Connect with us

Security

Here’s why more US employees self-censor social media posts

Published

on

The FBI is searching for tools to gather social media data in bulk
Plans to track social media activity will potentially clash with existing privacy policies.

With the world being always accessible in the palm of our hands, it’s often difficult to disconnect.

It’s hard to believe that in 2005 only 5% of adults in the US used at least one social media platform. Now, in 2019, almost three-out-of-four (72%) people are active on social media, so it’s no wonder that the lines between our home and work lives are becoming blurred. We are suffering from social media overload.

But what happens when your co-workers (or even boss) decide they want to follow you online?

Vancouver, BC-based job interview company The Interview Guys studied data from 1,024 employees who had been followed by a friend or colleague across their social media accounts. It wanted to discover more about their self-censorship behavior online.

Almost all respondents (97.8%) reported being followed or friended by their colleagues on Facebook, followed by 82.1% on Instagram, 75.6% on Snapchat, and 65.2% on Twitter.

Most of these connections (94.8%) came from co-workers they interacted with daily. Almost half of these friend requests (48%) however, came from people higher up in the organization such as supervisors or managers. 

However, several respondents reported having an account purely for work purposes. Almost one in five (19.5%) had a work account on Twitter, 15.1% on Facebook, 13.9% on Instagram and 13.3% on Snapchat.

Three in 10 employees accepted friend requests to keep the peace at work, as having a good relationship with your co-worker is crucial to job-related success. Is it worth accepting a friend request from someone you do not particularly like, or have a difficult relationship with at work?

Many employees self-censor their posts because colleagues can see them. Employees over 50 years old self-censored their posts 20% more than employees in their 20s.

Over two out of five (41%) employees in their 20s admitted to avoiding posting content that involves drinking or drug use on their social media profiles.

Seventy-seven percent of respondents acknowledged using privacy settings on their social posts, followed by around 76% who did the same for their photos.

Here's why more US employees self-censor social media posts

(Image: The Interview Guys)

The main topics employees avoided posting about because their co-workers could see them were: Political feelings (36.0%), drinking or drug use (34.2%), and anti-company statements (32.0%).

Around 31% of respondents in their 50s or older avoided posting about the company they worked for.

Two-out-of-five employees say their company is strict on their social media usage outside of work, and one in three people report knowing someone whose employer terminated them based on their actions on social media.

Over 30% of people say companies should screen job applicants’ social media as part of the hiring process. One in 10 employees said they were required to disclose their social media profiles when they applied for their current position. 

Social media contributed to the burnout that many experience at work, and added to anxiety about their colleagues monitoring their social activity. Perhaps it is time to take a step back.

If you keep your social profiles public, don’t be surprised if you find co-workers lurking on your content. You might want to scrub your social media posts and job hop to a better career.

It might be time to revisit your privacy settings and make sure your private posts stay that way.

Previous and related coverage:

US job seekers scrub their social media accounts to get success

Are you worried that your social media footprint will jeopardize your career? If so, you are not alone.

Where do the tech giants send your data?

Although we find our digital lives convenient with notifications, streamed music, messages, and emails, remember the tech companies are ruling our lives.

Millennials stressed from tech and social media overload

Milennials are suffering from burnout at work — and tech is a major factor in their stress.

Is your phone listening to your conversations? Paranoid’s guide to settings you can change

Are you suspicious about your phone? Have a look at these settings to put your mind at ease. they interacted



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Security

Key Criteria for Evaluating Security Information and Event Management Solutions (SIEM)

Published

on

Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions consolidate multiple security data streams under a single roof. Initially, SIEM supported early detection of cyberattacks and data breaches by collecting and correlating security event logs. Over time, it evolved into sophisticated systems capable of ingesting huge volumes of data from disparate sources, analyzing data in real time, and gathering additional context from threat intelligence feeds and new sources of security-related data. Next-generation SIEM solutions deliver tight integrations with other security products, advanced analytics, and semi-autonomous incident response.

SIEM solutions can be deployed on-premises, in the cloud, or a mix of the two. Deployment models must be weighed with regard to the environments the SIEM solution will protect. With more and more digital infrastructure and services becoming mission critical to every enterprise, SIEMs must handle higher volumes of data. Vendors and customers are increasingly focused on cloud-based solutions, whether SaaS or cloud-hosted models, for their scalability and flexibility.

The latest developments for SIEM solutions include machine learning capabilities for incident detection, advanced analytics features that include user behavior analytics (UBA), and integrations with other security solutions, such as security orchestration automation and response (SOAR) and endpoint detection and response (EDR) systems. Even though additional capabilities within the SIEM environment are a natural progression, customers are finding it even more difficult to deploy, customize, and operate SIEM solutions.

Other improvements include better user experience and lower time-to-value for new deployments. To achieve this, vendors are working on:

  • Streamlining data onboarding
  • Preloading customizable content—use cases, rulesets, and playbooks
  • Standardizing data formats and labels
  • Mapping incident alerts to common frameworks, such as the MITRE ATT&CK framework

Vendors and service providers are also expanding their offerings beyond managed SIEM solutions to à la carte services, such as content development services and threat hunting-as-a-service.

