Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Attacks/Breaches

4/3/2019
03:50 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Focus on Business Priorities Exposing Companies to Avoidable Cyber-Risk

Despite the growing sophistication of threats and increase compliance requirements, a high percentage of organizations are continuing to compromise their security.

A high percentage of organizations are exposed to avoidable cyber-risk because of a persisting tendency to put business interests ahead of safety, a new study by Tanium shows.

The security vendor surveyed some 500 CIOs and CISOs from companies with more than 1,000 employees about the challenges and trade-offs they face in protecting their organizations against cyberthreats.

Almost all respondents (94%) admitted to making security compromises to accommodate business priorities. Eighty-one percent, for instance, said they had on at least one occasion delayed deploying a critical security update or patch because of concerns over the potential impact to business operations. Fifty-two percent admitted to doing so on more than one occasion.

"Another common area of compromise is network segmentation," says Ryan Kazanciyan, chief technology officer at Tanium. Security practitioners often want micro-segmentation and strict device isolation to contain breach fallout, while endpoint and network teams tend to fall back to overly permissive architectures.

"As a result, the blast radius of many breaches - such as those that entail self-propagating malware - is much larger than it should be," Kazanciyan says.

A relentless pressure to keep the lights on is the most common reason security teams make these compromises: One-third of the respondents in the Tanium survey cited this when asked to describe why they sometimes held back on needed security measures.

In addition, 31% said a focus on implementing new business systems often took precedence over protecting existing ones, and 26% said the presence of legacy systems in the environment restricted their security capabilities. Nearly one in four (23%) of respondents described internal politics as one reason why they are forced to make security compromises.

Uninterrupted operations and time-to-market considerations have almost always taken precedence over security at a high-percentage of organizations. The Tanium survey results suggest little has changed on this front despite data breaches, growing compliance requirements, and increasingly sophisticated threats.

"As leaders, CIOs and CISOs face multifaceted pressures across the business to remain resilient against disruption and cyberthreats," Kazanciyan says. "They must maintain compliance with an evolving set of regulatory standards, track and secure sensitive data across computing devices, [and] manage a dynamic inventory of physical and cloud-based assets."

And they need to do all of this while also fulfilling an increasingly common executive mandate to make technology an enabler for business growth, he notes.

"But balancing these priorities often causes significant challenges and trade-offs for many business and IT leaders," Kazanciyan says. A lack of understanding about the need for resiliency among business leaders and upper management is a major factor. Nearly one in two (47%) survey respondents said they faced challenges on this front, and 40% said business units' tendency to prioritize customer-facing issues over security was a problem.

However, Tanium's survey shows that business priorities are not the only reason why security teams are hampered.

A lack of visibility across laptops, servers, virtual machines, and cloud infrastructure is also hampering the ability of security teams to make confident decisions and from operating efficiently.

Thirty-two percent of the respondents said the siloed manner in which their business units operated provided them with little of the visibility and control needed for effective security. For example, 80% admitted to occasions where a critical patch or security update that they thought had been deployed had, in fact, not been deployed across all impacted systems.

"CIOs and CISOs broadly understand how important these efforts are but run up against two key limitations: reliance on inaccurate data about the state of their systems and an inability to enact critical changes with the confidence that they can quickly identify and recover from unexpected failures," Kazanciyan says.

Many CISOs and CIOs are acutely aware of the dangers of compromising on security. Thirty-five percent expressed concern about data loss, 33% worried about a loss of customer trust, and 25% said they were worried that the security compromises they were making would make it harder for them to comply with regulatory requirements.

Related Content:

 

 

 

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop 2019. Learn from the industry's most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the Interop agenda here.

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
REISEN1955
100%
0%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
4/4/2019 | 10:31:48 AM
Invisible threat too
A very large perception not measured is that you cannot SEE a security threat or breach directly.  Customer complaints by email or letter catch an eye --- cancelled contracts do too.   These are events that anyone from staff to C-Suite can see and touch.  Threats inside the network, though, are silent and cannot be seen by most people save professionally trained staff.  The security people can see it most of the time.   But it is not a broken glass door, wall theft or missing document printed form.  So business management can walk right past it with a song in their heart, confident that those IT guys are keeping servers running, desktop solid and so forth.  As a matter of fact, they are doing it so well that we can outsource them out and save money by hiring young and dumb.  Now these chaps WILL know security, right?????    What management does not see can hurt them.
How Attackers Infiltrate the Supply Chain & What to Do About It
Shay Nahari, Head of Red-Team Services at CyberArk,  7/16/2019
US Mayors Commit to Just Saying No to Ransomware
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/16/2019
The Problem with Proprietary Testing: NSS Labs vs. CrowdStrike
Brian Monkman, Executive Director at NetSecOPEN,  7/19/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-12551
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
In SweetScape 010 Editor 9.0.1, improper validation of arguments in the internal implementation of the Memcpy function (provided by the scripting engine) allows an attacker to overwrite arbitrary memory, which could lead to code execution.
CVE-2019-12552
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
In SweetScape 010 Editor 9.0.1, an integer overflow during the initialization of variables could allow an attacker to cause a denial of service.
CVE-2019-3414
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
All versions up to V1.19.20.02 of ZTE OTCP product are impacted by XSS vulnerability. Due to XSS, when an attacker invokes the security management to obtain the resources of the specified operation code owned by a user, the malicious script code could be transmitted in the parameter. If the front en...
CVE-2019-10102
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
tcpdump.org tcpdump 4.9.2 is affected by: CWE-126: Buffer Over-read. The impact is: May expose Saved Frame Pointer, Return Address etc. on stack. The component is: line 234: "ND_PRINT((ndo, "%s", buf));", in function named "print_prefix", in "print-hncp.c". Th...
CVE-2019-10102
PUBLISHED: 2019-07-22
aubio 0.4.8 and earlier is affected by: null pointer. The impact is: crash. The component is: filterbank. The attack vector is: pass invalid arguments to new_aubio_filterbank. The fixed version is: after commit eda95c9c22b4f0b466ae94c4708765eaae6e709e.