Cybersecurity: Perceptions & Practices

2018 Cybersecurity: Perceptions & Practices
A Benchmark Survey of Security Professionals in the U.S., U.K., and Asia-Pacific Regions

Foreword
As uncertainties — cybersecurity and otherwise — swim around
us with increased velocity and frequency, it’s always helpful
to hear directly from security leaders in the trenches of our
industry. These first-hand accounts have the unique ability to
shed light on the challenges security professionals and their
teams face nearly every day of their work lives. That’s precisely
what this “2018 Cybersecurity: Perceptions & Practices”
benchmark survey accomplishes. It provides insights into the
state of the cybersecurity practice of 751 mid- to large-sized
organizations in the United States, United Kingdom, and Asia-
Pacific regions.
From these insights, one thing that comes as a surprise
is data that suggests that the U.S. may not be leading
the cybersecurity industry in security maturity. In fact,
respondents from organizations in the Asia-Pacific region
clearly indicate that they are far more likely to have a security
operations center (SOC) than their U.S. and U.K. counterparts.
The Asia-Pacific region also boasts the largest percentage
of IT budget allocation toward cybersecurity. Both of these
findings suggest a cultural prioritization toward security
investments — one that isn’t being matched by the U.S. or U.K.
When prompted on workflow/employee efficiency, it appears
evident that security professionals are wasting huge amounts
of time and effort on false positives and inefficient processes.
Of course, this isn’t news to us, but it’s important to note
how the data acutely quantifies this problem. The majority
of IT executives indicate that the average cybersecurity
professional wastes as much as 10 hours a week due to
software inefficiencies. In an industry already plagued by a
shortage in qualified specialists, this is a reality that is not
only unacceptable, but also avoidable.
Containment of cyberthreats and breaches is a major
challenge for all organizations. It takes time to understand
the full scope of an incident and determine how best to
neutralize it. This is exacerbated by a lack of resources
(human, technology, intelligence) and then compounded
when automation and orchestration are not efficiently
leveraged to reduce the time necessary to complete the
investigative processes.
Now, more than ever, security teams need to be working
more intentionally. Corroboration and qualification using
threat intelligence and other technologies help teams
make informed decisions. Establishing automation and
orchestration processes, protocols, and procedures for the
most prevalent classes of attacks will improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of most any SOC.
As security experts, it’s unlikely our constant state of being
stretched thin will be relieved anytime soon. But this survey
does shine a ray of hope: the majority of IT executives
surveyed believe their C-suite is paying more attention to
cybersecurity efforts than they did last year. That, combined
with the availability of NextGen SIEM and end-to-end security
solutions today, gives me optimism that cybersecurity
organizations across the globe may soon increase fortification
in the fight against cyberthreats.
James Carder
CISO & VP, LogRhythm Labs
James Carder
CISO & VP, LogRhythm Labs
LogRhythm

Key Findings
The Current State of Security Maturity
Many companies are focused on growing their security
maturity — part of that growth is establishing a security
operations center (SOC) within their organization. Special
threat detection programs can be another indicator of
security maturity. More than 70 percent of decision makers
have programs in place to detect specific threats such as
ransomware, insider or employee threats, and denial of service
attacks. For those organizations that currently lack a formal
SOC, most plan to add one within the next two years.
Team size is another important indicator, as it can provide
insight into an organization’s commitment to a well-staffed
security program. In this survey, on average, respondents
said they employ 12 cybersecurity professionals in their
organization. More than half indicated that they employ 10
or fewer professionals on their teams. A huge majority of IT
decision makers — 95 percent — use security software to prevent
and react to threats. More than a quarter deploy more than 10
security software solutions to manage security threats.
Objective and Methodology
The purpose of this study was to determine the cybersecurity perceptions and
practices among organizations in the United States, United Kingdom, and Asia-
Pacific regions.
The results of this report are from an online survey of 751 IT decision makers who
indicated that cybersecurity was part of their responsibilities. Of these respondents,
250 came from the United States, 250 from the United Kingdom, and 251 from the
Asia-Pacific region. The Asia-Pacific region was represented by decision makers in
Australia, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Malaysia.
These respondents indicated they were employed in mid- to large-sized companies
(minimum 500+ employees).

