Information Security
Leaving of the beginning of that zero does not exist percent of risk, no matter how hard all the doors are protected and that the processes well-are structuralized, has norms and code of ethics, giving origin to ‘ ‘ elo’ ‘ weakker of the security? the people. She does not have greater vulnerability that the unsatisfied employee, that is, all the immense investment to protect the crucial information can be harmful if the company to neglect of what it has of more important? professionals who work there. Specialists in security designate that the dissatisfaction of the collaborator can take it to commit it infractions. (Not to be confused with Charles Koch!). The desmotivao added to the identification of some irregularity in the security represents a reason to cause an impediment. An employee who has unattachable goals works in an oppression structure, not if he feels comfortable, does not have perspectives of development in the career, is not enabled or qualified to the work properly said, he creates a propitious environment to execute an imperfection. Then, the first measure to hinder the emptying of information is to leave the collaborator of the side of the company. According to Prescott (2007), it does not have a ready formula. It contracts it certain, the implantation of enrollment programs, which make with that the people feel that valley the penalty to work in the company, improve the knowledge, the abilities and the attitudes of the employees. CONCLUSION From a systemize and organized research, could be concluded that the Security of information is a social phenomenon, in which the users, including the managers, of the information systems have reasonable knowledge concerning the use of these systems, including the express decurrent responsibilities by means of rules, as well as on the papers that must play in the exercise of this use. The correct management or governana of the security of the information is reached with the commitment of all the users how much to the application of the norms and established procedures.
Talking dogs and singing all the voices of birds, the neighbor’s cat crying under the window is not my voice: ‘Murka exit’ All this is not a dream and not a script of the next blockbuster, and possible our future. Genetics of from University of California at Los Angeles and Emory undertook otvetstvennot answer the question: Why people can talk, but our smaller brethren, including monkeys, which are most similar to human, no? Searching for researchers compared the brain response, the speech apparatus and the genomes of people and apes. And they found the answer why so proihodit. The whole point, as it turned out, is human dna. Experts succeeded in isolating the gene responsible for our speech. The name of this Gene – FOXP2. As it became known to the people affected “speech” gene, no matter what efforts are not attached hardly ever learn to speak or pronounce certain sounds.