Malware is intrusive software used by hackers to gain access to an organization’s network system. It comes in many forms, with all of them having the ability to harm the computer network.
To protect the business effectively, entrepreneurs need to have advanced knowledge of the various types of threats that they may face. The major types of malware include the dreaded “virus,” worms, Trojan horse and stealth programs, and rootkits. Below are the impacts of malware on business.
Interruption and disabling of services
Most malware programs aim to destroy the organization’s network so that there won’t be effective communication amongst the different departments. The malware disables the significant services used for communication and other services in the organization. This leads to huge losses and may damage the business completely.
Advertisement
When most of the services providing security to the site are disabled, the attackers can change the site’s appearance by adding explicit images or offensive text on the homepage. Without control over the site, the attackers will completely do anything they want on the site.
And this can erode the customer’s trust in the brand. So the recovery process must get done as fast as possible. Most of the interruption and disabling of service attacks require security experts’ manual intervention.
Though this is the most effective way to fix it, it results in a huge loss of traffic that leads to long-term problems. That’s why it’s vital first to learn how to prevent malware from infecting other parts of the system. Earlier detection will ensure that essential services are enabled again, and there won’t be too much damage to the computer system.
Advertisement
Loss of personal information
Loss of personal information is one of the major negative impacts of malware on businesses. The stolen data is used for phishing attacks and extortion. Research shows that an estimation of 3.4 billion phishing emails is sent out each day across the world. More than a trillion phishing emails are sent each year.
That’s quite scary! This makes phishing one of the most severe and widespread types of cybercrimes worldwide. The victims of the stolen data are on high alert by the hackers. Some are lured into giving credential information like credit card details by criminals masking themselves as legit.
An identity thief can also use the names of the credit cards to open new cards, open new gas accounts, or electricity bill accounts. They also sell this information on the dark web in bulk.
Advertisement
Loss of personnel can raise serious legal issues, and the company might be sued for failing to protect the customers’ data. When collecting the data, entrepreneurs must inform the customers that their information will be kept safe, and any legal data breach puts the company in hot water.
In this case, the person that caused the data breach and used the information illegally might be difficult to pursue, and this may result in heavy fines for the damage incurred to the customer.
Access to sensitive information
When the malware programs are downloaded and installed onto the computer system, they spread like worms to all other computers connected to the network. These programs monitor the browsing data and copy personal information like the customers’ IDs, passwords, and bank account details. They also interfere with sensitive information like intellectual property rights.
Advertisement
The attackers may then threaten to sell or publish the intellectual property rights if their demands are not met. It damages the operations entirely on the market as the competitors already know the business secrets of the company.
This adversely affects the company’s ability to claim trade secret protection. Due to the unhealthy competition from the business enterprises, the company is not likely to survive, and it may be forced to close all its activities.
Browsing data is then analyzed, and browser hijackers are added to the system, sometimes redirecting the searches to malicious sites. After accessing all the sensible information in the computer system, the attackers can then use the malware applications to shut down most hardware components.
Advertisement
Financial consequences
The financial devastation of malware attacks is always huge. They range from the halt of operations, loss of the target customers, data recovery efforts, hardware replacements, and the succeeding system fortification measures. Halting the business’s operations will result in lots of losses, and most of the ready-made goods may go to waste, especially when dealing with perishable goods.
There is also the need to develop alternative communication means to ensure that the customers are notified of what is happening with the business and promise them that the matter will be solved soon. Research shows that a company accounts for about 38 percent of the total data breach cost. The cost is rising with the advancement of cybercrime attacks.
That’s why investing in next-gen technology is vital for any business. The importance of cybersecurity in this era cannot be overstated because it only takes one malware program to bring the whole business on its knees.
Advertisement
Businesses are encouraged to invest more in two-factor authentication methods to deter illegal access into their servers. Updates on the servers should be done regularly, and necessary improvements made to ensure that the business information is safe.
Irreversible reputation damage
Once customers have lost personal details in the company, it’s very hard to convince them that the company did its best to protect their data. Most customers will feel that the company isn’t doing its best to protect them. Clients are always willing to pay and work with a company that takes them seriously despite expensive services.