Ability to Respond to Cyberthreats
There are many factors that enable a SOC to quickly detect
and respond to an incident, including technology, process,
programs, and people. When it comes to technology, a strong
majority — nearly 80 percent — of respondents said that a
platform for security management, analysis, and response
is beneficial, though only about a third rate such a
platform as very beneficial. This response may reinforce the
thought that true security confidence cannot be created with
technology alone.
The metrics of MTTD and MTTR to a cybersecurity incident
are two of the strongest indicators of the readiness and
success of a security program. However, less than half of
surveyed respondents indicated that their team is able
to detect a major cybersecurity incident within one hour.
When comparing the amount of time it takes to detect an
incident versus the time it takes to respond to one, there
are minor differences. Conversely, when examining the time
required to contain an incident, there was a noticeable drop.
Overall, respondents indicated their organizations are far
less likely to contain a major incident in one hour.
When asked to consider how their organization is operating
from an end-to-end approach that includes discovery,
qualification, neutralization, and recovery from cyberattacks,
the respondents reported that they need help on virtually all
stages within this framework.
Level of Security Confidence
When it comes to confidence levels, security decision makers
indicated they are optimistic about protection; about half
of them believe they are protected from external threats.
Despite these levels of confidence, most of the other half
of respondents believe that a determined hacker can still
breach security measures that are in place. In fact, more than
one-third reported that their company has experienced
a breach in the past year — ranging from 29 percent in the
United States to 39 percent in the Asia-Pacific region.
When specifically asked about confidence levels, these decision
makers revealed that they are only moderately confident in their
cybersecurity measures and abilities — suggesting an attitude
that may be more hopeful than truly confident.
Most IT respondents — more than 60 percent — are only
somewhat confident that their security software can detect
all major breaches. They are only moderately confident that
they can protect their companies from hackers.
In addition, the level of confidence in one’s security also
seemed to sway based on other variables, such as industry
or the implementation of programs to target specific types
of threats. For instance, decision makers who did not
report having programs to protect against threats such
as ransomware, insider threats, and service denial attacks
are less confident in their security programs. That same
segment reported slower rates of detection, response, and
containment. IT decision makers in manufacturing also
reported feeling more vulnerable than in other industries.
Key Findings
Perceptions
of Information
Security
We established a wide
perception of information
security programs and
initiatives among our
surveyed IT decision
makers. Our survey
includes confidence levels
in decision makers’ ability
to detect and respond to
threats, their preferred
security technologies,
and some of the biggest
challenges to a successful
security program. Mean
time to detect (MTTD)
and mean time to respond
(MTTR) are two primary
metrics in assessing the
success of any information
security program.

The Challenges Facing Today’s Security Teams
When asked about the biggest challenge in detecting and
responding to cyberthreats, there is no clear smoking gun.
IT decision makers are equally likely to cite the lack of
cybersecurity skills, qualified manpower, ineffective software,
lack of funding, and insufficient or undefined processes.
They are also divided about which security technologies
are most valuable, citing firewalls, network security, and
security information and event management (SIEM) to about
the same degree.
As decision makers are planning for the future and establishing
ways to further protect their organizations, there are many
things to consider. These decision makers need to carefully
plan their budgets and strategies (with what they sometimes
deem to be limited resources) to carry out strategies and
deploy technologies to stay ahead of cyberattacks. They also
must consider the development of programs to tackle specific
threats that may put their organizations at risk.
One such threat is the insider or user threat. Most decision
makers — nearly 60 percent — indicate that they expect
insider threats to increase over the next year. Less than
10 percent indicate that they expect insider threats
to decrease. Decision makers whose organizations had
experienced a breach in the past year held the opinion that
insider threats would increase, as did those who are currently
using artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) as
part of their technology stack.
When it comes to budget, the percentage allocated to
security from the overall IT budget is often on the lower side.
Overall, one-third of respondents allocate 10 percent or less
of their IT budget to security. Regionally, the U.S. had the
lowest rate, and Asia-Pacific companies the highest. When
asked about their comfort level of security funding, decision
makers indicated they are moderately comfortable with
their companies’ level of security funding; however, nearly a
quarter indicated they are not comfortable. From a regional
perspective, those in the U.S. were less likely to think the level
of their security funding is appropriate.
Key Findings

