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.

Endpoint

10/8/2019
11:30 AM
Steve Zurier
Steve Zurier
Slideshows
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

7 Considerations Before Adopting Security Standards

Here's what to think through as you prepare your organization for standards compliance.
Previous
1 of 8
Next

ISO 27001. PCI DSS. GDPR. When it comes to business and security standards, it's easy to get lost in the alphabet soup of acronyms.

How can you discern which ones are right for your organization? Start by asking some high-level questions as to what you hope to accomplish by adopting them – and how adhering to standards can help your growth, says Khushbu Pratap, a senior principal analyst at Gartner who covers risk and compliance.

"The most important questions to ask [are]: Are your customers asking for it, and do your stakeholders think a particular standard is important?" says Pratap.

Assuming the answers are yes, there are additional factors to think through before moving ahead with a strategy for compliance. The seven practical tips outlined in this feature will help. Heavily regulated organizations typically have special teams that work on these standards, but even for them, use this list as a chance to take a step back and better target your standards compliance and certification teams.

 

Steve Zurier has more than 30 years of journalism and publishing experience, most of the last 24 of which were spent covering networking and security technology. Steve is based in Columbia, Md. View Full Bio

Previous
1 of 8
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
MarkL199
50%
50%
MarkL199,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/23/2019 | 4:59:45 AM
ISO 27001 used as a Framework
I agree with the article in that you really need to understand the business drivers, but I also think that a vast majority of business would be best served using ISO 27001 as their Information Security Management System. This gives the framework for their security program as a whole, from the creation of policies to performing compliance activities. I would not even consider certification, unless there is an overwhelming need. The next decision is whether to use the controls contained within ISO 27001, or take the opportunity to swap out more suitable controls (e.g. NIST, CIS20, ISF, PCI DSS etc.). The good thing about ISO 27001 is that it does give a wide coverage of controls across a security program, such as covering non IT-related area's most other controls don't (e.g. policies, people, physical etc.) However, ISO 27001 can be a bit high level and not detailed enough, even if using ISO 27002. This is where tailoring your controls either by using say NIST SP 800-53 across your enterprise, or specific requirements (e.g. PCI DSS). I personally like to use ISO27001 as the framework and also utilise the non-tech controls contained within. Then I would bring in more specific controls to cover the technical side, cloud specific, privacy, IoT etc. My concern about going straight to NIST is that although they are excellent controls, they are designed for information systems and therefore focus on the IT security side and not really a holistic information security program. Lack resources, time, or just need to get some technical controls in fast? I would go with CIS20 controls as they are very easy to follow and lead you through a three stage maturity process.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/10/2020
Researcher Finds New Office Macro Attacks for MacOS
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  8/7/2020
Healthcare Industry Sees Respite From Attacks in First Half of 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  8/13/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: It's a technique known as breaking out of the sandbox kids.
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-20383
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
ABBYY network license server in ABBYY FineReader 15 before Release 4 (aka 15.0.112.2130) allows escalation of privileges by local users via manipulations involving files and using symbolic links.
CVE-2020-24348
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
njs through 0.4.3, used in NGINX, has an out-of-bounds read in njs_json_stringify_iterator in njs_json.c.
CVE-2020-24349
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
njs through 0.4.3, used in NGINX, allows control-flow hijack in njs_value_property in njs_value.c. NOTE: the vendor considers the issue to be "fluff" in the NGINX use case because there is no remote attack surface.
CVE-2020-7360
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
An Uncontrolled Search Path Element (CWE-427) vulnerability in SmartControl version 4.3.15 and versions released before April 15, 2020 may allow an authenticated user to escalate privileges by placing a specially crafted DLL file in the search path. This issue was fixed in version 1.0.7, which was r...
CVE-2020-24342
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
Lua through 5.4.0 allows a stack redzone cross in luaO_pushvfstring because a protection mechanism wrongly calls luaD_callnoyield twice in a row.