The COVID-19 pandemic has brought massive online activities and increased cybersecurity incidents and cybercrime. As a result of this, the cyber reputation of organisations has also received increased scrutiny and global attention. Due to increased cybercrime, reputation displaying a more important role within risk management frameworks both within public and private institutions is vital. This study identifies key factors in determining reputational damage to public and private sector institutions through cyberattacks. Researchers conducted an extensive review of the literature, which addresses factors relating to risk management of reputation post-cyber breach. The study identified 42 potential factors, which were then classified using the STAR model. This model is an organisational design framework and was suitable due to its alignment with organisations. A qualitative study using semi-structured and structured questions was conducted with purposively selected cybersecurity experts in both public and private sector institutions. Data obtained from the expert forum were analysed using thematic analysis, which revealed that a commonly accepted definition for cyber reputation was lacking despite the growing use of the term “online reputation”. In addition, the structured questions data were analysed using relative importance index rankings. The analysis results revealed significant factors in determining reputational damage due to cyberattacks, as well as highlighting reputation factor discrepancies between private and public institutions. Theoretically, this study contributes to the body of knowledge relating to cybersecurity of organisations. Practically, this research is expected to aid organisations to properly position themselves to meet cyber incidents and become more competitive in the post-COVID-19 era.

The Wearable Internet of Medical Things (WIoMT) is a collective term for all wearable medical devices connected to the internet to facilitate the collection and sharing of health data such as blood pressure, heart rate, oxygen level, and more. Standard wearable devices include smartwatches and fitness bands. This evolving phenomenon due to the IoT has become prevalent in managing health and poses severe security and privacy risks to personal information. For better implementation, performance, adoption, and secured wearable medical devices, observing users’ perception is crucial. This study examined users’ perspectives of trust in the WIoMT while also exploring the associated security risks. Data analysed from 189 participants indicated a significant variance (R² = 0.553) on intention to use WIoMT devices, which was determined by the significant predictors (95% Confidence Interval; p < 0.05) perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and perceived security and privacy. These were found to have important consequences, with WIoMT users intending to use the devices based on the trust factors of usefulness, easy to use, and security and privacy features. Further outcomes of the study identified how users’ security matters while adopting the WIoMT and provided implications for the healthcare industry to ensure regulated devices that secure confidential data.

Do you use Office 365 or Windows 10? How about GoDaddy to support your website? Has it been a while since you connected your iPhone to Wi-Fi instead of merely running off your data? Or is your Samsung phone more than 2 years old? Would it surprise you to learn that some of these products no longer receive security support or automatic updates? If so, you may be surprised to hear that you are being exposed to security risks, as many cyber incidences are the direct result of an absence of security patching and automatic updates. There are many reasons for this. Most companies provide security patches, but they are not always timely and many are not automated, requiring manual effort (often unbeknownst to consumers and businesses). Timely security patching is, upon discovery or notification of a security flaw in a system or product, the release of a security update within a reasonable time that patches and updates the security of a system—sometimes this is automatic, sometimes the security patch is merely a notification that you can and should patch your own system. A contributing factor to this is that there is no legal obligation to provide security support, let alone timely security support. This means that there is no legal requirement to patch known security vulnerabilities and bugs or issue automatic updates. This paper asks whether or not Australia should have a legal obligation to ensure timely security patching and require automatic updates by default in all consumer systems. Our conclusion: yes, it should, since many companies cannot be relied on to self-regulate and put their client’s security interests first, and the stakes in cybersecurity have become too high to continue with the status quo. We conclude by presenting our recommended pathway for legal reform.