As businesses store and manage data across multiple cloud environments, SaaS applications, and third-party platforms, maintaining control becomes increasingly difficult. Security teams often lack visibility into where sensitive information resides, making it harder to enforce access controls and protect against cyber threats. Traditional security models that rely on layering additional tools onto existing infrastructures are no longer effective. A centralized, AI-driven approach to security and governance is necessary to address these risks holistically. 

Forward-thinking businesses recognize that managing security, compliance, and AI governance in isolation is inefficient. A unified approach consolidates risk management efforts into a cohesive, scalable framework. By breaking down operational silos, organizations can streamline workflows, improve efficiency through AI-driven automation, and proactively mitigate security threats. Integrating compliance and security within a single system ensures better regulatory adherence while reducing the complexity of data management. 

To stay ahead of emerging threats, organizations must modernize their approach to data security and governance. Investing in AI-driven security solutions enables businesses to automate data classification, detect vulnerabilities, and safeguard sensitive information at scale. Shifting from reactive compliance measures to proactive strategies ensures that regulatory requirements are met without last-minute adjustments. Moving away from fragmented security solutions and adopting a modular, scalable platform allows businesses to reduce risk and maintain resilience in an ever-evolving digital landscape. Those that embrace a forward-thinking, unified strategy will be best positioned for long-term success.

Microsoft's Priva Platform: Revolutionizing Enterprise Data Privacy and Compliance

 

Microsoft has taken a significant step forward in the realm of enterprise data privacy and compliance with the expansive expansion of its Priva platform. With the introduction of five new automated products, Microsoft aims to assist organizations worldwide in navigating the ever-evolving landscape of privacy regulations. 

In today's world, the importance of prioritizing data privacy for businesses cannot be overstated. There is a growing demand from individuals for transparency and control over their personal data, while governments are implementing stricter laws to regulate data usage, such as the AI Accountability Act. Paul Brightmore, principal group program manager for Microsoft’s Governance and Privacy Platform, highlighted the challenges faced by organizations, noting a common reactive approach to privacy management. 

The new Priva products are designed to shift organizations from reactive to proactive data privacy operations through automation and comprehensive risk assessment. Leveraging AI technology, these offerings aim to provide complete visibility into an organization’s entire data estate, regardless of its location. 

Brightmore emphasized the capabilities of Priva in handling data requests from individuals and ensuring compliance across various data sources. The expanded Priva family includes Privacy Assessments, Privacy Risk Management, Tracker Scanning, Consent Management, and Subject Rights Requests. These products automate compliance audits, detect privacy violations, monitor web tracking technologies, manage user consent, and handle data access requests at scale, respectively. 

Brightmore highlighted the importance of Privacy by Design principles and emphasized the continuous updating of Priva's automated risk management features to address emerging data privacy risks. Microsoft's move into the enterprise AI governance space with Priva follows its recent disagreement with AI ethics leaders over responsibility assignment practices in its AI copilot product. 

However, Priva's AI capabilities for sensitive data identification could raise concerns among privacy advocates. Brightmore referenced Microsoft's commitment to protecting customer privacy in the AI era through technologies like privacy sandboxing and federated analytics. With fines for privacy violations increasing annually, solutions like Priva are becoming essential for data-driven organizations. 

Microsoft strategically positions Priva as a comprehensive privacy governance solution for the enterprise, aiming to make privacy a fundamental aspect of its product stack. By tightly integrating these capabilities into the Microsoft cloud, the company seeks to establish privacy as a key driver of revenue across its offerings. 

However, integrating disparate privacy tools under one umbrella poses significant challenges, and Microsoft's track record in this area is mixed. Privacy-native startups may prove more agile in this regard. Nonetheless, Priva's seamless integration with workplace applications like Teams, Outlook, and Word could be its key differentiator, ensuring widespread adoption and usage among employees. 

Microsoft's Priva platform represents a significant advancement in enterprise data privacy and compliance. With its suite of automated solutions, Microsoft aims to empower organizations to navigate complex privacy regulations effectively while maintaining transparency and accountability in data usage.

Embracing the Virtual: The Rise and Role of vCISOs in Modern Businesses

 

In recent years, the task of safeguarding businesses against cyber threats and ensuring compliance with security standards has become increasingly challenging. Unlike larger corporations that typically employ Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) for handling such issues, smaller businesses often lack this dedicated role due to either a perceived lack of necessity or budget constraints.

The growing difficulty in justifying the absence of a CISO has led many businesses without one to adopt a virtual CISO (vCISO) model. Also known as fractional CISO or CISO-as-a-service, a vCISO is typically an outsourced security expert working part-time to assist businesses in securing their infrastructure, data, personnel, and customers. Depending on the company's requirements, vCISOs can operate on-site or remotely, providing both short-term and long-term solutions.

Various factors contribute to the increasing adoption of vCISOs. It may be prompted by internal crises such as the unexpected resignation of a CISO, the need to comply with new regulations, or adherence to cybersecurity frameworks like NIST's Cybersecurity Framework 2.0 expected in 2024. Additionally, board members accustomed to CISO briefings may request the engagement of a vCISO.

Russell Eubanks, a vCISO and faculty member at IANS Research, emphasizes the importance of flexibility in vCISO engagements, tailoring the delivery model to match the specific needs of a company, whether for a few days or 40 hours a week.

The vCISO model is not limited to smaller businesses; it also finds applicability in industries such as software-as-a-service (SaaS), manufacturing, industrial, and healthcare. However, opinions differ regarding its suitability in the heavily regulated financial sector, where some argue in favor of full-time CISOs.

Key responsibilities of vCISOs include governance, risk, and compliance (GRC), strategic planning, and enhancing security maturity. These experts possess a comprehensive understanding of cyber risk, technology, and business operations, enabling them to orchestrate effective security strategies.

Experienced vCISOs often play advisory roles, assisting CEOs, CFOs, CIOs, CTOs, and CISOs in understanding priorities, assessing technology configurations, and addressing potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Some vCISOs even assist in defining the CISO role within a company, preparing the groundwork for a permanent CISO to take over.

When seeking a vCISO, companies have various options, including industry experts, large consulting firms, boutique firms specializing in vCISO services, and managed services providers. The critical factor in selecting a vCISO is ensuring that the candidate has prior experience as a CISO, preferably within the same industry as the hiring company.

The process of finding the right vCISO involves understanding the company's needs, defining the scope and outcome expectations clearly, and vetting candidates based on their industry familiarity and experience. While compatibility with the company's size and vertical is essential, the right vCISO can outweigh some of these considerations. Rushing the selection process is discouraged, with experts emphasizing the importance of taking the time to find the right fit to avoid potential mismatches.