Cybersecurity Team Resources
About 40 percent of IT decision makers employ larger
cybersecurity teams of 11 or more professionals, while about
half have 10 or fewer.
Detailed Findings
Figure 1. Number of Cybersecurity Professionals Employed
Finance and technology companies are most likely to have
more than 10 cybersecurity professionals: 59 percent and 60
percent respectively, vs. 40 percent overall.
Companies that have experienced a breach, and those using
AI, tend to have more cybersecurity professionals on staff.
Figure 2. Percent of Organizations with 10 or More Cybersecurity
Professionals Employed
About half of decision makers claim to use the highest level
of prevention to stop breaches and are optimistic about
protection. Most of the others, however, think that determined
hackers can still breach security.

Figure 4. Organizations with a SOC
Among IT decision makers whose companies lack a SOC, most plan to create one within
the next two years. Decision makers in the Asia-Pacific region are most likely to act in
this timeframe.
Figure 3.
How Organizations Currently Measure Approaches to Stop Breaches
IT decision makers in larger companies (10,000+ employees)
are more likely to use the highest level of prevention and are
confident they are protected: 61 percent, vs. 51 percent overall.
Most decision makers say their organization has a SOC. Asia-
Pacific companies are more likely, and U.S. companies are less
likely to have a SOC.
Figure 5. Timeframe in Which Organizations Without a SOC Plan to Open One
Detailed Findings
KEY CHART

On average, 95 percent of respondents use security software
to prevent and react to threats. More than one quarter of
decision makers deploy more than 10 security software
solutions to manage security threats. About 40 percent use
five or less.
Detailed Findings
Figure 6. Number of Security Software Solutions Organizations Deploy
Less than half of respondents say their team detects a major
cybersecurity incident with an hour.
Figure 7. Average Time to Detect a Major Cybersecurity Incident
Comparing the amount of time it takes organizations to detect vs. respond to a major incident
shows relatively minor differences.
However, there is a big drop when it comes to the time required to contain threats. These
companies, overall and in each region, are far less likely to contain major incidents within the
first hour.
Figure 8. Comparing the Time to Contain a Major Incident
Most respondents who say it takes longer (2+ hours)
to detect an incident are decision makers who
report that they do not have a SOC (61 percent) or
do not have a formal program to protect against
ransomware (64 percent), insider threats (68
percent), and denial of service attacks (71 percent).

For those in the Asia-Pacific region, the drop in the rate of detection/response/
containment in the first hour is slightly lower than for the U.S. and the U.K.
Figure 9. Average Percentage of Those Able to Detect, Respond, and Contain a Major
Cybersecurity Incident within the First Hour
Most decision makers — more than 60 percent — are only moderately confident
that their security software can detect all major breaches.
Figure 10. Confidence Level of Ability to Detect ALL Major Breaches with Security Software
Similarly, these decision makers are only moderately confident that they can
protect their company from hackers.
Figure 11. Confidence Level that Organization Can Stay Ahead of Attackers
Decision makers who expressed less confidence in their ability to stay ahead of
attackers include executives in manufacturing and those with Telecom titles, as
well as those who lack AI and formal programs to protect against ransomware,
insider threats, and denial of service attacks.
Figure 12. Percent of Those Who are “Very Confident” That Their Company is Protected Against
All Major Breaches and Hackers
Detailed Findings
KEY CHART

