Regarding the proposal to reduce the funding for information security by 40% because there haven't been any recent virus outbreaks, I would stress the significance of taking a proactive and preventive approach to cybersecurity. I could state:
The fact that there haven't been any new virus outbreaks is positive, but it's important to remember that maintaining cybersecurity requires constant funding. The lack of events does not always mean that our defenses are too strong; rather, it could mean that they have worked thus far. Reducing the information security budget by forty percent may make it more difficult for us to keep up with new threats, make investments in modern technology, and carry out routine security audits.
Because cyber threats are always changing, potential dangers might not always become apparent right away. Putting money into information security is an investment in our systems' long-term stability and resilience. A decrease in funding could make us more susceptible to future, highly developed threats. It's also critical to take into account the possible financial and reputational consequences of a security breach, which may be significantly greater than the expense of keeping up strong security measures.
Information security should remain a top priority, and we need make sure that our defenses are flexible enough to meet new threats as well as successful against established ones. This strategy is in line with cybersecurity best practices and demonstrates our dedication to protecting the organization's information, good name, and general ability to operate."