There is no one-size-fits-all SIEM solution. Each organization will have to evaluate its own requirements and resource constraints to find the right solution. Organizations will weigh factors such as deployment models or integrations with existing applications and security solutions. However, the main decision factor for most customers will revolve around usability, affordability, and return on investment. Fortunately, a wide range of solutions available in the market can almost guarantee a good fit for every customer.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

Continue Reading

Security

Key Criteria for Evaluating Secure Service Access

Published

on

Since the inception of large-scale computing, enterprises, organizations, and service providers have protected their digital assets by securing the perimeter of their on-premises data centers. With the advent of cloud computing, the perimeter has dissolved, but—in most cases—the legacy approach to security hasn not. Many corporations still manage the expanded enterprise and remote workforce as an extension of the old headquarters office/branch model serviced by LANs and WANs.

Bolting new security products onto their aging networks increased costs and complexity exponentially, while at the same time severely limiting their ability to meet regulatory compliance mandates, scale elastically, or secure the threat surface of the new any place/any user/any device perimeter.

The result? Patchwork security ill-suited to the demands of the post-COVID distributed enterprise.

Converging networking and security, secure service access (SSA) represents a significant shift in the way organizations consume network security, enabling them to replace multiple security vendors with a single, integrated platform offering full interoperability and end-to-end redundancy. Encompassing secure access service edge (SASE), zero-trust network access (ZTNA), and extended detection and response (XDR), SSA shifts the focus of security consumption from being either data center or edge-centric to being ubiquitous, with an emphasis on securing services irrespective of user identity or resources accessed.

This GigaOm Key Criteria report outlines critical criteria and evaluation metrics for selecting an SSA solution. The corresponding GigaOm Radar Report provides an overview of notable SSA vendors and their offerings available today. Together, these reports are designed to help educate decision-makers, making them aware of various approaches and vendors that are meeting the challenges of the distributed enterprise in the post-pandemic era.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Solution Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

Continue Reading

Security

Key Criteria for Evaluating Edge Platforms

Published

on

Edge platforms leverage distributed infrastructure to deliver content, computing, and security closer to end devices, offloading networks and improving performance. We define edge platforms as the solutions capable of providing end users with millisecond access to processing power, media files, storage, secure connectivity, and related “cloud-like” services.

The key benefit of edge platforms is bringing websites, applications, media, security, and a multitude of virtual infrastructures and services closer to end devices compared to public or private cloud locations.

The need for content proximity started to become more evident in the early 2000s as the web evolved from a read-only service to a read-write experience, and users worldwide began both consuming and creating content. Today, this is even more important, as live and on-demand video streaming at very high resolutions cannot be sustained from a single central location. Content delivery networks (CDNs) helped host these types of media at the edge, and the associated network optimization methods allowed them to provide these new demanding services.

As we moved into the early 2010s, we experienced the rapid cloudification of traditional infrastructure. Roughly speaking, cloud computing takes a server from a user’s office, puts it in a faraway data center, and allows it to be used across the internet. Cloud providers manage the underlying hardware and provide it as a service, allowing users to provision their own virtual infrastructure. There are many operational benefits, but at least one unavoidable downside: the increase in latency. This is especially true in this dawning age of distributed enterprises for which there is not just a single office to optimize. Instead, “the office” is now anywhere and everywhere employees happen to be.

Even so, this centralized, cloud-based compute methodology works very well for most enterprise applications, as long as there is no critical sensitivity to delay. But what about use cases that cannot tolerate latency? Think industrial monitoring and control, real-time machine learning, autonomous vehicles, augmented reality, and gaming. If a cloud data center is a few hundred or even thousands of miles away, the physical limitations of sending an optical or electrical pulse through a cable mean there are no options to lower the latency. The answer to this is leveraging a distributed infrastructure model, which has traditionally been used by content delivery networks.

As CDNs have brought the internet’s content closer to everyone, CDN providers have positioned themselves in the unique space of owning much of the infrastructure required to bring computing and security closer to users and end devices. With servers close to the topological edge of the network, CDN providers can offer processing power and other “cloud-like” services to end devices with only a few milliseconds latency.

While CDN operators are in the right place at the right time to develop edge platforms, we’ve observed a total of four types of vendors that have been building out relevant—and potentially competing—edge infrastructure. These include traditional CDNs, hyperscale cloud providers, telecommunications companies, and new dedicated edge platform operators, purpose-built for this emerging requirement.

How to Read this Report

This GigaOm report is one of a series of documents that helps IT organizations assess competing solutions in the context of well-defined features and criteria. For a fuller understanding consider reviewing the following reports:

Key Criteria report: A detailed market sector analysis that assesses the impact that key product features and criteria have on top-line solution characteristics—such as scalability, performance, and TCO—that drive purchase decisions.

GigaOm Radar report: A forward-looking analysis that plots the relative value and progression of vendor solutions along multiple axes based on strategy and execution. The Radar report includes a breakdown of each vendor’s offering in the sector.

Vendor Profile: An in-depth vendor analysis that builds on the framework developed in the Key Criteria and Radar reports to assess a company’s engagement within a technology sector. This analysis includes forward-looking guidance around both strategy and product.

Continue Reading

Trending