by Andrew Shone | May 20, 2026 | IT Management, Newsfeed
When you first sign up for a software-as-a-service (SaaS) platform, everything is designed to feel effortless.
The problem is that the first real test of a SaaS relationship isn’t the onboarding. It’s the exit.
For many small businesses, the front door is wide open, but the emergency exit is bolted shut: exports are incomplete, key data sits in proprietary formats, and leaving requires expensive vendor help.
That’s more than inconvenient. It’s a business risk.
As teams move toward a workforce blended with humans and Agentic AI in 2026, your advantage will come from data you can move, reuse, and trust. If your data can’t leave a vendor cleanly, you don’t fully control your processes. Then your options, timelines, and costs are controlled for you.
Why This Gets Worse in 2026
The “backup exit strategy” question is getting sharper in 2026 because SaaS sprawl and third-party dependence are now normal.
Your business data isn’t sitting in one system. It’s spread across platforms, integrations, plug-ins, and automation. When one vendor changes pricing, terms, features, or risk profile, you don’t just “switch tools.” You either move your data cleanly or you stay stuck.
The breach environment also raises the stakes. Verizon’s 2025 DBIR Executive Summary says it analysed 22,052 security incidents and 12,195 confirmed breaches, calling it “the highest number of breaches ever analysed in a single report,” across 139 countries.
That volume matters because exits and migrations often happen under pressure. A backup exit strategy is what prevents “we need to move” from becoming “we can’t move.”
Attackers are also increasingly focused on credentials and data pathways. These are the same pathways you rely on during exports and migrations.
Microsoft’s Digital Defense Report 2025 notes that credential and access key theft attempts are up 23%, and attempts to extract sensitive data from storage accounts and databases increased 58%.
Microsoft also reports that data collection showed up in 80% of reactive engagements, which is a reminder that “getting the data” is now a common objective.
If you can’t export your data safely and predictably, you end up trapped. You can’t rotate away from a risky platform quickly. And you can’t migrate without creating new exposure.
Finally, being stuck is expensive even before you factor in vendor fees. IBM’s Cost of a Data Breach Report 2025 puts the global average cost of a breach at USD 4.4M.
That’s not a “lock-in” statistic, but it is a useful reality check: data incidents cost real money. A clean exit strategy reduces the chance that a vendor becomes an added cost multiplier during an already expensive situation.
In 2026, the question isn’t whether you’ll ever need to move data. It’s whether you’ll be able to do it without vendor hand-holding, surprise costs, or emergency timelines.
The Financial Cost of the “Proprietary Trap”
A weak exit plan doesn’t just slow innovation. It quietly increases operating costs because you end up paying for a setup you can’t easily change.
When you’re locked into a vendor, spending becomes sticky. You can’t right-size quickly, consolidate tools, or move workloads to a better-fit platform without turning it into a major project.
That’s how waste hangs around.
The real cost isn’t the monthly invoice. It’s the lack of options. When your data can’t move easily, every renewal, pricing change, or product shift becomes a forced decision instead of a strategic one.
A true backup exit strategy flips that dynamic. It gives you the ability to migrate on your timeline, reduce duplicate tooling, and make cost decisions based on value rather than inertia. In practical terms, it turns “we can’t leave” into “we can compare, choose, and move when it makes sense.”
Securing the Move
Once you decide to move your data, the migration itself becomes a high-risk moment. Not because migrations are inherently unsafe. But because they concentrate exactly what attackers want:
- High-privilege access
- Lots of open sessions,
- A lot of data moving at once
During a data move, your team is often signed into multiple admin-level tools at the same time. That’s where session cookie hijacking becomes relevant. An attacker doesn’t need to “crack” your password if they can steal the session token that proves you’re already authenticated.
Microsoft has described adversary-in-the-middle phishing campaigns that intercept session cookies so attackers can reuse an authenticated session and bypass the MFA prompt.
Cloudflare also notes that attackers are finding ways to circumvent MFA as part of broader attack chains, which is why the safest approach is layered rather than relying on one control.
To protect your backup exit migration:
- Use phishing-resistant sign-ins where possible for migration and admin accounts.
