Insider Threats on the Rise: What Cybersecurity Professionals Can Learn from the 2024 Insider Threat Report

‍Skip the full report. Get the critical findings in 5 minutes.

‍

In early 2024, a financial services firm discovered that a departing employee had downloaded over 100,000 customer records weeks before resignation. Cost to remediate: $1.8 million. The employee had valid credentials and legitimate access. The company's perimeter defenses worked perfectly, but couldn't see the threat already inside.

‍

This scenario isn't an outlier anymore.

‍

The 2024 Insider Threat Report by Cybersecurity Insiders confirms what many in the field already suspect: insider threats are escalating in both frequency and impact. These incidents are no longer edge cases. They're frequent, costly, and demand as much attention as external attacks.

‍

This article breaks down the most important statistics and takeaways so you can quickly understand where insider threats stand today and what you need to do about them.

‍

What is an insider threat?

‍

An insider threat is a security risk that originates from within an organization. It involves employees, contractors, or partners who have authorized access to systems and data. These threats fall into three categories: malicious insiders who intentionally cause harm, negligent insiders who accidentally create breaches, and compromised insiders whose credentials are stolen by external attackers. Unlike external attacks that must breach perimeter defenses, insider threats exploit legitimate access, making them harder to detect.

‍

Key finding: Insider attacks are more frequent than ever

‍

The 2024 report reveals that insider attacks are no longer rare events.

‍

48% of organizations reported that insider threats have become more frequent over the past 12 months.

51% said they had experienced six or more insider-related incidents in the past year.

‍

Six insider-related events annually, or more, means these aren't occasional accidents. Insider risk has become a persistent, recurring threat vector that security teams can't afford to ignore.

‍

Key finding: The high cost of insider incidents

The financial impact is severe. Organizations reported remediation costs that ranged widely, but the numbers tell a concerning story:

• 29% of respondents said the average cost per incident exceeded $1 million.
  ‍
• 27% estimated costs between $500,000 and $1 million.
  ‍
• 21% placed the cost between $1 million and $2 million.
  ‍
• 8% reported spending over $2 million to remediate an insider incident.
  ‍

Even at the lower end, 32% cited costs between $100,000 and $499,000 per incident. Beyond direct financial losses, insider incidents carry hidden expenses: forensic investigations, legal fees, regulatory fines, and damage to employee morale.

‍

Time compounds the damage. 55% of organizations said they could recover from an insider incident within 24 hours, but 45% reported recovery times of a week or more. For organizations in healthcare, finance, or critical infrastructure, even 48 hours of disruption can cascade into serious operational and compliance issues.

‍

Key finding: What's driving the surge in insider threats?

‍

Why are insider attacks becoming so frequent and costly? The report points to several contributing factors:

• Complex IT environments (39%): Hybrid work and sprawling cloud systems make it difficult to maintain visibility. When employees access resources from home networks, personal devices, and dozens of SaaS applications, the traditional perimeter dissolves. There's simply no single point of control anymore.
• Adoption of new technologies (37%): Organizations are deploying cloud services, AI platforms, and IoT devices faster than security teams can properly secure them. Every new tool adds another access point that needs monitoring.
• Inadequate security measures (33%): Weak policies, poor monitoring, and gaps in enforcement all increase the likelihood of incidents. Many organizations have the technology but lack the processes to use it effectively.
• Lack of training and awareness (32%): Most insider threats aren't malicious. They're unintentional. A sales representative forwarding customer lists to personal email "for convenience" probably doesn't realize they're creating a data breach.
• Weak enforcement of policies and monitoring (31%): Rules exist on paper, but they're not always applied consistently. Executives and high-performers often receive exceptions that create security blind spots no one wants to acknowledge.
  ‍

This combination shows why insider threats aren't just a technology problem. Malicious insiders may grab headlines, but most organizations struggle just as much with negligent employees who compromise security through honest mistakes.

‍

Key finding: Why insider attacks are harder to detect than external threats

‍

Here's the most troubling finding from the report: detecting insider attacks is genuinely difficult.

‍

37% of respondents said insider attacks are harder to detect than external ones.

‍

The challenge comes down to fundamental differences. External threats must breach perimeter defenses and often trigger security alerts through suspicious activity. Insider threats already have valid credentials and authorized access. They know where valuable data lives and which controls are weakly enforced. An external attacker scanning for vulnerabilities triggers intrusion detection immediately. But an insider downloading financial records? That might be legitimate work, or it might be theft. The technical signatures look identical.

‍

The visibility problem runs deeper than most organizations realize:

• 93% of IT and cybersecurity professionals believe unified visibility and control are critically important for detecting insider threats.
• Yet only 36% say they currently have a fully integrated insider threat solution.
• 28% rely on partially integrated tools, and 20% still use disparate systems that don't talk to each other.
  ‍

When your security tools can't communicate with each other, you get blind spots. Big ones. Even more concerning: 52% of respondents admitted they had gaps in their insider threat defenses, while nearly half (48%) believed they already had "all the necessary tools." That gap between perception and reality leaves organizations vulnerable.

‍

Organizations that successfully catch insider threats early usually combine several approaches. They deploy User and Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) platforms that learn normal behavior patterns and flag anomalies. They implement Data Loss Prevention (DLP) tools that monitor how sensitive information moves across all channels. And critically, they build a culture where employees feel comfortable reporting concerning behaviors without fear of overreaction.