Total U.S. U.K. Asia-Pacific
Lack of staff cybersecurity
skills
22 percent 20 percent 23 percent 24 percent
Ineffective security software 21 percent 21 percent 23 percent 18 percent
Lack of funding and resources 19 percent 21 percent 16 percent 20 percent
Insufficient processes or
undefined workflows
Lack of manpower to monitor
threats
Other 2 percent 4 percent 2 percent 0 percent
Decision makers are divided in their perceptions of the major challenge to detecting
cybersecurity threats.
Table 1. The Biggest Challenge to Detecting Cyberthreats
Total U.S. U.K. Asia-Pacific
Firewalls 27 percent 26 percent 29 percent 25 percent
Network security 26 percent 25 percent 28 percent 26 percent
Security information and event
management (SIEM)
Endpoint security 17 percent 18 percent 14 percent 19 percent
IDS 6 percent 5 percent 4 percent 10 percent
Other 1 percent * 1 percent 0 percent
Similarly, no single security technology emerged as most valuable. Firewalls, network security,
and SIEM are about equally rated as most valuable.
Table 2. Security Technologies That Decision Makers Find the Most Value
Detailed Findings

Threat Lifecycle Management Defined
Threat Lifecycle Management (TLM) is a framework
that puts security teams a step ahead of attackers
by providing an end-to-end security workflow that
combines people, process, and technology. TLM
empowers teams by sorting through the noise to
highlight and investigate high-priority threats.
This series of aligned SecOps capabilities begins with
the ability to “see” broadly and deeply across an
IT environment and ends with the ability to quickly
mitigate and recover from a security incident.
Detailed Findings
Far and away, IT decision makers define “Threat Lifecycle Management” holistically, as an
approach involving discovery, qualification, neutralization, and recovery from cyberattacks.
Decision makers think they need help on nearly all stages of Threat Lifecycle Management,
especially detecting, neutralizing, investigating, and recovering from cyberthreats.
Figure 13. Threat Lifecycle Management Stages Where Decision Makes Indicate They Need Help

Detailed Findings
Roughly six out of 10 decision makers expect insider or employee threats
to increase over the next year, while another third expect the level to stay
constant. Only seven percent expect any decrease.
Figure 14. Anticipated Insider/Employee Threats in the Coming Year
Those decision makers who experienced a breach in the past year were 70
percent more likely to expect an increase in insider threats. Those who report
that they are currently using AI as part of their security strategy are 70
percent more likely to expect an increase.
More than 70 percent of decision makers have programs to respond to
ransomware, insider threats, and denial of services attacks.
Figure 15. Organizations That Have Formal Programs in Place to Address Ransomware, Insider
Threats, and Denial of Service Attacks
Total
U.S.
U.K.
Asia/Pacific

Detailed Findings
Overall, a third of these decision makers allocate 10 percent or less of their
IT budget to security. There is considerable variation by region, with the U.S.
directing the lowest proportion of its IT budget to security, and Asia-Pacific
companies the greatest.
Figure 16. Percentage of IT Budget Directed Toward Security
About three-quarters of survey respondents think their C-suite is paying more
attention to cybersecurity issues compared to the previous year — though many
think it’s only slightly more.
Figure 17. C-Suite Attention on Cybersecurity issues Compared to the Previous Year
Total U.S. U.K.
Asia-
Pacific
Loss of brand
reputation
Loss of individual
reputation/job
security
Loss of customers 19 percent 16 percent 18 percent 22 percent
Negative news 16 percent 19 percent 11 percent 16 percent
Stock drop 13 percent 13 percent 14 percent 12 percent
Other 1 percent 2 percent * *
* Less than 5 percent
Table 3. Trigger Most Likely to Make Senior Executives/C-Suite Care More About Cybersecurity
KEY CHART