- Tighten session controls so privileged sessions expire sooner and re-authentication is required for risky actions.
- Treat device health as part of access: run the migration from a managed, patched, protected device.
- Monitor for suspicious access during the move.
Ownership is a Discipline
The businesses that thrive over the next few years won’t just adopt new tools. They’ll stay flexible as tools change.
In a world of SaaS sprawl and AI-driven workflows, that flexibility comes from clean data, clear processes, and the ability to move when you need to.
If you’d like help building an exit-ready baseline across your vendor stack, contact us for a technology consultation.
—
Featured Image Credit
This Article has been Republished with Permission from The Technology Press.
by Andrew Shone | May 15, 2026 | Cybersecurity, Newsfeed
Browser add-ons have a funny reputation. They feel “small”. A quick install. A tiny productivity boost. A harmless little helper that lives in your toolbar.
But in practice, a browser extension is more like a micro-SaaS vendor sitting inside your browser session. It can see what you see, interact with the pages you open, and sometimes access the same cloud apps your business runs on all day.
That’s why a browser extension security check matters.
Not because every extension is bad, but because it only takes one over-permissioned add-on or one bad update to turn “helpful” into exposure.
The good news is you don’t need a 40-page policy to reduce the risk. A simple five-minute check can prevent most extension problems before they start.
Why Browser Extensions Are a High-Leverage Risk
Browser extensions sit in the most sensitive place in modern work: the browser tab where your staff live all day.
That matters because extensions aren’t just “apps”. They’re granted special authorisations inside the browser. That makes them attractive targets and gives them leverage that’s disproportionate to how “small” they feel.
UC Berkeley’s guidance says extensions get “special authorisations,” and the more you install, the bigger the attack surface becomes.
The risk is often permission-based. OWASP calls out “permissions overreach” as a core problem. Extensions can request more access than they need, including access to “all tabs, browsing history, and even sensitive user data.”
When an extension can read and modify what happens in the browser, it can potentially see data in cloud tools, capture what’s typed into forms, or alter content on a page.
It’s also a “change over time” risk. A useful extension today can become a different extension tomorrow.
The 5-Minute Browser Extension Security Check
This browser extension security check is designed to be fast, repeatable, and realistic. It helps staff make safe decisions in minutes without turning every extension into a big IT ticket.
Vet the developer like a real vendor
If you wouldn’t give a random supplier access to your customer records, don’t give a random extension access to your browser.
Start with the basics:
- Confirm the developer has a real website, support details, and a consistent name across listings
- Look for a track record (other products, a clear company presence, updates that look normal)
- Prefer official stores and trusted sources over “download this .zip” links
Read the description like a contract
Treat the store listing as a mini security disclosure. It should clearly explain what the extension does and why it needs access.
What to look for:
- Specific, concrete function
- Clear explanation of what data it touches
- Any hint of tracking, analytics, or data sharing that doesn’t match the core feature.
Permission sanity check
Permissions are the whole game. This is where a “helpful tool” can become a high-leverage risk.
Microsoft’s Edge Add-ons policies say extensions “must only request those permissions that are essential for functioning,” and requesting permissions for “future proofing” is “not allowed.”
How to do a fast check:
- Ask: “Does this permission match the feature?” If not, it’s a red flag.
- Be cautious of anything that effectively means “read and change everything you do in the browser.”
- Remember: Google even publishes guidance for admins to “evaluate the security risk” of different extension permissions.
Check updates and change risk
Extensions aren’t static. They update. And updates can change what the extension can do.
Two things to watch:
- Permission creep: If an extension suddenly requests new permissions, you should be wary. And if you can’t justify it, “it’s probably better to uninstall”
- Update abuse: Treat unexpected permission changes or sudden feature shifts as a reason to pause and escalate
Decide: approve, avoid, or escalate
You don’t need a committee for every install.
You need a simple decision tree:
- Approve when the vendor is credible, the purpose is clear, and permissions are tight and match the feature
- Avoid when the extension is vague, over-permissioned, or feels like it wants access “just in case”
- Escalate when it’s genuinely useful but touches sensitive systems or asks for broad permissions.
