Story image

'Visual hacking' a privacy risk to business travellers

18 Jun 2019
Twitter
Facebook

Whether working at cafes, in shared workspaces, in conference halls, or in any public space, ‘visual hacking’ is a danger that more business travellers should be acutely aware of, according to the 2019 Global Visual Hacking Study by 3M.

While 8 out of 10 business travellers consider visual hacking a threat, they don’t do much about it.

More than three quarters of the 1000 polled business travellers admit that they display company information on their screen while they are in aeroplanes or on the train. Two thirds do the same in buses or whilst riding the subway.

Half of business travellers say that public transportation is the riskiest place to view sensitive information on their screen.

Business travellers also say the top four riskiest places to view sensitive information on their screens include public transportation, cafés, airports and hotel lobbies.

“As a result, unprotected screens can be the weak link in a company’s IT security efforts,” says 3M global business manager Jessica Walton.

Data breaches are now an almost everyday occurrence, but the study suggests that business travellers aren’t educated enough about visual hacking.

While two thirds of business travellers have noticed someone looking at their screen, 30% say their organisation hasn’t educated them on how to protect sensitive company information that may be displayed on their screen.

Furthermore, one in three business travellers have seen business information on exposed screens when traveling. An equal number of business travellers have seen personally identifiable information on exposed screens when traveling.

Travellers are unlikely to confront their alleged visual hackers – instead they opt to move their screen or close their device. According to the study, eight in ten business travellers try to prevent people from seeing their screen.

Nearly half of respondents who have changed how they protect information did so because of the increasing number of data breaches.

The study suggests that one in three data breaches occur because of visual hacking.

Eight in ten business travellers who say they are equipped to stop a visual hacker have a privacy filter and more than half of business travellers have changed how they protect sensitive information displayed on their screen in the past year.

The study is based on responses from 1,007 business travellers in Germany, India, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States who take a minimum of six business trips per year.  The study was conducted by SMS Research on behalf of 3M.

Story image
09 Sep
DTCC and Accenture unveil research on blockchain governance model
The study introduces model that addresses the responsibilities and critical functions in operating and maintaining a private, permissioned DLT platform.More
Story image
29 Aug
Ransomware making a comeback, McAfee report finds
McAfee Labs saw an average of 504 new threats per minute in Q1 and a resurgence of ransomware along with changes in campaign execution and code.More
Story image
13 Sep
IBM launches data privacy platform for hybrid multicloud environments
The IBM z15 will enable customers to manage who can access data via policy-based controls such as encryption, cloud-native deployment, instant recovery, and data-centric privacy controls.More
Story image
10 Sep
Trustwave platform brings more visibility and control cloud security
The platform aims to give internal security teams deep visibility, technologies and the security expertise necessary for protecting assets and eradicating threats as they arise.More
Story image
19 Sep
Veritas and Pure Storage team up to reduce downtime for applications and services
Three new integrations just announced extend the collaboration across the Veritas Enterprise Data Services platform providing Veritas and Pure Storage customers with business continuity.More
Story image
02 Sep
Over 50% of incident response requests occur after damage complete – Kaspersky
It is often assumed that incident response is only needed in cases when damage from a cyber-attack has already occurred and there is a need for further investigation.More