About a year ago, the U.S. security firm Palo Alto Networks began to hear from a flurry of companies that had been hacked in ways that weren't the norm for cybercriminals.
I think as more gen z enters the workforce we’re going to start seeing more breaches because they’re not going to give a shit when they see someone in the csuite making 1000x what an average person makes. Especially when they can barely afford to eat and need 5 roommates.
If these places want to stop that from happening the best way is to pay your staff EXTREMELY well and setup things like pensions and profit sharing.
I guess you didn’t read the article or think about what you’re saying?
They aren’t phishing low tier workers. They’re getting executives and people high up in companies to the data they’re after. They aren’t getting in by using an hourly employees info.
And “tech debt” (which I’m sure said execs would lump refactoring infrastructural security under) isn’t a new feature that generates money, so it’ll get consistently deprioritized.
I think as more gen z enters the workforce we’re going to start seeing more breaches because they’re not going to give a shit when they see someone in the csuite making 1000x what an average person makes. Especially when they can barely afford to eat and need 5 roommates.
If these places want to stop that from happening the best way is to pay your staff EXTREMELY well and setup things like pensions and profit sharing.
I guess you didn’t read the article or think about what you’re saying?
They aren’t phishing low tier workers. They’re getting executives and people high up in companies to the data they’re after. They aren’t getting in by using an hourly employees info.
It’s the low tier employees that usually monitor for breaches and anomalies and they just won’t give a shit.
And “tech debt” (which I’m sure said execs would lump refactoring infrastructural security under) isn’t a new feature that generates money, so it’ll get consistently deprioritized.
Source: am software+devops engineer