Detailed Findings
More than a third of IT decision makers say their company was hit by a breach in
the past year — ranging from 29 percent in the U.S. to 39 percent in Asia-Pacific.
Figure 18. Organizations Reporting a Breach in the Past Year
Decision makers in government were the most likely to have suffered a breach
(48 percent vs. 35 percent total).
More than a third of IT decision
makers say their company was
hit by a breach in 2017

Artificial Intelligence in Security
The Promise of Artificial Intelligence
Artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) have become hot topics
in the cybersecurity world. With them comes much promise: to improve the
speed to detect threats, as well as to relieve some of the manual work for
overwhelmed security teams. A recent report from the National Science and
Technology Council (NSTC) stated:
“Using AI may help maintain the rapid response
required to detect and react to the landscape of ever-
evolving cyberthreats. There are many opportunities
for AI, and specifically machine learning systems, to
help cope with the sheer complexity of cyberspace and
support effective human decision making in response
to cyberattacks.”1
1
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/whitehouse_files/microsites/ostp/NSTC/preparing_for_the_future_of_ai.pdf

So why have AI and ML
become such darlings in the
security space?
One reason is that IT security teams are working inefficiently,
and the prospect of improving workflow is exciting. More
than one-third of those surveyed said they and their team
spend at least three hours a day on tasks that could be
handled by better software. And most think that the
average cybersecurity professional wastes as much as
10 hours a week due to software inefficiencies. These
teams are dealing with an average of 113 false positives every
week — causing them to spend much of their time manually
investigating threats that aren’t there. This is a huge problem
in a landscape that cites a lack of skilled resources.
This paradigm may speak to why so many information security
decision makers are looking to AI and ML for the answer. Just
under half of respondents indicated they are currently using AI
in their security programs. Decision makers in the U.S. are the
least likely to incorporate AI into their security programs, and
those in the Asia-Pacific region are the most likely to use AI.
The Use Case for AI and ML in Security
Many in the cybersecurity world are turning to AI/ML in order
to combat the threat of insider-based threats. However, when
surveyed, only 55 percent of respondents considered insider
or employee attacks to be a dangerous cybersecurity threat,
and just 14 percent viewed these attacks as very dangerous.
About one in eight respondents didn’t see these attacks as a
threat at all.
Using AI and ML to Tackle Inefficient Security Processes
The Reality of Applying AI/ML to Security
When considering the movement of cybersecurity to the cloud
for AI/ML applications, most decision makers are looking
for faster threat detection. But, when investigating threats,
decision makers indicate that their teams are still taking a
group discussion approach to analyze and prioritize threats
instead of relying heavily on automation (although they often
use software in combination with this approach).
In fact, nearly a third of the respondents indicated that
the one feature they would consider most critical for
better cybersecurity software is the collaboration and
integration with critical technologies. Twenty-two percent
cited advanced machine learning to detect threats more
efficiently as most critical. This response may indicate that,
while employing AI/ML is a growing need, these teams more
pressingly need software that helps to streamline processes
and other technologies.
Looking Ahead to the Future of AI/ML
AI/ML will certainly have a critical role to play in the evolution
of security technologies to help teams become more efficient
and effective. When asked about what they think the major
“game changer” for security will be in the next few years,
survey respondents overall indicated that big data analytics
will be primary, followed closely by AI. Regionally, however,
decision makers in the U.S. (unlike those in the U.K. and Asia-
Pacific) believe AI will make the greatest difference.

