Technical opinion are employees putting your company at risk by not following information security policies?

Communications of the ACM

Volumn 52, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 145-147

  Siponen, Mikko ^a   Mahmood, M Adam ^b   Pahnila, Seppo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OULU   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BEST PRACTICE; FIELD SURVEYS; INFORMATION SECURITY; INFORMATION SECURITY POLICIES; NON-COMPLIANCE; SECURITY POLICY; SECURITY THREATS; SELF EFFICACY; STRATEGIC PLAN;

PERSONNEL; SECURITY SYSTEMS; STRATEGIC PLANNING; SURVEYS;

NETWORK SECURITY;

EID: 71149100808     PISSN: 00010782     EISSN: 15577317     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/1610252.1610289     Document Type: Review

References (6)

1. Fishbein M. Ajzen I.Belief Attitude Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley MA. 1975.
2. Hinde, S. Security surveys spring crop. Computers & Security 21, 4, (2002), 310-321.
3. Rogers, R. W. and Prentice-Dunn, S. Protection motivation theory. In D. S. Gochman (Ed.), Handbook of Health Behavior Research I: Personal and Social Determinants, NY: Plenum Press, NY, (1997), 113-132.
4. Siponen, M.T. Analysis of modern IS security development approaches: towards the next generation of social and adaptable ISS methods. Information and Organization 15, 4, (2005), 339-375.
5. Straub, D.W. Effective IS security: An empirical study. Information Systems Research 1, 3, (1990), 255-276.
6. Woon, I. M. Y., Tan, G. W. and Low, R. T. A Protection Motivation Theory Approach to Home Wireless Security. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Information Systems, Las Vegas, 2005, 367-380.