Issue #0603/3 - Appalling document security is all too often a human failing not a technology inadequacy, as a survey by Lexmark highlights.
Around 75% of UK workers “rate paper documents as more powerful and authoritative than email or telephone communication”. This emphasises the nature of the results of a study undertaken by Lexmark in the UK into paper handling in office environments.
‘Paper handling’ is this instance does not refer to the paper input trays and finishing options available for many printers and MFPs but the handling of paper by human beings once it has been printed on the hard copy device.
But, how would they have been disposed of? And what could happen to the information either before or during the disposal process? Not only is this an incredibly wasteful practice, costing the organisation dearly in terms of wasted paper and toner, but is potentially leaving the organisation open to a variety of internal and external security and personnel issues.
From time to time we hear stories on the national news networks about defence secrets being jeopardised by the theft of a laptop computer from a car. These instances are almost certainly the result of a deliberate targeting of specific information rather even than opportunistic theft.
But, we are not really talking about theft here. We are talking about a general lack of consideration for good practice.
One intriguing fact to emerge from the report is that the lost property office for TFL (Transport for London – the body that operates the transport network in London) collected 2,500 briefcases in the course of one year. These briefcases were just left on trains, buses and in taxis in London – their owners walking off without them. One owner even left a briefcase containing £10,000!
In addition, the lost property office records: 14,000 value items (wallets, purses, etc.); 10,600 mobile phones; 5,700 items of jewellery / cameras / computers / etc.; plus thousands of cheque books, credit cards, diaries, etc., handed in within the 12-month period.
To bring this specifically to the printer world, one of the features noted within corporations is the high number of personal printers found on managers’ desks because they ‘need confidential printing’!
Yet, in light of the results of this study, we have to ask the question, ‘what may be happening to that paper once it leaves the printer? Is it being left lying on the manager’s desk for colleagues to see or for cleaners to see at the end of the day? Is it left on a train or in a taxi – in or out of a briefcase?
Lexmark reports that 26% of professional office workers leave sensitive papers exposed on their desks; 32% of workers admit to looking through colleagues’ documents when they find them on the printer’s paper tray; and 61% put sensitive documents straight in the bin instead of through a shredder.
And, on many occasions, I have sat on a train and been able to see and read confidential documents being reviewed by the person in the seat next to me. It could make the journey more interesting to work out who the person works for, what projects they might be working on or who is likely to be sacked within the coming week!
Simulation of a photo taken on a train—mobile phone at 1.3mp.
At full resolution some information
is clearly readable.
With 2mp cameras now available in mobile phones, and sophisticated image processing software readily available, the train is not a secure place to read sensitive documents. A camera user standing beside the seat only needs to look as though a text message is being prepared and photos could easily be taken of documents.
Apparently, on average, 44% of documents left on printer output trays contain sensitive information. Remarkably, the study reveals that lawyers are the worst offenders with 22% failing to collect sensitive material (59% of which contains sensitive client information) from the printer.
By contrast, IT and Medical professionals are the least likely to cause security breaches, with 44% regularly shredding confidential material, while Marketing professionals are most likely to snoop at other people’s documents (no surprise there then!!).
So, we then have to ask, why is there such a high degree if paranoia over personal printing when the paper may just sit around for anyone to see.
I would suggest that there is a high degree of ‘I want my own printer’ rather than ‘I need my documents to be secure’ driving this trend.
Security is a state of mind and a culture. There is no point in spending large amounts of money on printer security features if the culture does not support security once the paper leaves the device.
Just for the fun of it I even contacted the lost property office at TFL to find out just what proportion of lost items are never claimed. Due to the high volume of calls to the office, I had to try a number of times over several days but finally was told that an estimated 60% of items remain unclaimed and have to be disposed of!!
So, good for Lexmark UK for undertaking a very interesting study! This issue regarding the document needs to be highlighted so that security can be improved and wastage reduced.
Solutions do certainly include secure print features on the hardware itself. For instance, an individual should find it impossible to leave documents on a printer if it is necessary to punch in a PIN on the printer before the document is committed to paper in the first place. Follow-me printing has the same benefits.
However, the wider issue is cultural and cannot be so simply addressed by the implementation of technology. Individuals must safeguard their paper documents throughout the document life-cycle wherever they are used, stored or destroyed.
~End~