KEY CHART
More than one-third of decision makers say they and their teams spend at
least three hours a day on tasks that could be handled by better software.
Figure 19. Amount of Time Spent by Security Teams on Mundane, Repetitive, and
Administrative Tasks (e.g., Auditing and Assessing Systems, Reviewing Logs, Changing
Control Processes, Scanning, and Patching Cycles) That Could Be Handled by More
Sophisticated Software
Those in the professional services field reported being even more likely to spend
more than three hours a day on these tasks (50 percent vs. 34 percent overall).
Nearly 30 percent of respondents said their team spends at least 11 hours a
week manually searching for threats on their network.
Figure 20. Amount of Time Security Teams Spend Manually Hunting for Threats on Their Network
Each Week
Some groups stood out as spending more time than others. For example,
those in the finance industry reported spending 10.6 hours per week on
average, while those in the health care industry reported spending an average
of 10.4 hours per week. In addition, companies with annual revenues of
$250M–$400M reported spending an average of 10.8 hours per week
manually hunting for threats. Those who reported being hit by a breach
in the last year averaged 10 hours per week.

KEY CHART
Just 55 percent of respondents consider insider/employee attacks to be a
dangerous cybersecurity threat. Only 14 percent view them as very dangerous.
About one in eight (12 percent) do not see them as a threat.
The majority of IT decision makers think the average cybersecurity professional
wastes as much as 10 hours a week due to software inefficiencies.
Figure 21. Time the Average Cybersecurity Professional Wastes Due to Software Inefficiencies
in a Week
Decision makers in security must deal with an average of 113 false positives
every week — ranging from 98 in the U.S. to 128 in the U.K.
Figure 22. Average Number of False Positives Reported on a Weekly Basis
In addition to reducing the number of false positives, security solutions that
integrate AI often help provide teams with a technological advantage over
attackers. Decision makers were split in terms of their use of AI. Just under
half use it — U.S. respondents are least likely to use AI. Those in the Asia-Pacific
region are most likely.
Figure 23. Decision Makers Using AI in Their Security Stack

In addition, those who were most likely to use AI included:
• Finance (56 percent) and health care (55 percent) vs. 45
percent overall
• Those who indicated that they have a SOC
• Those who indicated they are using more than five
software solutions
• Those who reported that they have experienced a breach in
the last five years
More than 90 percent of IT decision makers believe AI has
made at least some improvement in the productivity of
their cybersecurity operations. Just under one-third see a
significant improvement. Respondents in the Asia-Pacific
region are much more positive toward the benefits of AI
than others.
Figure 24. Level of Improvement AI/ML Has Made on Productivity of Operations
Figure 25. Level of Improvement AI or Machine Learning Has Made on Productivity of Operations (by region)

Conclusion
This survey provides us with valuable insight into the state of
the cybersecurity practices and opinions of hundreds of mid-
to large-sized organizations across the globe. From its findings,
we’re able to observe themes and trends across the security
landscape that serve to provide a larger perspective on the
biggest security-related challenges organizations face today.
More than one-third of respondents say they and their
teams spend at least three hours a day on tasks that
could be handled by better software. Meanwhile, more
than 90 percent of these same respondents also report that
they believe AI has made at least some improvement in the
productivity of their cybersecurity operations. These report
findings, when viewed together, reveal that when applied to
security procedures, AI technologies can be instrumental
in improving existing inefficiencies in security operations.
With security professionals already stretched thin, improved
productivity and streamlined operations are highly coveted
necessities for IT executives.
With the exception of a few surprise results, this survey
largely reinforced common perception that security teams
across the board are experiencing a lack of resources — be it
budget, personnel, or technological. Yet these shorthanded
teams, tasked with defending an organization’s entire cyber
landscape, can overcome their inevitable shortcomings when
equipped with the right tools and technologies that allow
their analysts to work with more accuracy, collaboration,
and comprehensive visibility. It’s time to arm teams with the
AI-enabled tools they need to succeed in the critical battle
against persistent and damaging cyberthreats.

