Recent orders
A Project On Corporation And Security Of Staff Devices
A Project On Corporation And Security Of Staff Devices
Table of Contents
TOC o “1-3” h z u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc372988663 h 3Literature Review PAGEREF _Toc372988664 h 3(a)The Project Research Problem PAGEREF _Toc372988665 h 3(b)The aim of the Research PAGEREF _Toc372988666 h 4Research Methodologies PAGEREF _Toc372988667 h 5(a)Findings PAGEREF _Toc372988668 h 5Conclusion PAGEREF _Toc372988669 h 7References PAGEREF _Toc372988670 h 8
IntroductionIn the past, people could only use computers owned and managed by a company, and no one would think of lugging in their personal computers (PC) to use within the company. However, today, many things are quite different, where there is an increased number of people using smart phones which has become faster and cheaper. The use of these handheld devices by the staffs within an organization have provided services as well as, constant connectivity especially to the mobile workers in spite of all these presenting new threats to the corporate assets (Mitchell, 2004).
Literature ReviewThe Research ProblemThe staff personal devices are causing ongoing concern for most companies for information security. There are sensitive corporate information which can easily be transported as well as lost; however, the use of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) movement has led to an increase number of expensive security incidents. The main problem in this case is that, most corporation up to date are still relying on the staff personal devices such as smart phones and personal laptop for business, however these devices fails to have the same security level than those of the company. As a result, this paper will discuss on the use of personal devices within the corporate and the security issues associated with the topic (Burke, 2006).
The use of staff personal devices is growing dramatically and affecting the corporate of all sizes. The research showed that about 93% of the staffs have mobile devices that connect to the corporate networks and 67% allow personal devices to connect to corporate networks. It is also evident that the staff personal devices are causing challenges especially for the corporate IT (Mitchell, 2004). Among the companies which allowed personal devices on their networks reported that the staff uses their own smart phones, tablets and other devices to work with business information, which caused issues. The most common challenge faced by the IT corporate who allowed the staff to use personal devices include, the security issues regarding the corporate information, tracking and controlling access to corporate and private networks, the managing personal devices containing the corporate as well as personal data and applications.
The aim of the Research
. The research aims in understanding the various risks issues that are brought upon by using personal devices in organization.
Significance of the Research
Most staff often feels comfortable using their own devices as opposed to using the corporate machines. In the United States of America, about 46% of the businesses are today allowing their staffs to use personally owned PCs. Indeed many researchers such as the information technology research and advisory company continue reporting that in future employers will require their employees to supply their own devices to be used for business purposes. Today, the significance of using personal computers is mainly focusing on the choice as well as the convenience for the employees and cost savings for the employers. Most corporate rely on the staffs’ personal devices because they cause a significant time shift in the working behavior of the employees (Burke, 2006). However, some corporate who allows staffs to carry their personal devices such as smart phones in the company have become successful in one way or another. For example, the devices enable the people to conveniently send as well as reply to the emails at any time, and from any location. Personal devices have enabled catching up on emails to be quite easy. It has also suited the staffs given that an outstanding task can now be quickly dealt with while managers on the other hand can obtain prompt responses to their enquiries.
The other benefit of using personal devices such as smart phones in corporate is that, the users will find the devices o be always at hand as compared to big machines implemented within the organizations. As a consequence, staff members tend to have ready access to the businesses, personal information as well as check on the organizations latest business figures. The ready access to information offers a greater choice in a way the staff members work.Research MethodologiesFindingsIt is evident that mobility can bring both advantages as well as, risks to the corporate. As the staff members bring their personal devices into workplace, most organizations are motivated to encourage the use of these devices for business purposes because they increase the employee productivity within the corporate. Personal devices especially the portable ones can give the employees access to the corporate resources as well as, continuous collaboration with business partners. The other advantage of using these devices is that, the devices reduce the IT costs by allowing the employees to often pay for their own devices, most companies save IT spending on the device purchases and communication services. The research also showed that the use of personal devices for work has become very consistent across all the companies. Little variation were also seen in the number of businesses saying they have personal devices on their corporate networks from the smallest business which is about 65 % to the largest 68% as shown below.
Corporation reliance on staff on the use of their personal laptops and smart phones would promote productivity as this allows flexibility in mobility. However, over-reliance on employees’ personal gadgets would compromise the security of data and information of the corporate. Conversely, there are some risks that the corporate may face when they allow the staff devices in the organization. Therefore, these corporate needs to recognize that when the employees connect mobile devices to the organizations systems, the devices must then be treated just like any IT equipment with appropriate security controls (Burke, 2006). Security issues of these devices should be addressed by the corporate at the outset because the devices used may become a point of security weakness which threatens to disclose business information. Research has also shown that most hackers have discovered that the staff members carrying their personal devices to the corporate may have linked both business and personal data within the system; hence it would be easy for the hackers to get more and more information regarding the corporate. Given that, personal devices platforms have not been natively designed to provide comprehensive security, hackers therefore have a strong incentive of developing new techniques or create the mobile-centric malware for the devices.