‍

Key finding: Common barriers to building effective insider threat programs

‍

If insider risk is such a clear danger, why aren't more organizations addressing it properly? The report identifies several roadblocks:

• Technical challenges (39%): Integrating security tools across complex hybrid environments isn't easy. When you're dealing with multiple cloud providers, on-premises systems, and hundreds of SaaS applications, creating unified visibility becomes a genuine engineering challenge.
• Cost (31%): Budget is always limited. When you're competing for funding against ransomware defense, cloud security, and compliance requirements, insider threat programs often lose out.
• Resource and staffing limitations (27%): Security teams are already stretched thin. Adding comprehensive insider threat monitoring to an overwhelmed SOC usually means something else gets dropped, and nobody wants to make that tradeoff.
• Privacy and compliance concerns (26%): Employee monitoring creates legal and ethical complications. Organizations navigating GDPR or similar regulations face strict requirements around surveillance that can conflict with security needs.
• Lack of executive support (20%): Insider threats don't always grab executive attention until after an incident. External threats feel more immediate and easier to explain to non-technical leadership.
  ‍

The most mature insider threat programs don't treat this as purely a security initiative. They involve regular coordination between security, HR, and legal departments to ensure investigations respect both security needs and employee rights.

‍

Key finding: Why IT logs alone won't catch insider threats

‍

Here's something interesting: organizations are starting to look beyond traditional IT data to detect insider risk. IT signals alone don't tell the whole story.

• 55% of respondents said they monitor legal data such as compliance records or court filings.
• 45% use HR data to track behavioral changes or disciplinary issues.
• 43% incorporate public data sources, from social media activity to dark web monitoring.
  ‍

This multi-source approach helps security teams spot the difference between genuine accidents and potentially malicious patterns. Think about it: an employee who gets a poor performance review, starts actively job hunting on LinkedIn, and suddenly accesses files way outside their normal scope looks very different from someone who accidentally misconfigures a cloud bucket.

‍

HR can flag employees involved in contentious disputes. Legal teams can identify individuals facing lawsuits. Finance can spot unusual expense patterns. When you combine these human signals with technical monitoring, you get a much clearer picture of actual risk rather than just technical anomalies.

‍

How to build a stronger insider threat defense

‍

The data shows clearly that insider risk is growing, expensive, and hard to spot. But there are practical steps security teams can take right now:

5 essential steps to prevent insider threats
‍

1. Unify your visibility across all systems. Your endpoint security, cloud monitoring, and application controls need to share data. That doesn't mean buying everything from one vendor, but it does mean ensuring your tools communicate through APIs, SIEM integration, or security data lakes. If your DLP system can't talk to your UEBA platform, you're missing critical context about user behavior.
‍

2. Automate detection and response wherever possible. When an employee downloads 50,000 records at 2 AM during their last week before leaving the company, automated systems should freeze that access immediately. Waiting for Monday morning security reviews gives attackers a multi-day head start.
‍

3. Apply Zero Trust principles to insider activity. Stop assuming that having valid credentials equals trustworthiness. Require step-up authentication for accessing sensitive resources. Limit how easily users can move laterally between systems. Implement least-privilege access so people only have the permissions they actually need for their current work.
‍

4. Invest in employee awareness and training. Most insider incidents aren't malicious. They're mistakes made by people who don't understand the security implications of their actions. Training that uses realistic scenarios instead of generic compliance videos actually helps employees recognize risky behaviors before they cause damage.
‍

5. Create a formal insider threat response plan. Who investigates when something suspicious happens? At what point does HR get involved? When should you contact law enforcement? What are the legal boundaries around employee surveillance and termination? Answer these questions now, during calm planning sessions, not during a crisis.
‍

These steps won't eliminate insider threats completely. But they can significantly reduce how often incidents happen, how much damage they cause, and how quickly you can contain them.
‍

Warning signs: What to watch for

‍

Security teams should monitor for these behavioral and technical indicators that often show up before insider incidents:

Unusual data access happens when employees start viewing information outside their normal role. A marketing person suddenly pulling engineering documents or financial forecasts? That's worth a conversation.

Abnormal working patterns include odd hours or access at unusual times, especially when combined with other factors like an upcoming resignation or recent disciplinary action.

Large data movements to personal devices, cloud storage, or personal email accounts need verification, particularly when the information is sensitive.

Failed access attempts suggest someone is testing their privileges or trying to escalate their access. When these attempts are followed by successful access through different means, pay attention.

Security control tampering means someone is trying to disable logging, monitoring, or other security tools. Usually because they want to hide what they're doing.

Social engineering colleagues to gain unauthorized access often indicates someone is gathering resources they shouldn't have for purposes they won't explain.

‍

Bottom line: Insider threats need real attention

‍

The 2024 Insider Threat Report shows a problem that's bigger than many organizations want to admit. Nearly half of companies are dealing with six or more insider incidents every year. Costs routinely exceed $1 million. Recovery takes a week or longer for 45% of organizations. These aren't background concerns. They're active threats that deserve the same resources and attention you give to ransomware and external attacks.

‍

The takeaway for IT and security professionals is straightforward: treat insider risk like the serious security priority it is. Invest in visibility tools that actually work together. Automate what you can. Train your people. Build clear processes for when (not if) something happens.

‍

The organizations that handle insider threats well don't rely solely on sophisticated technology. They combine technical controls with a security-aware culture, real collaboration between departments, and clear procedures everyone understands. Defending against insider threats isn't about building higher walls. It's about understanding that some of your biggest risks come from people who already have keys to the building.

‍

What you can do next

‍

📊 Read the full 2024 Insider Threat Report to see complete findings and methodology

‍

🔍 Assess your current readiness: Can you detect unusual data access within 24 hours? Do your security tools actually share information with each other? Have you practiced your investigation procedures?

‍

📋 Check the frameworks from the CERT Insider Threat Center and NIST Special Publication 800-53 for guidance on building mature programs

‍

⚡ Start with what you have: Even without budget for new tools, you can improve insider threat defense by creating clear data handling policies, training employees on security awareness, and establishing regular communication between security, HR, and legal teams

‍