LogRhythm
LogRhythm is a world leader in NextGen SIEM, empowering
organizations on six continents to successfully reduce risk by rapidly
detecting, responding to and neutralizing damaging cyberthreats.
The LogRhythm platform combines user and entity behavior
analytics (UEBA), network traffic and behavior analytics (NTBA) and
security automation orchestration (SAO) in a single end-to-end
solution. LogRhythm’s Threat Lifecycle Management (TLM) workflow
serves as the foundation for the AI-enabled security operations
center (SOC), helping customers measurably secure their cloud,
physical and virtual infrastructures for both IT and OT environments.
Built for security professionals by security professionals, the
LogRhythm platform has won many accolades, including being
positioned as a Leader in Gartner’s SIEM Magic Quadrant.
Widmeyer Communications
Widmeyer Communications, a Finn Partners Company, has an in-house
research and polling practice. The firm has a guiding philosophy that clients
gain knowledge and perspective when projects are informed by quantitative
and qualitative research. The value added to projects with a research
component along with a robust digital research practice helps to differentiate
Widmeyer from other firms of similar size.
Widmeyer believes that sound research guides all successful communication
activity. Our research team collects and analyzes information to help recognize
targets and shape communications strategy.
We never conduct research for research’s sake. Rather, we use research to shed
light on and help solve our clients’ challenges. Our research serves as a strategic
roadmap to shape our clients’ efforts and tackle the challenges they face.

This study was designed to represent IT decision makers in
the U.S., United Kingdom, and Asia-Pacific regions equally.
Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Hong Kong were all
included in the Asia-Pacific region
Figure 26. Regional Breakdown of Surveyed Decision Makers
Appendix
Figure 27. Geographic Representation of Survey and Breakdown of Asia-Pacific
Figure 28. Number of Employees Working for Company/Organization

Appendix
The decision maker respondents represented a wide range of industries.
Figure 29. Industries of Decision Makers
In terms of annual revenue, those surveyed in the U.S.
represented companies with significantly higher revenue than
both the U.K. and Asia-Pacific.
Figure 31. Breakdown of Decision Maker by Organization Revenue Size
Figure 30. Regions of Company Offices

Appendix
Just over half of these decision makers are executives with IT
in their titles. Another third is in the C-suite.
Figure 32. Role or Title of Respondents
For decision makers in the U.S., “IT” is more likely and “Telecommunications” is less likely to be
part of a job title than for Asia-Pacific counterparts.
U.S. executives are less likely to hold a C-suite position.
Nearly all of these decision makers (99 percent) are employed full time. Nearly half describe
their role in IT cybersecurity services and products as the sole decision maker.
Figure 33. Role in IT Cybersecurity Services and Products of Decision Makers

Appendix
Roughly one-third of these executives are the sole decision maker in a wide variety of other areas as well, and most have real input
into final decisions.
General Staffing/
Recruiting
Outsourced
Service Providers
Pricing Decisions
for Division/
Business Unit
Financial Products
Advertising/
Sales/Marketing
Materials
Sole decision maker 33 percent 38 percent 37 percent 32 percent 28 percent
Make final decision
with input from staff/
management
26 percent 25 percent 23 percent 21 percent 22 percent
Help reach final decision
on committee/group
Provide input into final
decision
Have no input in final
decision
Table 5. Role of Decision Makers in Other Areas

Appendix
The majority of these IT decision makers are between 35 and
49 years old. More than 70 percent are male.
Figure 36. Age of Respondents
Figure 37. Gender of Respondents
Of the surveyed respondents, more than half have been
employed by their company for at least six years. One in 12
aren’t actively working in cybersecurity. About two-thirds
have served in that area for three years or more. The average
is just over five years.
Figure 34. Number of Years Worked for Current Company
Figure 35. Number of Years Worked in Cybersecurity

Headline Goes Here
Contact us:
TOLL FREE 1-866-384-0713
FAX (303) 413-8791
EMAIL info@logrhythm.com
Worldwide HQ, 4780 Pearl East Circle, Boulder, CO, 80301

Cybersecurity: Perceptions & Practices

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Similar to Cybersecurity: Perceptions & Practices (20)

More from Joseph DeFever (11)

Recently uploaded (20)

Cybersecurity: Perceptions & Practices