## 8 Conclusions  
The realities of threats have evolved into both technologies as well as wider policies towards managing threats. Protection of data, as seen in this paper, is the reason why IDPS systems have come into force. The ever-changing demographics of the internet invite hackers and malicious actors who are getting cleverer and using technology to try and bypass the good systems the world is trying to put in place to protect its data. GDPR and cybersecurity models are platforms in which compliant standards are put in place for countries to implement and SME businesses to feel safe in an environment that is structured and has a process. However, this can only be met if the right people through education and communication put these processes and procedures in place. As for the devices in the market, hybrid solutions and affordable devices need to be at a balance on how our data are managed and kept safe within the SME market for those in the safety of the office environment and a hybrid solution working its way into the home environment as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic shift of working. The study showed the comparisons between Cisco, SNORT and pfSense. There were three different IDS, and their features were compared. It was concluded that whilst SNORT and pfSense were free to use from the OpenSource Market, it required a certain level of expertise to implement and embed the rules into an SME business solution. It was also noted that Cisco, due to the company's engineering expertise and its position as a market leader in the industry, was able to embed these free rules and use them to their advantage. For an SME business, this outcome, although bearing an upfront cost to the business, shows a more feasible and working method towards showing compliance and GDPR in its infrastructure through the usage of Cisco IDS. Further, the models and algorithms used are automatically updated through a Cisco device provided a subscription model is taken. The study showed that Vendor Suppliers have a better model in place to provide their SME customers with a balance of highly skilled expertise including highly comprehensive technology in order to find the balance of securing their data. This balance is shown in the monthly costs to the SME customers and the infrastructure of how these devices get updated and keep on securing clients' data. Machine learning approaches such as Signature-based models can only detect attacks that are known whereas Anomaly-based systems are able to detect unknown attacks. Anomaly-based IDS makes it possible to detect attacks whose signatures are not included in rule files. Unfortunately, due to the maturity of Anomaly-based IDS, the costs are still very high to run and it requires computing power that is unrealistic in our developing environment. Anomaly-based IDS, whilst still in its infancy, also requires a deeper analysis and future study. Alternatively, proposals that are feasible and affordable need to be addressed in the near future in the field of IDS with confidence. Therefore, it is crucial for SMEs to also understand how Machine Learning plays an important role in the detection of zero-day attacks. However, this does come with a cost. Understanding this cost is important for SMEs to be aware and thus understand the need to invest in their IT infrastructure plus invest in the people who are supporting their business. For future work, it may be useful to compare SNORT and pfSense experiments and their simulations, using a similar controlled setup within the same environment of the SME, for example, in the office environment or fully from the home environment. This will provide perspectives on better comparisons and relative conclusions based on this study rather than in the disruption of the global pandemic that was experienced in 2020. As it stands, businesses and organisations, with the help of government policies and processes, will use this balancing act to combat hackers, malicious actors and their bots and manage the best they can to stay ahead of the game.