Analytics

5/31/2018
09:00 AM
Kelly Sheridan
Kelly Sheridan
Slideshows
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

6 Security Investments You May Be Wasting

Not all tools and services provide the same value. Some relatively low-cost practices have a major payoff while some of the most expensive tools make little difference.
Previous
1 of 7
Next

(Image: Wutzkohphoto via Shutterstock)

(Image: Wutzkohphoto via Shutterstock)

Security budgets are growing and so are security costs, with drivers coming from all sides: data breaches that are more frequent and more expensive to remediate; preventative technologies that are costly to buy and maintain; and talent that remains both pricey and hard to find.

On a positive note, businesses today are better at understanding risks and allocating more of their attention and IT budgets (23%) to cybersecurity. Enterprises, as reported in new Kaspersky Lab research, believe their security budgets will grow by 15% over the next three years, as do businesses with less than 50 employees. SMBs are about the same, anticipating 14% growth in security spend by 2021, according to Kaspersky Lab.

But despite larger budgets, security teams still struggle to make ends meet. Increasingly advanced tools are expensive to buy and, oftentimes, more expensive to run. Enterprise victims allocate most ($193,000, on average) of their post-breach spending toward improving software and infrastructure, and SMBs hit with breaches spend $15,000 on the same expense, according to Kaspersky.

Maintaining advanced technology is also a challenge due to the growth of complex infrastructure and lack of both organizational and technical ability to manage it. More than one-third (34%) of organizations say the intricacy of IT systems is driving investments; the same amount say improving security expertise is a motivation to spend, according to Kaspersky.

The reason: many security technologies simply aren't worth their cost without the right resources to implement and run them, observes Tom Parker, group technology officer at Accenture Security. Oftentimes what Parker describes as "comfort purchasing" makes companies feel good about the money they spend on new technology and lures them into feeling confident they're making the right moves.

"The biggest concern I have, honestly, is ... [about the] false sense of security organizations often get by buying technology and not having a well-considered view of how that technology is performing in their environment," Parker adds.

Here, experts point to security technologies and processes that require more investment to be worth their cost. Not all tools and services provide the same value. Some relatively low-cost practices can have a major payoff; some of the most expensive tools make little difference.

Are there any components to your security strategy you felt haven't been worth their high cost? Feel free to add to the conversation in the comments.

 

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance & Technology, where she covered financial ... View Full Bio

Previous
1 of 7
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
The Year in Security 2018
This Dark Reading Tech Digest explores the biggest news stories of 2018 that shaped the cybersecurity landscape.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises Are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises Are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Data breach fears and the need to comply with regulations such as GDPR are two major drivers increased spending on security products and technologies. But other factors are contributing to the trend as well. Find out more about how enterprises are attacking the cybersecurity problem by reading our report today.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-6691
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-23
phpwind 9.0.2.170426 UTF8 allows SQL Injection via the admin.php?m=backup&c=backup&a=doback tabledb[] parameter, related to the "--backup database" option.
CVE-2018-19019
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-22
A type confusion vulnerability exists when processing project files in CX-Supervisor (Versions 3.42 and prior). An attacker could use a specially crafted project file to exploit and execute code under the privileges of the application.
CVE-2019-6260
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-22
The ASPEED ast2400 and ast2500 Baseband Management Controller (BMC) hardware and firmware implement Advanced High-performance Bus (AHB) bridges, which allow arbitrary read and write access to the BMC's physical address space from the host (or from the network in unusual cases where the BMC console u...
CVE-2018-19011
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-22
CX-Supervisor (Versions 3.42 and prior) can execute code that has been injected into a project file. An attacker could exploit this to execute code under the privileges of the application.
CVE-2018-19013
PUBLISHED: 2019-01-22
An attacker could inject commands to delete files and/or delete the contents of a file on CX-Supervisor (Versions 3.42 and prior) through a specially crafted project file.