Access to Data
The targeted groups to this research are corporations and their staffs. Methods used to collect data to this research involved the use of primary and secondary sources. The data was also collected using interviews and questionnaires for the corporate who allow their workers to bring in their personal devices within the organization. The access to these data was not conditional because many corporate have been facing the issues of securities in regards to allowing the staff bringing in their personal devices to the organization (Burke, 2006).
ConclusionThe employees who bring their personal computers in corporate normally know what they want and publicize their preferences more than ever. The organizations who allows the staff to use their personal devices such as smart phones and iPhones is said to be at an all-time high because these companies tend to give the employees greater say over their used devices. The workers on the other hand are also driving the tablet sales and point to tablets as a preferred method of consuming content.
ReferencesBurke, J. (2006). Neal-Schuman library technology companion: a basic guide for library staff (2nd ed.). New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers.
Cole, B. C. (2010). The emergence of net-centric computing: network computers, Internet appliances, and connected PCs. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall PTR.
Lee, D., & Swartz, M. (2007). The corporate, securities, and M & A lawyer’s job: a survival guide. Chicago: ABA, General Practice, Solo & Small Firm Division.
Mitchell, C. (2009). Security for mobility. London: Institution of Electrical Engineers.
Reddy, M. T. (2010). Securities operations: a guide to operations and information systems in the securities industry. New York, N.Y.: New York Institute of Finance.
Bicicleta Sem Freio X Just Kids – Pow! Wow! Hawaii
Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
SubjectDate
Bicicleta Sem Freio X Just Kids – Pow! Wow! Hawaii
The art was created by POW! POW! This is an urban art movement. I chose the art since it took different dimensions. This art was the perfect one since it is both playful and serious. The Brazilian street art collective Bicicleta teamed up with people at Just Kids to create a big art at Hawaii. The main aim of creating the art was to spread and influence a mindset through creative art. The wonderful creation was developed by the artists since they wanted to instill a mindset in people. Through this, they would tackle and shift daily conversations regarding serious topics. The artists knew the power that was vested in their creativity to unleash a powerful paradigm shift in mindset.
Yash in Stockholm, Sweden
The street art by Yash in Stockholm Sweden elicits many mixed feelings. I chose the image because of the different aspects that were stashed up in one piece of art. The creativity is top notch. Incorporating a bird into that of a woman strengthens the effects of the overall impression. The light colors portray different emotions to create an effect of love and simplicity. The artist created the mural to illustrate how she views life. She created the art to leave everything unexplained such that the general public could offer their interpretations. The piece, in particular, did not serve to offer any solution. This particular image reflects how she viewed life in that instance.
A Principals Responsibility For The Actions Of Their Agent
A Principal’s Responsibility For The Actions Of Their Agent
Karen is shopping at Big Mart. She has with her an umbrella which is the same brand Big Mart carries. When a Big Mart employee, Steve, sees her leave with the umbrella without going through the checkout lane, he asks her to come back into the store. Steve says that he thinks Karen is shoplifting the umbrella. Karen tells him that she has had the umbrella for years and shows him marks of wear and tear. Steve apologizes and tells Karen she is free to go. Can Karen successfully sue for false imprisonment or defamation?
Karen cannot successfully sue for false imprisonment because as per the information in this case, the employee simply asks her to come back to the store so as to be able to clarify the misunderstanding. As an employee of Big Mart, Steve had the right to inquire about the originality of the umbrella. This is because he is supposed to protect the store from shoplifting. There is no defamation or imprisonment just a small misunderstanding that is cleared up without so much hustle to both parties.
From what you have learned about the relationship between a principal and an agent, analyze whether Steve or Big Mart could be liable because of Steve’s actions?
Steve is an employee of Big Mart and is expected to always be looking out for the best interest of the store a sue against him cannot hold however against the store it can hold. This is because an agent is expected to act for the interest of the employer (Rogers, 2012). As for the facts of the case, there is a clear reason as to why Karen had to be asked back into the store to answer a few questions; the fact that she walked into a store with one of their product means that when she is leaving she was bound to answer some questions about it. It was just a mere procedure to ensure that there is caution.
Karen was not suspected of shoplifting entirely, what Steve did was simply an act of precaution to ensure that there are minimal potential and actual shoplifting incidences at Big Mart.
References
Rogers, S. (2012). Essentials of Business Law. San Diego: Bridgepoint Education, Inc.