- Have IT review it and, if approved, add it to an allowlist
From “Quick Install” to Clear Standards
Browser extensions aren’t “bad”. Unvetted extensions are the problem.
A simple browser extension security check turns installs from impulse decisions into repeatable standards.
You’re not trying to slow people down. You’re trying to make sure the tools that live inside your browser have a clear purpose, tight permissions, and a vendor you’d actually trust.
Start small. Reduce extension sprawl, treat permission changes as a red flag, and escalate anything that touches sensitive systems.
Then make it easier for staff to do the right thing by default with an approved list and browser-level controls. When installs are standardised, extensions stop being a hidden risk and become just another managed part of the environment.
Contact us today to schedule a browser extension audit.
—
Featured Image Credit
This Article has been Republished with Permission from The Technology Press.
by Andrew Shone | May 6, 2026 | Newsfeed, Online Presence
A fake recruiter message is one of the cleanest social engineering tricks around because it doesn’t look like a trick.
That’s why LinkedIn recruitment scams work so well inside real businesses.
They don’t arrive as malware. They arrive as a normal conversation that nudges someone toward one small action: click this link, open this file, “verify” this detail, move the chat to a different app.
A few simple checks, a couple of hard-stop rules, and an easy way to report suspicious outreach can shut these scams down without slowing anyone down.
LinkedIn Recruitment Scams
LinkedIn recruitment scams artfully blend into normal professional behaviour.
The message doesn’t look like a “cyber attack.” It looks like networking, and it borrows credibility from recognisable brands, polished profiles, and familiar hiring language.
At platform scale, the volume is also hard to wrap your head around.
Rest of World reports that LinkedIn said it “identified and removed 80.6 million fake accounts” at registration from July to December 2024. A LinkedIn spokesperson claimed “over 99%” of the fake accounts they remove are detected proactively before anyone reports them.
Even with that level of detection, enough scam activity still leaks through to reach real employees. That’s especially true when scammers tailor their approach to what looks credible in a specific industry and location.
The other reason these scams succeed is that they follow a predictable persuasion pattern: urgency, authority, and a quick push to “do the next step.”
The FTC describes scammers impersonating well-known companies and then steering targets toward actions that create leverage. These actions include handing over sensitive personal information or sending money for “equipment” or other upfront costs.
Once someone is rushed into treating the process as real, the scam doesn’t need to be technically sophisticated. It just needs the victim to keep moving.
The Scam Pattern Most Teams Miss
1. A polished approach on LinkedIn
The profile looks credible enough, the role sounds plausible, and the message is written in a professional tone. The job post itself may still be oddly generic, though.
Amoria Bond notes that fake job postings often “lack details” and lean on broad language to catch as many people as possible.
2. A quick push off-platform
The conversation shifts to email, WhatsApp/Telegram, or a “recruitment portal” link. That shift is important because it removes the built-in friction of LinkedIn’s environment and makes it easier to send links, files, and instructions.
3. A credibility wrapper: “assessment”, “interview pack”, or “onboarding”
Airswift flags link/attachment requests and urgency tactics as common red flags. The story is usually something like: “Download this assessment,” “Review these onboarding steps,” or “Log in here to schedule.”
4. The pivot: money, sensitive info, or account takeover
Scammers impersonate well-known companies and then ask for things legitimate employers typically don’t: payment for “equipment” or early requests for personal information.
Another variation is more subtle: “verification” steps that are really designed to steal identity details or compromise accounts.
5. Pressure to keep moving
If someone hesitates, the scam leans on urgency: “limited slots,” “fast-track hiring,” “complete this today.” That’s why Forbes frames the key skill as slowing down and checking details, because the scam depends on momentum.
Red Flags Checklist for Staff
Here are the red flags to look out for.
Red flags in the job posting
- The role is oddly vague or overly broad. Generic responsibilities, unclear reporting lines, and “we’ll share details later” language are common in fake listings.
- The company’s presence doesn’t match the brand name. Thin company pages, inconsistent logos/branding, or a web presence that feels incomplete are worth pausing on.
- The process is “too easy, too fast.” If the listing implies immediate hiring with minimal steps, treat it as suspicious.
