Enterprises account for a significant share of CSPs’ subscribers and an even larger share of their revenues. However, fraud initiated through telecom channels like SMS and voice calls has become a major issue for enterprises. Smishing and vishing attacks, which use text messaging and voice calls to trick people into revealing sensitive information, are surging.

This report published by Mobile World Live in partnership with Enea explores how mobile operators and their enterprise customers respond to mobile network threats. It highlights a gap between enterprise needs and expectations, and the network security CSPs provide.

To find out how CSPs can better secure their enterprise customers and transform the need for security into a revenue opportunity, download the full survey report.

Enterprises are being hit hard by voice and messaging fraud and expect their CSPs to take the lead in protecting them. 

• 61% of enterprise respondents said their mobile messaging fraud costs were significant, yet more than three-quarters don’t invest in SMS spam or voice scam/fraud protection. 
• Slightly more than half (51%) said they expect their telecom operator to protect them from voice and mobile messaging fraud, citing their role as more important than that of cloud providers, managed IT providers, systems integrators or direct software vendors. 
• 85% of enterprises say that security is important or extremely important for their telecoms purchasing decisions. 

 CSPs lack sufficient capabilities to meet enterprise expectations for security. 

•  Only 59% of CSPs say they have implemented a messaging firewall, and just 51% said they have implemented a signaling firewall. 
•  Less than half (46%) report adopting some threat intelligence service, essentially leaving a majority blind to new or morphing threats. 

 CSPs that prioritize security are better positioned to win enterprise business.  

• Security leaders, characterized by better capabilities, better funding, and a higher prioritization of security, are less than half as likely as the followers to have a security breach go undetected or unmitigated (12% vs 25%). 
• CSP security leaders are more likely to see security as an opportunity to generate revenues (31% vs 19%).