So far I have focused on the Core Concepts of security, and how they are the basic building blocks of a security programme.  Well, – and to continue the cliched architectural analogy – these 4 things are the foundations on which those building blocks sit;

1. Management Buy-In / Culture – Hah, weren’t expecting that, were you!?  At least 3 of my posts have placed the vast majority of the responsibility – for everything from PCI compliance to customer service – firmly on the shoulders of the CEO (or equivalent).

Unless your company IS a security company of some sort, security is an expense, and whether or not that expense is seen as a business enabler (which it is) depends on the CEO’s attitude towards it.

Whether you’re starting an assessment at your client’s site, trying to implement a security program at your current employer, or interviewing for a job as a internal auditor, asking what the CEO’s attitude is toward security will determine the difference between success, and banging your head against the wall.

It may well be your JOB to change the CEO’s attitude toward security, if so, you’d better have a VERY good argument, and it had better involve making, or saving a ton a money (or making them look good …or both).

2. Policies & Procedures – Amazing how many people groan at this, and even security professionals cringe at the ‘paperwork’ they have to troll through.

That’s a shame really, because without that paperwork, you will never HAVE security. It’s your company’s instruction manual for how to do what you do, properly, responsibly, and securely.  Anyone who’s put together a chest of drawers from Ikea knows exactly what I mean; maybe, and I mean MAYBE, you could work it out for yourself, but how much more painful would that be?  It’s bad enough WITH the instructions!

Your policies and procedures let all employees know what to do, and as importantly, what NOT to do.  It’s enough that the thieves want to steal your data, why make things worse by not preventing your own employees from giving it away!?

3. Governance – As I have mentioned in previous articles, few phrases in security are perceived to be more ambiguous, open to interpretation, or complicated.

Wikipedia says; “Information Technology Governance is a subset discipline of corporate governance focused on information technology (IT) systems and their performance and risk management.”  It also says; “IT governance systematically involves everyone: board members, executive management, staff and customers. It establishes the framework used by the organization to establish transparent accountability of individual decisions, and ensures the traceability of decisions to assigned responsibilities.”

I can simplify this to; “IT Governance is the business side and the IT side having meaningful conversations.”  Group hug anyone?

It does not have to be complicated, it just has to be appropriate.  You don’t have to hire additional people to run it, you just have to assign the tasks, responsibilities, and accountability.  You don’t have to follow its decisions rigidly, all businesses have an exception processes (usually informal, and often consists of someone very high on the business side telling you to do something anyway).

IT, and especially IT security, are often seen as roadblocks to the business, and circumvented where possible.  The IT departments themselves are often just as much to blame for this.  IT’s job is to help the business do something right the first time, and they can only do this if they are in on the plans from the beginning.

4. Education & Training – While this is closely linked to policy and procedure, I’ve broken this out separately because of its importance.  You simply can’t expect non-security experts to keep up with the latest threats all by themselves, it’s not their job.  In the same way that I do not keep up with changes in the tax codes (that’s my account’s job), or the latest in social media advertising (that’s marketing’s job), everyone else relies on us to tell them what they need to know.

This training and ongoing education cannot become marginalised, and must be kept fresh and interesting.

If your security programme is not where you want it to be, or you are frustrated at the lack of progress, there is a very good chance that one or all of these foundations is missing.

I’m not saying you can’t hope to make ANY progress, but it will be needlessly inefficient, time consuming, and expensive.  Not to mention much harder to maintain.  I have only ever seen organisations achieve Business As Usual security when all 4 of these foundations is in place.

I will be individually expanding on the 6 Security Core Concepts, and putting them into context with these foundations.  Eventually I hope to provide more specific guidance on how to take this theory and put it practical use, but it’s time for dinner…

[If you liked this article, please share! Want more like it, subscribe!]

Some time ago I gave a presentation on BrightTalk titled ‘Insecurity Through Technology: Back to Basics‘ with the premise that the uncontrolled purchase of security technology to satisfy a perceived need may actually INCREASE your risk (go to Downloads if you just want the presentation).

Despite the crayon-esque diagrams, and the majority focus on PCI, I wanted to expand upon this concept in light of my current focus on simplifying security into “core concepts”, “appropriate / proportional security”, and “business-first”.

PCI lends itself as the perfect example of how a perceived need for technology can result in some very poor purchasing decisions.  Just look through the 12 sections of the PCI DSS and you may, in some form – and if you’re very unlucky – need ALL of the following; firewalls / routers, encryption, anti-virus, web application firewall, access control mechanisms, physical security measures, logging mechanism, vulnerability scanning, penetration testing, wireless scanning, file integrity monitoring, and a ton of ‘paperwork’.

All too often budgets are spent on items such as these at the beginning of a compliance project instead of when, and IF it’s really necessary. A lot goes into a compliance before you should be buying anything other than expert guidance or an education series.

The problem is on both sides of the sales process. The salesperson only knows how to sell either what they are being asked for, or more usually, as much as they possibly can. The purchaser has probably not done their proper due diligence and is asking the wrong questions. The best way to resolve this is if at least one side of the equation is aware of the The 6 Security Core Concepts, and follows the established good practice for the institution of a security program.

