A study titled “Improving resilience: cybersecurity through system immunity” conducted by Kaspersky, explored how organisations currently manage cybersecurity and how they are preparing for future challenges.

This research surveyed 850 IT professionals responsible for cybersecurity in large companies across Europe, the Americas, APAC, Russia, and the Middle East, Turkiye, and Africa (META) region, including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Egypt, and South Africa.

These respondents represented a diverse range of industries and organisational levels, offering a comprehensive view of current security postures and pain points.

The survey reveals that, despite high satisfaction levels—with 94% of experts from the META region stating they are “satisfied” to “extremely satisfied” with their current protection—the desire for stronger and more adaptable defenses remains widespread.

Although only 6% of respondents from META expressed dissatisfaction with their cybersecurity measures, most recognise the need for improvement. Specifically, 64% believe there are “a few” or “some” areas that could be enhanced, while 35% advocate for significant upgrades.

When asked to identify the weakest aspects of their cybersecurity systems that they would like to improve, respondents from the META region pointed to various operational and technical challenges. The most common issues included:

• Manual processes consuming excessive time (31%)
• Reactive protection lacking proactive threat detection (28%)
• Shortage of skilled personnel (28%)

The reliance on manual processes leads to increased operational overhead and delays in identifying and responding to threats, while the absence of proactive threat detection reduces the ability to prevent breaches before they occur.

Among other critical weak sides of their current cybersecurity systems noted by respondents in the META region were high risks of systemic collapse following breaches (24%), overly complex IT/OT environments (22%), and outdated threat intelligence (21%).

Additional concerns included “alert fatigue” (22%) and insufficient functionality of current solutions (19%), complexity of managing disparate solutions (19%), and poor control over security policy implementation (19%).

The management of multiple different security solutions leads to gaps in coverage, misconfigurations, and increased risk of oversight, as security teams struggle to maintain an integrated, effective defense across diverse systems.

The fragmentation hampers swift response times and increases the likelihood of overlooked vulnerabilities, ultimately weakening the organisation’s overall security posture.

These findings highlight the urgent need for streamlined intelligent security tools to address these vulnerabilities effectively.

As organisations worldwide strive to strengthen their cybersecurity posture, this research highlights that, alongside enhancing traditional cybersecurity solutions, vendors are working to develop innovative approaches: shifting from protecting inherently vulnerable software with applied security measures toward creating secure-by-design systems with innate resilience. Such systems are capable of safeguarding their core assets even when compromised, often with minimal or no additional cybersecurity spending.

“More and more organisations are beginning to understand that modern challenges require not just strong protection but also a proactive and cohesive security strategy that strengthens every aspect of their digital landscape against potential breaches.

“That’s why it is essential for companies to adopt a transformative approach, integrating advanced threat intelligence and streamlined processes, and applying reliable, all-encompassing solutions to protect their assets while ensuring operational continuity and building customer trust,” says Alexander Kostyuchenko, Head of Technology Solutions Product Line at Kaspersky.

The Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority has ordered all international airlines flying into Nigeria to enforce the $10,000 currency declaration rule.

The authority said the rule is required for passengers to declare cash or negotiable instruments above the limit, as part of efforts to strengthen anti-money laundering compliance.

According to the NCAA, the directive, referenced as NCAA/CPD/ABV/298, dated 24 April 2025 seeks to address gaps in the enforcement of existing currency declaration obligations for inbound passengers.

This was announced in a statement issued by the Director of Public Affairs and Consumer Protection, Michael Achimugu, via his official X account on Tuesday.

“International carriers must take two key actions, which include “Make inflight or pre-landing announcements informing passengers of their legal obligation to declare any currency or Bearer Negotiable Instruments exceeding $10,000 USD or its equivalent upon arrival in Nigeria.

“Distribute currency declaration forms onboard for passengers to complete before landing. The NCAA has received reports indicating that some airlines are yet to comply with this directive”, the statement read.

The NCAA said these requirements are consistent with international best practices and are vital to preventing the illegal movement of large sums of money across borders.

The Authority warned that full cooperation from international airlines is essential, saying, “Please note that the cooperation of all international airlines operating in Nigeria is critical to supporting the country’s efforts to align with global financial standards.”

Accordingly, the authority emphasised that full implementation of this directive, particularly as it concerns inbound passenger declarations, is of utmost importance.

“Compliance will be closely monitored, and non-compliant airlines will face appropriate sanctions,” it added.

The court of appeal in Lagos has asked the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) to revoke the certificate of registration of “KPMG Professional Services”.

In a unanimous decision delivered on Thursday, the appellant court granted the reliefs sought by KPMG Nigeria against CAC and KPMG Professional Services.

The judgment was read by Abdullahi Mahmud Bayero, the judge.

The two other judges are Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo and A.M. Talba.

In 2002, KPMG Professional Services was registered as a company with CAC despite the existence of KPMG Nigeria, comprising its audit, tax, and consulting arms.

The KPMG Nigeria has long been registered in Nigeria before 2002.

KPMG Audit was registered in 1969, KPMG Tax Consultants in 1990, and KPMG Consulting in 1969.

Displeased with the registration of KPMG Professional Services, KPMG Nigeria approached the federal high court.

The consulting firm had argued that the name “KPMG Professional Services” was deceptively similar to its long-established identity.

In 2005, the lower court dismissed KPMG Nigeria’s case, citing an alleged merger between KPMG Nigeria and Akintola Williams Deloitte as reason the company could no longer assert rights to the name.

The lower upheld the second respondent’s (KPMG Professional Services) counterclaim and ordered that KPMG Nigeria’s name be struck off the CAC register.

The lower court had premised its decision on newspaper articles stating that KPMG Nigeria reportedly merged with Akintola Williams Deloitte.

Delivering the judgment, Bayero ruled that the lower court erred by relying on newspaper articles to ascertain that KPMG Nigeria allegedly merged with another company.

The judge said the documents showing the alleged merger were not presented before the lower court, and the form of the alleged merger could not have been known.

“In any event, the only branch of KPMG, if any, that entered into a merger with Akintola Williams as stated in the newspaper articles 18, is KPMG Audit,” the judge ruled.

“The other spheres were totally unaffected. It would therefore be wrong to state that the merger (which has not been shown to this Court) of KPMG Audit with Akintola Williams means all the other areas of business, including KPMG Consulting and KPMG Tax Consultants, also ceased to exist.

“Even if the Appellants (KPMG Nigeria) had ceased to do business as the Court seemed to have held, the 2nd Respondents (KPMG Professional Services) should not have been carrying on business until the Appellant’s certificate of registration is withdrawn or set aside.

“They cannot use the name until the Appellant’s certification of registration is withdrawn or set aside. They cannot use the name until the name is removed from the 1st Respondent’s (CAC) Register of Names.

“The 1st Respondents can only assign the name to the 2nd Respondents after first taking it away from the Appellants.”

The court ruled that CAC erred by registering KPMG Professional Services despite the existence of a business name, which is already registered.

The judge reversed the earlier ruling of the lower court and reaffirmed the primacy of statutory protection for existing business names under Nigerian corporate law.