Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Study & Research - Financial Firms Hit With Million Pound Losses Per Cybersecurity Incident
Study & Research

Financial Firms Hit With Million Pound Losses Per Cybersecurity Incident

ISBuzz TeamBy ISBuzz TeamMarch 30, 20174 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

The costs associated with cyberattacks on the financial sector are rising as organisations face increasingly sophisticated threats. New research by Kaspersky Lab and B2B International reveals the scale and impact of attacks, with financial firms facing losses of over half a million pounds (£742,003) on average for each cybersecurity incident they face.  

The staggering figure is revealed as part of Financial Institutions Security Risks 2016, a survey of finance professionals highlighting the main security challenges for banks and financial institutions around the world and the financial costs of specific cyberattacks. The most-costly type of incident for financial organisations are threats that exploit vulnerabilities in point-of-sale (POS) systems, in which an organisation typically loses £1,658,161. Attacks on mobile devices are the second most costly (£1,314,933), followed by targeted attacks (£1,045,697).

Compliance is the main driver for increasing investment in IT security in banks and financial institutions. However, the study found that 61 per cent of UK organisations believe that being compliant is not enough to be secure. Another significant reason for spending more on security is growing infrastructure complexity. For example, an average financial firm adopts virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) and manages approximately 10,000 end user devices with roughly a half of them being mobile smartphones and tablets.

Insufficient internal expertise, top management directives and business expansion are also among the top reasons for a budget increase. In general, investing more in security appears to be inevitable to a clear majority of financial firms as 82 per cent of them expect an increase in their IT security budgets.

David Emm, principal security researcher at Kaspersky Lab commented: “It is not surprising that financial organisations are looking to increase spending on security, given the substantial potential monetary losses from cyberattacks. Successful security strategies lie not just in spending on compliance, but in a multitude of cyber security solutions to minimise unauthorised access. This includes paying more attention to personal security awareness, getting better insights on the industry-specific threats and investing more in protection from advanced targeted attacks.”

The study shows that UK financial firms seek to address security challenges by getting more threat intelligence and conducting security audits, with 75 per cent considering this measure effective. However, organisations from the financial sector are less inclined to use third-party security services with only 52 per cent of those surveyed perceiving it as an effective approach.

Kaspersky Lab’s experts recommend five key considerations for security strategies adopted by financial organisations in 2017.

  1. Beware of the targeted attacks

Targeted attacks on financial organisations are likely to be conducted through using third parties, or contractors. These companies can often have weaker or no protection at all and can be used as an entry point for malware or a phishing attempt.

  1. Do not underestimate less sophisticated threats

Fraudsters can strike at mass and benefit from the scale using simplest tools. Social engineering might contribute to 75 per cent of fraudulent incidents while only 17 per cent could be caused by malware.

  1. Do not pick compliance over protection

Budgets are usually allocated in favor of compliance, but strengthening security and introducing new protection technologies requires a more balanced approach to the allocation of resources.

  1. Do regular penetration testing:

Unseen vulnerabilities are real nevertheless. With implementation of sophisticated detection tools and penetration testing, vulnerabilities and incidents will emerge. Ensure your eyes are open to all weaknesses and threats – before it’s too late.

  1. Pay attention to insider threats

Employees can be exploited by cybercriminals — or decide to become ones. Effective security strategies should go beyond perimeter protection to include techniques that can detect suspicious activity within organisations.

To learn more about financial organisations’ losses from security incidents and effective security strategies to fight them, along with some other findings from the report by Kaspersky Lab, read our blogpost.

[su_box title=”About Kaspersky Lab” style=”noise” box_color=”#336588″][short_info id=’59584′ desc=”true” all=”false”][/su_box]

ISBuzz Team
  • ISBuzz Team
    Air Canada Data Breach: BianLian Extortion Group Claims A Massive Heist Contrary To Airline’s Earlier Statement
  • ISBuzz Team
    Unprecedented DDoS Attack Rocks The Web: Tech Giants Reveal A Digital Tsunami
  • ISBuzz Team
    CISA Flags High-Severity Adobe Acrobat Reader Flaw Amid Active Exploits
  • ISBuzz Team
    Curl Security Alert: Patching A Critical Bug Averting Potential Cyber Catastrophe

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

Exploited Faster, Patched Slower: Verizon DBIR 2026 Shows Security Teams Losing Ground

May 20, 20265 Mins Read

Security’s Blind Spot: The Threats Hiding in “Low-Severity” Alerts

May 6, 20265 Mins Read

Why OSINT deserves the same status as other intelligence disciplines

March 17, 20266 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

No se ha podido establecer conexión. Error 429

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}