UK Businesses Need To Take Mobile Security More Seriously

Jun 10, 2014

Given the rising numbers of remote workers, and the BYOD trend, businesses in the UK aren't taking the security of mobile devices as seriously as they should, or at least that's the headline from the latest piece of research Samsung has conducted.

75 per cent of firms questioned said that mobile devices were connected to their corporate network, and businesses are increasingly making themselves vulnerable on the mobile front – almost half of organisations admitted they'd had a company smartphone stolen in the past year. 7 per cent of businesses said they'd seen over 200 handsets either lost or stolen.

So it's not surprising that security breaches are becoming more common, with 11 per cent of businesses admitting they had suffered financial damage to the tune of £25,000 or more due to a security breach (and a quarter of firms having experienced a breach costing £15,000 plus).

The real problem, though, is that despite these dangers, mobile device security still isn't treated with the gravitas it deserves, and 30 per cent of CTOs simply didn't know how many of the firm's mobiles had gone missing in the past year. Furthermore, 34 per cent had no clue how many mobile security incidents their company had experienced in the preceding year, and the vast majority prioritised facilitating flexible working and improving software above mobile security – with only 9 per cent of CTOs plumping for the latter as more important.

Graham Long, VP of the Enterprise Business Team, Samsung UK & Ireland, said: "Businesses need to make sure their security keeps up with the increasing use of mobile devices. With more and more employees using their own personal smartphones and tablets for work, neglecting security can be a very expensive mistake to make."

He added: "The challenge for businesses and IT decision makers is to embrace new ways of working but ensure all devices are highly secure and efficient."

 




Author: Darren Allan
View the original article here.
Published under license from ITProPortal.com

Comment