In the story of Stanley Rifkin, we see how much damage can be done by misinterpreting our need for security. Such big coups, like Stanley Rifkin's one of over 10 million dollars, are of course rare, but they cause great damage, which we naturally want to avoid. Who knows who is being robbed at this moment?
Perhaps we are not even aware of it right now. All the more we should arm ourselves here together to protect ourselves successfully.

The problem grows

Many companies have had attacks of any kind on their business in the last 12 months. On average, half of the companies have been financially affected. This problem evokes a division of solutions, but these commercial solutions are not designed for incredibly creative attacks, like the one by Stanley Rifkin. The products usually only protect against digital and sloppy attacks (better known as the "script kiddies"). The "Script Kiddies" can only use other ready-made programs due to a lack of skills and can only modify them slightly or not at all.
The big threat lies in more professional scammers or social engineers, who act very target-oriented. The professional attackers work on the quality rather than the quantity of their attacks. Social engineers focus on the weakest link in the chain and therefore attack one link in a targeted manner rather than the entire chain, which would of course be remarkable if it were a higher quality attack. It is therefore important for all companies to invest more money in security instead of a new coffee machine.

Which link in the chain is the weakest?

Data that is not supplied with energy is not a problem per se because it cannot be accessed. This link in the chain is "secure".

Breaking into locked buildings is in itself also difficult without the right equipment for the problem. Lock = crowbar; electronic locks = transponder, tools to bypass. So this link is also secure.

During the Meaple Leaf theft from the Bode Museum in Berlin (March 27, 2017), an Arab clan in Berlin stole a Meaple Leaf coin weighing approximately 100 kg (material value: approx. 3.8 million euros). The four perpetrators consist of three thieves and an employee of the security company from the Bode-Museum. The coin was never found, although it is assumed that the coin was dismembered and sold. The security employee was an old school friend of one of the thieves and informed the thieves about a broken window that is not connected to the alarm system. Through this window, the perpetrators could enter and steal the coin. Source

The weakest link was thus the security employee, i.e. a human being. In order to circumvent the security measures, a person of trust was involved or bribed. Social engineers can try to deceive the trusted third party in order to maximize profits. Such deceptions are very valuable for social engineers, since there is no technology to prevent this. Only our exchange here can help us learn from the mistakes of others. So let's learn together.
@unbiasedwriter Thank you for your motivation!