Cyber attacks threaten 69% of Saudi firms

Updated 10 January 2013
0

Cyber attacks threaten 69% of Saudi firms

JEDDAH: Computer security software corporation Symantec has revealed to Al-Eqtisadiah newspaper that 69 percent of Saudi companies cannot cope with cyber attacks due to their “lack of data backup operations on daily basis”.
Samer Sidani, regional director of Symantec Saudi Arabia, told the paper that “Corporate data and information is a direct communication link with users; therefore, it has great importance and priority.”
Sidani indicated that companies in Saudi Arabia show sufficient awareness in the importance of keeping backup copies of important information, such as company data, customer records, and legal documents. However, this process remains hanging on the list of actions that will be undertaken by these companies in the future, when it will be too late.
At the same time, he pointed out that only 31 percent of small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Saudi Arabia undertake a data backup process, through which they can retrieve data loss caused by cyber attacks, on a daily basis.
Sidani highlighted on the increasing number of cyber attacks directed at companies in the Middle East – hence the importance of having security solutions in place – and on the need for strong data backup and a restore strategy in the workplace. This would protect the information from all types of emergencies ranging from power cutoffs to physical damage of the infrastructure and cyber attacks that can put the company information and data at risk, or lead to systems crashes and damage computers in the company.
From this standpoint, Symantec gives advice to enterprises during its assessment of backup policy and its data recovery plan after facing emergencies. These tips evolve around the importance of having a plan, Sidani said, indicating the common excuses for the lack of plan in the company, such as “We have paper records”, “The backup process is expensive compared to the few data we have”, and “The backup process is complex and wasting time”. Meanwhile, it is difficult to quantify the massive costs of the collapse of work systems in the company as well as the loss of data and important documents, although he considered the lack of a master plan to act accordingly in emergencies within the company in itself a disaster.
Sidani pointed to the importance of a testing data recovery strategy to ensure the strategy operates optimally.
He also stressed on the importance of backups that are stored outside the company, although that requires an additional step or two.
The regional director clarified that the consolidation of backups in all work environments using a single solution to get physical and virtual backups will reduce operating costs and the size of your storage. It will also speed up the process of retrieving data, he said.
Sidani explained that the merger between the backup process and data recovery tools is one of the most important steps in information security. It would reduce costs and at the same time simplify the day-to-day operations.
Implementing the above-mentioned proposals would ensure that there is a stable and consistent database can be relied upon to start the application process of appropriate solution to overcome the emergencies situations, and successful recovery of data in your company.
He advised people to select the most comfortable solution that ensures appropriate and complete data recovery in their work environment and will enhance the feeling of complete confidence that the vital lifeline of their company is strongly protected.


Tesla in Autopilot sped up before Utah crash

Updated 25 May 2018
0

Tesla in Autopilot sped up before Utah crash

  • Heather Lommatzsch, the driver of the vehicle, told police she thought the vehicle’s automatic emergency braking system would detect traffic and stop before the car hit another vehicle.
  • Police say car data show Lommatzsch did not touch the steering wheel for 80 seconds before the crash. She told police she was looking at her phone at the time and comparing different routes to her des
SALT LAKE CITY, US: A Tesla that crashed while in Autopilot mode in Utah this month accelerated in the seconds before it smashed into a stopped firetruck, according to a police report obtained by The Associated Press Thursday. Two people were injured.
Data from the Model S electric vehicle show it picked up speed for 3.5 seconds shortly before crashing into a stopped firetruck in suburban Salt Lake City, the report said. The driver manually hit the brakes a fraction of a second before impact.
Police suggested that the car was following another vehicle and dropped its speed to 55 mph to match the leading vehicle. They say the leading vehicle then likely changed lanes and the Tesla automatically sped up to its preset of 60 mph (97 kph) without noticing the stopped cars ahead of it.
The police report, which was obtained through an open records request, provides detail about the vehicle’s actions immediately before the May 11 crash and the driver’s familiarity with its system.
The driver of the vehicle, Heather Lommatzsch, 29, told police she thought the vehicle’s automatic emergency braking system would detect traffic and stop before the car hit another vehicle.
She said she had owned the car for two years and used the semi-autonomous Autopilot feature on all sorts of roadways, including on the Utah highway where she crashed, according to the report.
Lommatzsch said the car did not provide any audio or visual warnings before the crash. A witness told police she did not see signs the car illuminate its brake lights or swerve to avoid the truck ahead of it.
Lommatzsch did not return a voicemail Thursday. A Tesla spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment.
The car company has said it repeatedly warns drivers to stay alert, keep their hands on the wheel and maintain control of their vehicle at all times while using the Autopilot system.
Police say car data show Lommatzsch did not touch the steering wheel for 80 seconds before the crash. She told police she was looking at her phone at the time and comparing different routes to her destination.
She broke her foot in the crash and this week was charged with a misdemeanor traffic citation. Online court records do not show an attorney listed for her.
The driver of the firetruck told police he had injuries consistent with whiplash but did not go to a hospital.
Tesla’s Autopilot system uses cameras, ultrasonic sensors and radar to sense the vehicle’s surrounding environment and perform basic functions automatically.
Among those functions is automatic emergency braking, which the company says on its website is designed “to detect objects that the car may impact and applies the brakes accordingly.” Tesla says the system is not designed to avoid a collision and warns drivers not to rely on it entirely.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has said it is investigating the May 11 crash.
Tesla’s Autopilot has been the subject of previous scrutiny following other crashes involving the vehicles.
In March, a driver was killed when a Model X with Autopilot engaged hit a barrier while traveling at “freeway speed” in California. NHTSA and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating that case.
This week, Tesla said Autopilot was not engaged when a Model S veered off a road and plunged into a pond outside San Francisco, killing the driver.
Earlier in May, the NTSB opened a probe into an accident in which a Model S caught fire after crashing into a wall at a high speed in Florida. Two 18-year-olds were trapped and died in the blaze. The agency has said it does not expect Autopilot to be a focus in that investigation.