Red flags in recruiter behaviour
- They push you off LinkedIn quickly. Moving to WhatsApp/Telegram or personal email early is a common tactic.
- They use a personal email address or unusual contact details. Be specifically cautious of recruiters using free webmail accounts instead of a company domain.
- They avoid verification. If they dodge basic questions, treat that as a signal, not a scheduling issue.
Hard-stop requests
- Any request for money or fees. Application fees, equipment purchases, “training costs”, gift cards, crypto, that’s a hard stop.
- Requests for sensitive personal info early. Bank details, identity documents, tax forms, or “background checks” before a real interview process is established.
- Requests for verification codes. If anyone asks you to read back a one-time code sent to your phone/email, assume they’re trying to take over an account.
- Requests for non-public company information like org charts, internal system details, client lists, invoice processes and security tools. Look out for requisitions for anything beyond what a recruiter would reasonably need.
Stop Scams With Simple Defaults
LinkedIn recruitment scams don’t succeed because staff are careless. They succeed because the outreach looks normal, the process feels familiar, and the next step is always framed as urgent.
The fix isn’t turning everyone into an investigator. It’s setting simple defaults that make scams harder to complete: slow down before clicking, verify the recruiter and role through official channels, keep conversations on-platform until identity checks out, and treat money requests, code requests, and early personal data demands as hard stops.
When those habits are standardised, the scam loses its leverage.
Reach out to us today to make sure you have the latest tools to fight this and other types of online scams.
—
Featured Image Credit
This Article has been Republished with Permission from The Technology Press.
by Andrew Shone | Feb 18, 2026 | Cybersecurity, Newsfeed
For years, enabling Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) has been a cornerstone of account and device security. While MFA remains essential, the threat landscape has evolved, making some older methods less effective.
The most common form of MFA, four- or six-digit codes sent via SMS, is convenient and familiar, and it’s certainly better than relying on passwords alone. However, SMS is an outdated technology, and cybercriminals have developed reliable ways to bypass it. For organizations handling sensitive data, SMS-based MFA is no longer sufficient. It’s time to adopt the next generation of phishing-resistant MFA to stay ahead of today’s attackers.
SMS was never intended to serve as a secure authentication channel. Its reliance on cellular networks exposes it to security flaws, particularly in telecommunication protocols such as Signaling System No. 7 (SS7), used for communication between networks.
Attackers know that many businesses still use SMS for MFA, which makes them appealing targets. For instance, hackers can exploit SS7 vulnerabilities to intercept text messages without touching your phone. Techniques such as eavesdropping, message redirection, and message injection can be carried out within the carrier network or during over-the-air transmission.
SMS codes are also vulnerable to phishing. If a user enters their username, password, and SMS code on a fake login page, attackers can capture all three in real time and immediately gain access the legitimate account.
Understanding SIM Swapping Attacks
One of the most dangerous threats to SMS-based security is the SIM swap. In SIM swapping attacks, a criminal contacts your mobile carrier pretending to be you and claims to have lost their phone. They then request the support staff to port your number to a new blank SIM card in their possession.
If they succeed, your phone goes offline, allowing them to receive all calls and SMS messages, including MFA codes for banking and email. Without knowing your password, they can quickly reset credentials and gain full access to your accounts.
This attack doesn’t depend on advanced hacking skills; instead, it exploits social engineering tactics against mobile carrier support staff, making it a low-tech method with high‑impact consequences.
Why Phishing-Resistant MFA Is the New Gold Standard
To prevent these attacks, it’s essential to remove the human element from authentication by using phishing-resistant MFA. This approach relies on secure cryptographic protocols that tie login attempts to specific domains.
One of the more prominent standards used for such authentication is Fast Identity Online 2 (FIDO2) open standard, that uses passkeys created using public key cryptography linking a specific device to a domain. Even if a user is tricked into clicking a phishing link, their authenticator application will not release the credentials because the domain does not match the specific record.
The technology is also passwordless, which removes the threat of phishing attacks that capture credentials and one-time passwords (OTPs). Hackers are forced to target the endpoint device itself, which is far more difficult than deceiving users.
