Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

OtHanski t1_j100lyt wrote

How about we don't allow blatant commercial posts by companies on this subreddit?

20

cneskey t1_j1fllgc wrote

I don't like commercial things in general but I do like the idea of people getting paid for doing research and visualization instead of having to keep shelling them out for free.

1

vk6flab t1_j10gzse wrote

Why not? A good visualisation is a good visualisation, regardless of who produced it for what reason.

−5

ACH-S t1_j10lgug wrote

It's not really a useful visualisation though and the title of the submission is a bit scarier than it should be. Some mismatch between what happens in the industry and what is covered in the news is expected as "miscellenaous errors" is probably not as exciting for most readers as system intrusion. If you look at the mismatch with academia, things get worse: it's not super clear if those keywords were cited as examples in the academic papers, or if they were the principal topic the papers were addressing, or wheter they were used as the easiest benchmark/baseline to show an idea works etc...

Without explaining some factors like these, the figure doesn't really teach us anything and given the title, it looks like they just want to click bait you to go to their website.

7

vk6flab t1_j10m3e2 wrote

I understand your points, but that could be fixed with enforcing the data source requirements.

So far I've not seen any data sources for this post.

1

cneskey t1_j1flxuj wrote

Those are good points. They are covered in the page cited in the infographic. I like to include all detail within a visualization but then people tell us the graphic is "too busy".

1

OtHanski t1_j10hqn8 wrote

We've got ads on web pages, ads in phone notifications, ads in paid subscription TV shows, do we really also need the OC to be ads too?

1

vk6flab t1_j10in45 wrote

If you use that as a metric this sub will die. Everybody is selling something. A visualisation is by nature telling a story. That's its entire purpose. If we start limiting what story is allowed, we might as well close down the sub.

−2

OtHanski t1_j10jfve wrote

There's a pretty easy distinction to make: "Posts that can be considered advertising for a for-profit company are not allowed".

Want to sell a story just cause you think it's interesting? Sure. Make a post because you want my money? Fuck off.

3

Westcork1916 t1_j11n4du wrote

DOS is not a data breach.

11

cneskey t1_j1fl09r wrote

True. It can be part of a breach but is rare which is why the share is so small in the DBIR column. It is an incident type that gets a lot of hype despite rarely resulting in data exfiltration.

2

vk6flab t1_j10m4zc wrote

Data source?

5

hivesystems OP t1_j11kjvu wrote

See comment above or visit the link to get all the information that doesn’t fit here!

−4

vk6flab t1_j11q688 wrote

There is no comment from you or any link.

7

hivesystems OP t1_j122sq8 wrote

Copied here for you!

Data source: Data compiled from research using sources like the Verizon DBIR, scite.ai, API's from the New York Times and The Guardian, and Google Trends and Search Tools. The full methodology, sources, and assumptions can be found at www.hivesystems.io/perception

Tool used: Illustrator and Excel

Hi everyone - I'm back again with our 2022 update to our data breach perceptions graphic! Another year of data from the Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR) showed that what people are reading about and seeing online doesn't align to how data breaches are actually happening. It's a good visual for companies who may be investing in risk reduction strategies for the wrong threats based on what they see/hear about out in the world!

1