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.

Analytics

8/30/2019
11:00 AM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Overburdened SOC Analysts Shift Priorities

Many SOC analysts are starting to shut off high-alert features to keep pace with the volume, new study shows.

Yet another red flag that the security operations center is burning: Most SOC analysts now say their primary role is to close alert investigations or the number of alerts as quickly as possible rather than to study and remediate security threats, according to a new survey.

Last year, some 70% of SOC analysts surveyed by CriticalStart actually said the reverse: They saw their main role as analyzing and fixing security threats and issues. But in the managed detection response firm's newest survey — published this week — only 41% say that's their priority. And most (more than 70%) handle 10 or more security alerts per day, an increase over last year, when 45% were operating at that workload.

SOCs also get hit with false-positive security alerts at a rate of 50% or higher, according to the report, and nearly 40% say when SOC analysts can't keep up with alert, they either turn off some alerting functions or hire more analysts.

"Security teams are just trying to survive without the required resources and head count. They often filter alerts using email rules to send notifications to an alert folder, where they are ignored. Some teams even turn off security-system alerting so there is no record of security events not being monitored," says Rob Davis, CEO of CriticalStart, which recently surveyed 50 SOC professionals in enterprise organizations, managed security services providers, and managed detection and response providers. "It is very common for analysts to increase the thresholds for creating security events to reduce volume."

Turning down the volume on alerts to keep up with them puts organizations at risk of a real attack, says Chris Calvert, co-founder and vice president of product strategy at Respond Software, a security automation vendor. "If I am being attacked constantly and I have real vulnerabilities to manage but only a small team, how do I prioritize? In today's environment, detection and remediation is just as important as prevention and we often don't have the budget to cover everything," he says.

This latest study is yet another in a string of recent SOC reports this year underscoring the growing problem of an overwhelming and impossible volume of security alerts to sift through for that needle in the haystack, and the lack of people to fill the seats in the SOC. CriticalStart's report shows how these stresses are leading to heavy turnover, with more than 75% seeing SOC turnover rates of more than 10%, and close to half seeing turnover rates of 10% to 25%.

A Ponemon Institute study last month revealed that more than half of IT and security pros consider their SOC inadequate to thwart security threats and some 65% were thinking of leaving their positions due to alert overload, long hours, and incomplete visibility into their IT infrastructures.

"Turnover continues to increase and retention is a major issue for companies," notes CriticalStart's Davis. "With virtually no unemployment, the best analysts are constantly recruited. Executives fear the expertise from completed security projects will walk out the door and ruin their investment in tools."

It's a vicious cycle: Much of the stress in the SOC comes from analysts surrounded by too many security tools that don't work well together or that they don't have time or resources to fully master, as more alerts bombard their screens every day. They just don't have the time or expertise to master the tools, or stay on top of the alerts these systems pump out.

"More security sensors and log sources containing more signatures of potentially malicious activity combined with exponential IT growth — and a dramatic increase in malicious attacks," Calvert explains. He says SOCs should measure the time and effort spent on false positives and automate the process where they can.

The noise and overload of tools and alerts can escalate quickly, according to Larry Ponemon, president of the Ponemon Institute. "A lot of research studies find the whole issue of interoperability and scalability is largely ignored and as result, the technologies don't actually work together, and you have more [tools] than you need," Ponemon says.

An overwhelmed SOC can result in dangerously long times to resolve and remediate an attack. Some 42% of the SOC analysts in Ponemon's report, sponsored by Devo Technology, say it takes months or years on average to resolve a hack. That mean time to resolution, as it is called, occurs at 22% of organizations in a matter of hours or days.

CriticalStart's report found that most SOC analysts (78%) take 10 or more minutes to investigate each alert they see.

Security experts recommend outsourcing some or most SOC operations to managed or cloud-based providers, training up existing SOC analysts, and automating low-level tasks.

"The SOC of the future will look very different and provide the advantages of an in-house SOC with the lower cost of outsourcing," Davis notes. "A SOC must quickly detect attacks and respond before a breach occurs. This requires resolving every alert instead of filtering or ignoring security events. If you aren't resolving every alert, then you can't detect every attack."

He says that because most alerts are common across organizations, an outsourced SOC model can tackle "known good" false positives more efficiently and cheaply.

Related Content:

Check out The Edge, Dark Reading's new section for features, threat data, and in-depth perspectives. Today's top story: "Fuzzing 101: Why Bug-Finders Still Love It After All These Years."

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
lookitup
50%
50%
lookitup,
User Rank: Apprentice
9/27/2019 | 2:48:34 AM
Re: And stopping every attack ....
Great Post! I think GoPro HERO 7 Black Friday is one of them.
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
9/3/2019 | 3:30:40 PM
And stopping every attack ....
Requires good tools (expensive) and good staff (expensive) to the C-Suite.  Couple that with total lack of understanding as to what security attacks are (invisible) and there is no driving need othire new people or retain new tools.  Hey, there servers are all up, RIGHT?   Management better get an understanding of this subject now so that burned out SOC staff does not walk out the door. 
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
Unreasonable Security Best Practices vs. Good Risk Management
Jack Freund, Director, Risk Science at RiskLens,  11/13/2019
6 Small-Business Password Managers
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  11/8/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-18986
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Pimcore before 6.2.2 allow attackers to brute-force (guess) valid usernames by using the 'forgot password' functionality as it returns distinct messages for invalid password and non-existing users.
CVE-2019-18981
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Pimcore before 6.2.2 lacks an Access Denied outcome for a certain scenario of an incorrect recipient ID of a notification.
CVE-2019-18982
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
bundles/AdminBundle/Controller/Admin/EmailController.php in Pimcore before 6.3.0 allows script execution in the Email Log preview window because of the lack of a Content-Security-Policy header.
CVE-2019-18985
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Pimcore before 6.2.2 lacks brute force protection for the 2FA token.
CVE-2019-18928
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-15
Cyrus IMAP 2.5.x before 2.5.14 and 3.x before 3.0.12 allows privilege escalation because an HTTP request may be interpreted in the authentication context of an unrelated previous request that arrived over the same connection.