World News
Enterprise spending on cybersecurity has changed, and vendors must adapt on August 14, 2023 at 10:30 am
Even in the usually exciting world of cybersecurity, discussions on enterprise security budgets tend to veer toward the mundane. However, today’s macroenvironment has thwarted almost every market prediction, and while we know for certain that the down market has driven most companies toward austerity, its true impact on cybersecurity spending has remained an enigma — until today.
A recent report by YL Ventures based on data pulled from surveying Fortune 1000 CISOs (chief information security officers) and cybersecurity decision-makers is shedding light on the impact of the down market on buying behavior, how security strategies are evolving in response and how customer interactions with vendors have changed as a result.
The biggest takeaway? Half of CISOs can still accommodate new solutions, and, contrary to low expectations, 45% of cybersecurity budgets remained unchanged or have even been increased. Specifically, a third of respondents (33.3%) report unchanged budgets and 12.2% saw their budgets raised.
Meanwhile, another third (33.3%) of cybersecurity budgets have been cut while 21.2% of cybersecurity leaders are currently managing frozen budgets, meaning that new spending is not possible.
Image Credits: YL Ventures
Making first contact
Though the data may seem intimidating, vendors still have ample opportunity to get a foot in the door. A considerable majority (75.8%) of cybersecurity leaders are still willing to meet new vendors — there are simply more caveats involved. While almost half (45.5%) are willing to meet any vendor, 18.2% are only meeting with those who strictly address their most pressing security priorities and 12.1% are only interested in meeting younger and smaller startups.
Indeed, this is an excellent time for small startups to shine and perhaps for larger vendors to take note. In the eyes of most cybersecurity leaders, smaller and earlier-stage companies tend to offer more advantageous licensing costs as well as design partnerships, which enable bespoke solutions that better suit their unique pain points and operational needs.
Currently, 26.7% of respondents are relying on free trials as provisional measures. If we think back on the more difficult days of the pandemic, when many cybersecurity providers offered their services for free, we can see ample evidence of just how much goodwill such gestures built and how they propelled companies to the top. For vendors who find this too difficult to stomach, consider how effective land and expansion tactics have tended to work in the past, and remember that the rising tide of fiscal conservatism leaves little room for obstinacy.
Sara Behar Contributor Sara Behar is a content manager at YL Ventures, where she promotes the firm’s cybersecurity expertise and provides value-add support to the firm’s portfolio companies with content creation and strategic initiatives. Even in the usually exciting world of cybersecurity, discussions on enterprise security budgets tend to veer toward the mundane. However, today’s
President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.
What Trump Is Saying
Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.
How Taxes Work Now
Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.
Questions From Experts
Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.
What Congress Must Do
The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.
What It Means Right Now
For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.
Former President Donald Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to declassify all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death in 2019 continues to fuel controversy and speculation.
The order, signed Wednesday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, instructs the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies to release documents detailing Epstein’s network, finances, and alleged connections to high-profile figures. Trump described the move as “a step toward transparency and public trust,” promising that no names would be shielded from scrutiny.
“This information belongs to the American people,” Trump said in a televised statement. “For too long, powerful interests have tried to bury the truth. That ends now.”
U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that preparations for the release are already underway. According to sources familiar with the process, the first batch of documents is expected to be made public within the next 30 days, with additional releases scheduled over several months.
Reactions poured in across the political spectrum. Supporters praised the decision as a bold act of accountability, while critics alleged it was politically motivated, timed to draw attention during a volatile election season. Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, emphasized caution, warning that some records could expose private victims or ongoing legal matters.
The Epstein case, which implicated figures in politics, business, and entertainment, remains one of the most talked-about scandals of the past decade. Epstein’s connections to influential individuals—including politicians, royals, and executives—have long sparked speculation about the extent of his operations and who may have been involved.
Former federal prosecutor Lauren Fields said the release could mark a turning point in public discourse surrounding government transparency. “Regardless of political stance, this declassification has the potential to reshape how Americans view power and accountability,” Fields noted.
Officials say redactions may still occur to protect sensitive intelligence or personal information, but the intent is a near-complete disclosure. For years, critics of the government’s handling of Epstein’s case have accused agencies of concealing evidence or shielding elites from exposure. Trump’s order promises to change that narrative.
As anticipation builds, journalists, legal analysts, and online commentators are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential information releases in recent history.
What Happened at the United Nations
On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, defending Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza. As he spoke, more than 100 delegates from over 50 countries stood up and left the chamber—a rare and significant diplomatic walkout. Outside the UN, thousands of protesters gathered to voice opposition to Netanyahu’s policies and call for accountability, including some who labeled him a war criminal. The protest included activists from Palestinian and Jewish groups, along with international allies.
Why Did Delegates and Protesters Walk Out?
The walkouts and protests were a response to Israel’s continued offensive in Gaza, which has resulted in widespread destruction and a significant humanitarian crisis. Many countries and individuals have accused Israel of excessive use of force, and some international prosecutors have suggested Netanyahu should face investigation by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, including claims that starvation was used as a weapon against civilians. At the same time, a record number of nations—over 150—recently recognized the State of Palestine, leaving the United States as the only permanent UN Security Council member not to join them.
International Reaction and Significance
The diplomatic walkouts and street protests demonstrate increasing global concern over the situation in Gaza and growing support for Palestinian statehood. Several world leaders, including Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, showed visible solidarity with protesters. Petro called for international intervention and, controversially, for US troops not to follow orders he viewed as supporting ongoing conflict. The US later revoked Petro’s visa over his role in the protests, which he argued was evidence of a declining respect for international law.
Why Is This News Important?
The Gaza conflict is one of the world’s most contentious and closely-watched issues. It has drawn strong feelings and differing opinions from governments, activists, and ordinary people worldwide. The United Nations, as an international organization focused on peace and human rights, is a key arena for these debates. The events surrounding Netanyahu’s speech show that many nations and voices are urging new action—from recognition of Palestinian rights to calls for sanctions against Israel—while discussion and disagreement over the best path forward continue.
This episode at the UN highlights how international diplomacy, public protests, and official policy are all intersecting in real time as the search for solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains urgent and unresolved.
Disney Brings Beloved Characters to ChatGPT After $1 Billion OpenAI Deal
Google Accused Of Favoring White, Asian Staff As It Reaches $28 Million Deal That Excludes Black Workers