Analogy; If your doctor tells you you’re going to require an operation, you will of course learn all you can about the procedure. You may even become something of an authority in your condition (to laymen anyway). What you will NOT do is try to perform the operation yourself. Why would you treat cybersecurity any differently if you’re not an expert?

Know enough to ask the right questions, then let the experts take over. How do I…

  • choose the right technology?
  • ensure it can be integrated with current processes?
  • manage and monitor it?
  • measure it?
  • show the benefit to senior leadership?
  • …and so on…

If new technology is not properly configured, baselined, monitored, and maintained, you have added another potential vulnerability to your infrastructure. Any appliance is just another hardened server running an application of some sort, and should be treated the same way as the ones you build yourself.

Also, the more data you receive the more important baselining and tuning becomes, as you don’t want the important stuff to be obscured under layers of false positives. I do not believe there is room for Big Data analysis in security (per Don’t Get Me Started on ‘Big Data’), so integration of new technology with less-is-more security processes is paramount.

This has been, and will continue to be a theme throughout my blogs; 1) don’t buy anything until you know why you need it, 2) install nothing in production until you have figured out how to use and manage it, and 3) integrate all processes around it with a single overarching operations centre.

The threat landscape is intimidating enough without making things easier for the bad guys.

[If you liked this article, please share! Want more like it, subscribe!]

In my White Paper on Selecting the Right QSA, I liken security to the law, in that it is becoming increasingly complicated, specialised, and inaccessible to businesses too small to afford in-house expertise. Unless you’re Fortune/FTSE 100, this is most likely your business.

I also introduce these core concept in the form of a highly artistic and creative Word table (what’s the punctuation for irony?).

With the plethora (one for you Three Amigos fans) of regulations, enforcement bodies, and good practice standards out there, it’s no surprise organisations are stuck in the mode of analysis paralysis. Every requirement for data protection cares only for their specific data type / jurisdiction / use / retention etc, so who is supposed to make sense of this for a business that just wants to sell their widgets?

Unfortunately, only the business concerned can put the necessary commercial perspective on this. However, seeing as ALL security boils down to the same core concepts or common denominators, this is likely easier than you think. Yes, you may still need professional help, but if all you are doing is talking about your business goals, you can leave the security part up to your consultant.

In my experience, there are only 6 security program core concepts:

1. Risk Assessment (RA) & Business Impact Analysis (BIA) – If you can’t (in some form) qualify/quantify your business risks related to your sensitive data, and then determine an estimated cost-of-loss related to data theft or unavailability, how will you know how much to spend on security? Put simply; if the cost of security outweighs the value of the data, don’t do it (this includes compliance). This does NOT mean you should do nothing at all, it just means you need to re-evaluate how you perform some of your business functions. The first question is not “How do I protect it?”, it’s “Do I need it?”

2. Security Control Selection & Implementation – The RA, done correctly, will show you where you can make improvements in your security posture. This does not necessarily involve capital expenditure – which should always be the LAST resort – it can be something as simple as destroying every instance of redundant data. Regardless, at some point you will probably purchase technology, but even here you should be careful (In Security, Technology is Always the Last Resort) and ensure that this new technology meets all of the business needs defined in the RA.

3. Security Management Systems – There’s not much point putting security controls in place if you don’t manage them properly to keep them in place. This is where standards like ISO 2700X come into play. This includes the day-to-day procedures used to maintain the operational aspect of your security infrastructure. Obviously this will vary dramatically by organisation; from a simple check-list for your corner sandwich shop, to a full time job for larger more complex organisations. The trick is doing only what’s appropriate without going overboard.

4. Governance & Change Control – Ask 100 people what Governance is, and you’ll get 105 different answers. I believe governance provides a function that trumps all others; it allows the business side of an organisation to talk to the IT side in the same language. Business: “I want this new functionality.”, IT: “Sure, but do it this way.” is the perfect conversation. IT, and especially IT security, are typically seen as roadblocks, but this is just a symptom of immature Governance processes. As for change control, that’s just common sense. If things don’t change, the only increase in security risk is from external sources. The threat landscape changes almost daily, why make things worse by screwing up internally as well?

5. Incident Response (IR) & Disaster Recovery (DR) – Fairly self-explanatory; what’s the point of being in business if you don’t intend staying in business? For example; if you are an e-comm company, you should know from the RA what your maximum downtime is, and both your security controls and IR & DR processes need to fit according.

6. Business Continuity Management (BCM) & Business As Usual (BAU) – You may ask why this is broken out from IR & DR. I do this because BCP and BAU are more related to the business side of the table, and IR & DR are on the IT side. IT never leads, IT enables, it’s the business side that needs to lay down the plans for staying in business, as well as how to do so efficiently, and cost effectively.

I know its a bold statement, but if you follow these core concepts, it won’t matter the compliance regime, the data type, of even the type / location you’re business is in, you’ll be covered …mostly. These are the concepts on which I founded Core Concept Security, Ltd.

Yes, this is a lot of work, and the up-front costs in both capital and resource terms can be significant, but it’s a damned sight cheaper than the cost of non-compliance, fines, and particularly; being breached. In the extreme, what if it’s the difference between you being in business at all?

As the Americans say, it’s a no-brainer.

[If you liked this article, please share! Want more like it, subscribe!]