7 ms·
The incumbents in the insurance/banking industry will have to invest heavily in security and in some cases overhaul entire systems. Personally I think its more
by kennxfl 8y ago
The incumbents in the insurance/banking industry will have to invest heavily in security and in some cases overhaul entire systems. Personally I think its more cost effective long-term than hiring a bunch of lobby groups and lawyers to find loopholes.
I mean the Equifax security was laughable and no one got in trouble. I wouldn't be surprised if this case takes a complete 180 from common sense.
- javiramos 8y agoAre there objective audits or rankings where financial institutions are assessed for their cyber-security measures/infrastructure? How do I even know whether my bank has good security? Cyber-security being such a major threat, I would be willing to change banks if my bank is proven to have crappy online security.
- kennxfl 8y agoIf any exists, its by third parties who have no insight from the inside. Central banks wouldn't disclose 'cyber-security index' in stress tests due to the risk of scaring customers off or causing a bank run.
- jdironman 8y agoOr risk inviting attacks.
- AmericanChopper 8y agoEven well written standards are not objectively audited. There’s a huge variety in the quality of external auditing, and a fair amount of pay-to-play. A lot of people will tell you that every PCI certified company to ever be involved in a breach was non-compliant at the time of the breach. Is that because the PCI DSS is such a remarkable standard that complying with it will protect you from 100% of breaches? Or is it because you can retroactively find some type of issue with 100% of PCI audits?