Consumers around the world are very concerned about information collections that the companies that are perceived to them – especially when used for AI, according to cohesity.
The majority of respondents (73% in the United Kingdom, 81% in the United States and 82% in Australia) criticized companies to collect too much of their personal or financial data. And 9 out of 10 consumers fear that AI will have an impact on how businesses keep data from safety customers. Responding to the growing expectations of customers for better protection of their sensitive information is now a commercial imperative, consumers ready to punish businesses by changing providers for any loss of confidence.
Consumers ready to change sellers after a data compromise
The survey of more than 6,000 consumers worldwide has questioned assessments of digital industry data practices. In addition to criticism of the hunger for business data, the results also explain an unattended expectation of a greater diligence of organizations to protect personal information from consumers once obtained – as identified by 73% of respondents in the United Kingdom, 86% in the United States and 87% in Australia.
Respondents are not only asking for a change – they are ready to change their favorite seller if they are victims of a cyber attack and their data is compromised. Another consensus among users of the three countries (more than 90%) said they could stop doing business with a company if it was the victim of a cyber attack.
“Consumers clearly understand that companies have a lot of catch -up to be done in the field of governance and data security,” said James BlakeGlobal cybersecurity strategist, cohesity.
“AI’s hunger obliges certain companies to skip threat modeling and reasonable diligence on how their data will be exposed. Companies seeking to use internal AI must invest in the safety and hygiene of their data to maintain cyber-resilience in order to satisfy these consumers who are ready to vote with their purchases. Those who seek to take advantage of the capacities of AI of suppliers must adopt a strong and proactive approach to third party risks. Consumer confidence is quickly lost and competitors are still only a click, so ensuring that AI strategies do not introduce additional risks to customer data, “added Blake.
Companies around the world expect AI miracles, but large amounts of data must be collected so that these AI models can learn. Often, this need for data is hierarchical by the collection and management responsible for data. Private users are, in turn, concerned by the lack of transparency of companies concerning their AI practices.
Almost all consumers (87% in the United Kingdom, 92% in the United States and 93% in Australia) fear that AI will make the security and management of their data much more difficult. Most even goes a little further to classify AI as a risk for data protection and security (64% in the United Kingdom, 72% in the United States and 83% in Australia).
Private users emphasize the authorization of personal data in AI
The aggravation of these fears concerning the implications of the AI for their data, consumers (70% in the United Kingdom, 81% in the United States and 83% in Australia) are seriously concerned about non-limited or not use Advanced AI with their data, the vast demanding majority requiring greater transparency and regulation.
At a minimum, private users (74% in the United Kingdom, 85% in the United States and 88% in Australia) wish to be requested for permission before their personal or financial data is introduced into AI models.
The vast majority of respondents (79% in the United Kingdom, 87% in the United States and 90% in Australia) want to know with whom their data is shared. Most respondents (77% in the United Kingdom, 85% in the United States and 90% in Australia) also call on companies to verify the security and data management practices of third-party suppliers with access to customer data.
This clear call for more control, transparency and protection around their data is largely motivated by the negative experiences of respondents. Unsurprisingly, most respondents are very critical of the purchase of access to their compromised data – mainly fueling the business model of cybercriminals with new capital.
Half of the people interviewed (46% in the United Kingdom, 75% in the United States and 62% in Australia) were personally affected by a cyber attack. Most questions do not agree with the idea that companies should pay ransoms (56% in the United Kingdom, 52% in the United States and 58% in Australia), condemning the current practice of companies that buy Their ransomware attacks.
“Payment of a ransom rarely leads to recovery of all data. It brings its own logistical challenges and its potential criminal responsibility for the payment of sanctioned entities – not to mention rewarding criminals, ”explains Blake.