Implementing Hardware Security Keys
Perhaps one of the strongest phishing-resistant authentication solutions involves hardware security keys. Hardware security keys are physical devices resembling a USB drive, which can be plugged into a computer or tapped against a mobile device.
To log in, you simply insert the key into the computer or touch a button, and the key performs a cryptographic handshake with the service. This method is quite secure since there are no codes to type, and attackers can’t steal your key over the internet. Unless they physically steal the key from you, they cannot access your account.
Mobile Authentication Apps and Push Notifications
If physical keys are not feasible for your business, mobile authenticator apps such as Microsoft or Google Authenticator are a step up from SMS MFA. These apps generate codes locally on the device, eliminating the risk of SIM swapping or SMS interception since the codes are not sent over a cellular network.
Simple push notifications also carry risks. For example, attackers may flood a user’s phone with repeated login approval requests, causing “MFA fatigue,” where a frustrated or confused user taps “approve” just to stop the notifications. Modern authenticator apps address this with “number matching,” requiring the user to enter a number shown on their login screen into the app. This ensures the person approving the login is physically present at their computer.
Passkeys: The Future of Authentication
With passwords being routinely compromised, modern systems are embracing passkeys, which are digital credentials stored on a device and protected by biometrics such as fingerprint or Face ID. Passkeys are phishing-resistant and can be synchronized across your ecosystem, such as iCloud Keychain or Google Password Manager. They offer the security of a hardware key with the convenience of a device that you already carry.
Passkeys reduce the workload for IT support, as there are no passwords to store, reset, or manage. They simplify the user experience while strengthening security.
Balancing Security With User Experience
Moving away from SMS-based MFA requires a cultural shift. Since users are already used to the universality and convenience of text messages, the introduction of physical keys and authenticator apps can trigger resistance.
It’s important to explain the reasoning behind the change, highlighting the realities of SIM-swapping attacks and the value of the protected information. When users understand the risks, they are more likely to embrace the new measures.
While a phased rollout can help ease the transition for the general user base, phishing-resistant MFA should be mandatory for privileged accounts. Administrators and executives must not rely on SMS-based MFA.
The Costs of Inaction
Sticking with legacy MFA techniques is a ticking time bomb that gives a false sense of security. While it may satisfy compliance requirements, it leaves systems vulnerable to attacks and breaches, which can be both costly and embarrassing.
Upgrading your authentication methods offers one of the highest returns on investment in cybersecurity. The cost of hardware keys or management software is minimal compared to the expense of incident response and data recovery.
Is your business ready to move beyond passwords and text codes? We specialize in deploying modern identity solutions that keep your data safe without frustrating your team. Reach out, and we’ll help you implement a secure and user-friendly authentication strategy.
—
Featured Image Credit
This Article has been Republished with Permission from The Technology Press.
by Andrew Shone | Feb 18, 2026 | Cloud, Newsfeed
Time moves fast in the world of technology, and operating systems that once felt cutting-edge are becoming obsolete. With Microsoft having set the deadline for Windows Server 2016 End of Support to January 12, 2027, the clock is ticking for businesses that use this operating system.
Once support ends, Microsoft will no longer provide security updates or patches, leaving your business systems vulnerable. It’s not just about missing new features, continuing to use unsupported software significantly increases the risk of cyberattacks.
If your systems are still on Windows Server 2016, now is the time to plan your upgrade. With about a year until support ends, waiting until the last minute can lead to rushed decisions and higher costs.
Understanding the Security Implications
When support ends, the protection provided by security updates and patches disappears, as Microsoft will no longer fix bugs or vulnerabilities. Hackers often target unsupported systems, knowing any new exploits will go unpatched and open the door to attacks.
Legacy systems put IT administrators in a tough spot. Without vendor support, defending against threats becomes nearly impossible, compliance with industry regulations is compromised, and running unsupported software can lead to failed audits.
Additionally, customer data on servers running this operating system is vulnerable to theft and ransomware. The cost of a breach far outweighs the cost of upgrading. Using unsupported systems is like driving a faulty, uninsured car, failure is inevitable. The question isn’t if it will happen, but when.