That means many of them will prefer working with the competitors not unless certain conditions are met. In this case, the business loses clients, but it cannot expect to rebuild its brand reputation to where it was either that easily. This diminishes all the good work the business has been doing, and everything crumbles within a day.
Advertisement
In that case, it has to start restoring the business image by acknowledging the problem, taking action against the attackers, and responding to criticism. This takes a lot of time, and huge capital is invested in the underlying processes.
Heana Sharma: A rising talent, Heana boasts 2 years of versatile content writing experience across multiple niches. Her adaptable skills result in engaging and informative content that resonates with a wide spectrum of readers.
The founder and CEO of Bombay Shaving Company Shantanu Deshpande took to LinkedIn and shared a picture from the topper’s newspaper advertisement.
In the caption, he wrote
“It was shocking to see the amount of hate targeted at a teenage girl who had topped an exam because of her facial hair. Our simple message to this amazing young woman with such a bright future. Love to see my team ooze class. No opportunistic sales, QR codes, nothing. Just a heartfelt message to a fellow Bae.”
The caption further reads,
Advertisement
“Dear Prachi, they’re trolling your hair today, they’ll applaud your AIR tomorrow.”
It was the advertisement’s closing statement that fueled controversy and drew backlash from the public.
It stated,
“We hope you never get bullied into using our razor.”
Netizens’ Reactions
The post went viral within hours of its posting. Many netizens called it “disgusting” and “absurd.”
Advertisement
One user wrote,
“This is a collective failure of your team. Hope they read each and every comment and reflect. Did no one in the team notice this problem? How disconnected are they from reality? This will leave a deeper scar on the girl than anything else, and I will always remember your brand for being an opportunist.”
While another commented, “Insensitive.”
“This is terrible, a huge mistake you made. This is bullying this woman on another, bigger level,”
wrote another.
Advertisement
“Classless and in poor taste… You don’t deserve more attention than this,”
one commented.
What the CEO Has to Say?
Shantanu Deshpande described his caption as a small token of support for Prachi, and thus defended the ad.
His efforts to clear the air were in vain, as many netizens still found the company’s response via the ad lacking sensitivity.
Advertisement
Bombay Shaving Company’s intention was to extend support for the topper. However, it ultimately led to more criticism and enhanced controversy.
Recently, the class 10th and 12th results were published by the Uttar Pradesh Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad. Prachi Nigam scored 591/600 marks and topped Class 10. She revealed that her aim is to crack the IIT-JEE and become an engineer.
Gerber and Perrigo Face New Lawsuit Over ‘Store-Brand’ Infant Formula Pricing; All Pending Toxic Baby Food Cases Consolidated into New Class Action MDL
Infant formula makers Gerber and Perrigo have been hit with a class-action lawsuit, which accuses the companies of artificially creating a shortage and jacking up prices for “store-brand” formula sold at Walmart, Walgreens, and other retailers.
The lawsuit was filed on Monday in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia. It accuses Perrigo of violating antitrust laws by collaborating with Gerber to prevent competitors from entering the market for store-brand formula.
Perrigo, one of the nation’s largest suppliers of store-brand formula, sells its products under retail labels at prices lower than similar branded products. However, the lawsuit alleges that Gerber, by granting Perrigo the first right of refusal to Gerber’s excess formula supply, which could have been sold to other competitors, is engaging in practices that stifle competition.
Advertisement
The lawsuit claims that through this arrangement, Gerber agreed to keep its excess formula out of the store-brand market, thereby gaining a share of Perrigo’s profits. The lawsuit was filed by four residents of California, Illinois, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, who will represent millions of customers who have purchased store-brand baby formula. The lawsuit does not name formula retailers as defendants. It asks the court to intervene and end the anticompetitive deals between Perrigo and Gerber and seeks more than $5 million in monetary damages.
This lawsuit is similar to another case filed in Brooklyn federal court by a potential store-brand competitor, P&L Development. Gerber and Perrigo requested the dismissal of that case, which was denied by the judge in February. The companies involved in the lawsuit claimed they compete fairly with other infant formula manufacturers, including those of store-brand formulas. The lawsuit also cited the squeezing out of P&L Development from the store-brand market, which has led to higher prices.
