Detention and prevention approaches to the application of security devices have the same goal: to deal with intrusions and ensure the stability of security systems. However, these approaches have their differences, and there is a heated debate regarding which of them is more effective. An intrusion prevention system (IPS) seems a better solution as an intrusion detection system (IDS) has significant limitations, making it less efficient. First, IDS uses familiar intrusion signatures, meaning that attacks and assaults from undiscovered sources may remain undetected. Second, IDS can only detect attacks in progress, and it is powerless against incoming assaults, which require an IPS to block them. IPS is also more effective as it can be programmed to trace anomalies in the system, meaning that it can prevent attacks even from sources out of the pre-existing databases. Overall, using IPS appears as a better solution for most security systems.
There are many reasons and threats explaining the significance of using security protocols, especially in the systems of extensive facilities and companies. The most dangerous threats are identity theft, unauthorized access to data and networks, and confidential records being stolen. The first threat, identity theft, can negatively impact the lives of a person and their family members. The identity thief can use it to perform specific actions without consequences: for instance, they can make online payments using other person’s bank accounts. The next threat associated with unauthorized data access is also perilous. Using local data, people can use it to their advantage or even alter it, compromising the activity of an entire organization. Finally, the loss of confidential records to third parties can also be critical. People may access a company’s trading secrets and reveal them to the world or sell them to the competitors, endangering the firm. All the threats described above represent significant reasons to use security protocols and avoid data breaches.