## 4 Results
### Characterization of Risks Arising from Industry 4.0
#### 4.3.9 Technological Risks
Cyberattacks [11; 39; 59; 70], lack of data protection [2; 122; 29; 35; 122], information leaks [59; 78], and deficiencies in technological infrastructure [112; 115; 133] can pose a significant threat, exposing the data and information of an entire nation. It is essential to invest in security systems that prevent attacks on the national technological infrastructure as well as attacks on defense systems, which can compromise national operations. Additionally, it is crucial to protect against data leaks, whether governmental or not, which expose sensitive information and compromise public security [136; 137]. To mitigate these risks, a significant investment in public security systems is necessary [136; 137]. Only then will it be possible to minimize these threats and protect national security in the context of Industry 4.0. Another approach that can be considered in the technological dimension is quantum risks, which are associated with quantum computing and quantum cryptography. For this reason, security systems must be active and efficient to prevent cryptographic algorithms from being broken, which could compromise the generated data [138; 139]. Additionally, quantum cryptography systems are costly, and their implementation can be complex [138; 140], posing a major challenge for data security and a high-cost risk for these technologies [11; 64; 84; 116]. Finally, according to [138; 139; 140; 141], quantum computing and cryptography, besides having a high implementation cost, are highly complex, making it difficult to find qualified personnel to operate these technologies. Therefore, both national security risks and quantum computing risks should be considered if an industry works with complex security systems and large volumes of data, requiring effective strategies for implementation. Once understood, the risks were grouped based on the occurrences of sources and their references in order to weigh each of these risks according to their frequency, as presented in Table 8. The risks were classified and organized with the assistance of QSR Nvivo(r) version 10 software. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Dimension** & **Code** & **Digital Risk** & **Source** & **Ref.** & **(\%)** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Environmental Risks} & AR1 & Risks related to Climate Change & 4 & 4 & **3.39\%** \\  & AR2 & High Energy Consumption Risk & 5 & 5 & **4.24\%** \\  & AR3 & Risk of High Natural Resource Consumption & 5 & 5 & **4.24\%** \\  & AR4 & Risk of Natural Disasters & 4 & 4 & **3.39\%** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Cultural Risks} & CR1 & Risk of Lack of Trust & 2 & 2 & **1.69\%** \\  & CR2 & Risk of Lack of Digital Culture & 2 & 2 & **1.69\%** \\ \cline{1-1}  & CR3 & Risk of Customer Acceptance & 6 & 6 & **5.08\%** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Grouping of Digital Risks based on Source Occurrence and References. It is observed that the Technological Risks (TR) dimension presented the highest number of risks in its categorization, with 13 mapped risks. Next, we have the Human Risks (HR) and Organizational Risks (OR) dimensions, with six risks each. Following them, the Environmental Risks (ER) dimension with four risks, followed by the Cultural Risks (CR), Economic Risks (EC), political-legal risks (PL), and social risks (SR) dimensions with three risks each. Finally, we have the Educational Risks (ED) dimension with two risks, totaling 43 digital risks. The weighting of these risks occurs due to their frequency; the higher the frequency, the more important the risk becomes and, consequently, should be minimized as soon as identified. In this context, it is observed that the risk of cyberattacks is the most addressed in the literature, considered the most critical, followed by the risk of high investment and implementation costs. Risks considered less harmful, according to the literature, include the risk of lack of trust, lack of digital culture, lack of understanding of the resources and limitations of new technologies, inability to interpret data, organizational changes