The Case for Cloud Migration
With the end-of-support deadline approaching, businesses face a choice: purchase new physical servers that run the latest Windows Server editions, or migrate their infrastructure to the cloud. Investing in new hardware and software comes with substantial upfront costs and locks you into that capacity for five years, the typical span of mainstream support for Windows Server, plus an additional five years for Long-Term Servicing Channel (LTSC) releases.
On the other hand, a cloud migration strategy offers a more flexible alternative. Platforms such as Microsoft Azure or Amazon’s AWS cloud services, allow you to select virtualized computing resources such as servers and storage, which can scale as needed. On these platforms, you only pay for what you use, transforming your IT spending from capital expenditure to operating expense.
The cloud provides greater reliability and disaster recovery, eliminating concerns about hard drive failures in your server rack. Cloud providers handle the management and upgrades of the physical infrastructure, freeing your IT team to focus on driving business growth.
Analyze Your Current Workloads
Before moving to the cloud, it’s essential to know what you’re working with. Take inventory of all applications running on your Windows Server 2016 machines. While some are cloud-ready, others may need updates or reconfiguration.
Identify which workloads are critical to your daily operations and prioritize them in your migration plan. You may also discover applications you no longer need, making this an ideal time to streamline and clean up your environment.
When in doubt, consult with your software vendors to confirm compatibility, as they might have specific requirements for newer operating systems. Gathering this information early helps you to avoid surprises during the actual migration.
Create a Phased Migration Plan
When transitioning to a new system, moving everything at once is risky, ‘big bang’ migrations often cause downtime and confusion. The best approach is a phased migration to manage risk effectively. Begin with low-impact workloads to test the process, then proceed to medium and high-impact workloads once you’re confident everything runs smoothly.
Set a realistic timeline that beats the server upgrade deadline by a significant margin, and then work backward from the end-of-support date. This approach allows for plenty of buffer time for testing and troubleshooting, since rushing migrations often results in mistakes and security gaps.
Communicate the schedule to your staff clearly, they need to know when maintenance windows will occur, so that they can also manage their workflows effectively. Managing expectations is just as important as managing servers, and you don’t want to get in your own way. A smooth transition requires everyone to be informed and on the same page.
Test and Validate
Once you migrate a workload, it’s essential to verify that it functions as expected. Key questions to ask include: Does the application launch correctly? Can users access their data without permission errors? Testing is the most critical phase of any migration.
After migration, run extensive performance benchmarks to compare the new system with the old one. The cloud should offer equal or better speed, and if things are slow, you might need to adjust resources. Optimization will be a normal part of the migration process, until you find the perfect balance that works for you.
The summarized steps for a successful migration include:
- Audit all current hardware and software assets
- Choose between an on-premise upgrade or a cloud migration
- Back up all data securely before making changes
- Test applications thoroughly in the new environment
- Do not declare victory until users confirm everything is working
The Cost of Doing Nothing
Ignoring the end of support deadline is not a viable strategy. Some businesses hope to delay until the last minute and then rush a migration, but this is extremely risky. Cybercriminals constantly target outdated, vulnerable systems, often using automated bots to scan for weaknesses.
If you continue using Windows Server 2016 past the extended support dates, you may need to purchase ‘Extended Security Updates.’ While Microsoft offers this service, it is extremely costly, and the price rises each year, making it more a penalty for delay than a sustainable long-term solution.
Act Now to Modernize Your Infrastructure
If your business still relies on Windows Server 2016, the end of support marks a pivotal moment for your IT strategy, upgrading your technology stack is no longer optional. Whether you choose new hardware or a cloud solution, decisive action is required.
Take this opportunity to enhance your legacy system’s security and efficiency, ensuring your modern business runs on a modern infrastructure. Don’t let time compromise your data’s safety, plan your migration today and safeguard your future.
Concerned about the approaching Windows Server 2016 end-of-support deadline? We specialize in smooth migrations to the cloud and modern server environments. Let us take care of the technical heavy lifting, contact us today to begin your upgrade plan.
—
Featured Image Credit
This Article has been Republished with Permission from The Technology Press.
