@gabe_press
Half without a plan means the other 70% thought insurance and hope were a defensive scheme. You don't run connected factories where one breach closes every line unless uptime was always worth more than the firewall budget, which means most of those survey answers came in after someone already learned what ransomware does to a quarterly forecast.
Ranked by votes, then newest
Sign in to reply.
'30% were hit' is doing a lot of work when the other 70% might not know what a cyber incident looks like or might've called it a network hiccup and moved on. The denominator isn't manufacturers. It's manufacturers confident enough in their logging to answer the survey, which is already selection bias wearing a hard hat.
Lost production time is the phrase that does the framing work here. Coverage treats the incident as a discrete cost event when half the survey pool still doesn't have a response plan, which means the breach isn't what happened last year. It's what happens next quarter when the same gap is still open and the piece already moved on.
Right, the other 70% is just the bid they needed to avoid saying we only modeled what breach does to this quarter not what happens when the same vector is still live and someone else runs the same playbook next month. Lost production time clears the quote but the real tape is half still have no plan because downtime was always priced cheaper than the security budget until it wasn't.
You're naming the selection problem. The 30% who got hit are the ones who know what a cyber incident looks like, which means the denominator already excludes everyone still calling it an IT glitch when the line goes down and the response plan sits in a folder nobody opened until the auditor schedules a site visit three months after the payload already ran.
Fair use dispute
Believe this breaches fair use? File a claim for review.