Gerber is also facing numerous lawsuits accusing its brands of baby food of containing dangerously high levels of toxic heavy metals, such as lead, arsenic, and mercury. These heavy metals are extremely toxic, even for adults, and can have catastrophic consequences on developing children, leading to health complications and neurological damage. Conditions such as ADHD and autism may be linked to consuming these toxic baby foods.
Advertisement
On April 11, 2024, all the lawsuits pertaining to toxic baby foods, which had been filed at different times in various courts, were consolidated into a new class action MDL in the Northern District of California and assigned to Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley. Besides Gerber, other baby food manufacturers like Beech-Nut and Campbell Soup Co. have also been named as defendants.
The legal wrangling between the crypto sector and the SEC, or the Securities and Exchange Commission, is getting uglier, with ConsenSys, a major protagonist of the Ethereum Blockchain, filing a lawsuit against the regulatory body in a Texas federal court. This legal action seeks an intervention to ward off a looming SEC lawsuit against the company regarding features of its popular MetaMask wallet. The lawsuit also seeks the court’s help in deciding once and for all the vexed question of whether Ethereum’s digital token, Ether, is not a security. The legal uncertainty hangs heavily on the crypto sector and puts a question mark on its very existence.
In an exhaustive 34-page legal filing, ConsenSys states that the SEC’s endeavor to exert control over Ethereum is both illegal and a threat to blockchain technology.
The complaint states,
Advertisement
“The SEC’s unlawful seizure of authority over ETH would spell disaster for the Ethereum network, and for ConsenSys. Every holder of ETH, including ConsenSys, would fear violating the securities laws if he or she were to transfer ETH on the network. This would bring the use of the Ethereum blockchain in the United States to a halt, crippling one of the internet’s greatest innovations.”
The lawsuit also alleges that SEC Chairman Gary Gensler has embarked on an aggressive enforcement policy directed at the big players in the crypto sector like Coinbase and Uniswap. The lawsuit particularly points out a campaign that involved a deluge of subpoenas asking firms and developers for documents related to their dealings with the nonprofit Ethereum Foundation, which supports the blockchain’s development.
The crypto sector is up in arms against Gensler’s tactics and has contended that the SEC has never provided clear rules meant for the distinct features of blockchain technology. However, Gensler negates this argument, saying that the existing securities laws are clear and sufficient, and that the crypto industry refuses to comply with them.
Gensler’s actions are full of contradictions since, in the past, the SEC had maintained that blockchain’s tokens, like Bitcoin, are not securities and hence beyond its purview. A senior official in 2018 had stated that Ethereum has reached a state where it is adequately decentralized, and further, the agency also gave the green signal for the launch of Ethereum futures trading—an implicit acknowledgement that Ether is a commodity. However, at present, Gensler is using a recent feature of Ethereum, known as staking, as grounds for the recent legal campaign.
Advertisement
The lawsuit was filed after the SEC issued a Wells Notice, which is akin to a formal letter warning that the agency intends to sue a firm and could lead to a settlement later. The SEC charged ConsenSys that MetaMask was operating as an unlicensed broker-dealer. MetaMask offered users a means to stake Ethereum on their behalf. Staking was a feature introduced in September 2022 on the Blockchain as a replacement for the energy-intensive mining process. The process involves a system of validators who pledge collateral to become trusted validators.
The SEC objects to the process of staking, which has changed Ethereum from a commodity into a security. ConsenSys founder Joe Lubin has called this account of the SEC “preposterous”.
Lubin said,
Advertisement
“The act of staking is really just posting a security bond so you can get paid to contribute labor and resources to help operate the Ethereum protocol. Now they’re trying to turn that into some sort of investment contract.”
Lubin also stated that the SEC’s actions will lead to a halt in the growth of the crypto sector and blockchain technology as a whole. Lubin feels that the SEC seeks to block pending applications by companies to launch spot ETFs for Ethereum, following the huge popularity of Bitcoin ETFs. The SEC is in fact trying to regulate a technology on its merits and it will only stifle innovation.
