I think that small and mid-size businesses are the most underserved in the information security market today. These companies have not paid the necessary attention to information security, and the data indicates they will pay a steep price for not doing more.
Robert Plant, writing for the Harvard Business Review on June 4, 2013, spoke very plainly and clearly on the need for the CSO in companies today. Mr. Plant in his blog writes:
“First off, if the company doesn't have a CSO and the chief executive thinks the "S" has something to do with sustainability, just fire him. If it does have a CSO and the CEO chooses to eliminate that position, do the same thing, because it's the wrong answer. While you're firing him, inform the CEO that data security is the number one critical need for U.S. corporations today, and that the CSO is kind of like the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. You wouldn't get rid of the chairman of the joint chiefs in wartime.”
While Mr. Plant is speaking of large corporations, the reality is the CEOs of smaller firms should have the same concerns as large companies when it comes to information security. It may not seem like it, but we are at war — an economic war — and the prize is the intellectual property held by companies large and small. The number of cyber attacks is on the rise and the level of effort being applied by both nation states and cyber criminals is huge. All of us in the security field have heard this before. However, there has been a real challenge in the industry to get information security the role it deserves as a critical component of enterprise risk.
As individuals get better access to the technology that enables their participation in the information age, so privacy has to be considered and regulation applied to raise standards to those that are acceptable across that society. It was interesting, therefore, to note the cultural recoil that occurred in response to the NSA’s recently discovered, and rather widespread, caller record collection (not to mention other 'PRISM' related data!) - it’s clear that this has crossed a boundary of acceptability.
This isn’t however, just a US problem. A news story recently broke in India highlighting that local law enforcement agencies had, over the past six months, compelled mobile phone companies to hand over call detail records for almost 100,000 subscribers. The requisitions originated from different sources and levels within the police force and their targets included many senior police officers and bureaucrats.
Unlike the NSA scrutiny, which although potentially unreasonable, at least appears legal, the vast majority of these data requests did not have the required formal documentation to uphold or justify the demand, yet they were fulfilled. This revelation was revealed by Gujarat’s State Director General of Police, Amitabh Pathak, and came hot on the tail of a similar story originating from New Dehli where the mobile phone records of a senior political leader, Arun Jaitley, were also acquired by a very junior law enforcement officer.
As part of my ongoing research into data privacy laws in Asia Pacific (AP), I spoke with chief information security officers (CISOs), consultants, lawyers, and governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) professionals. This is critical to gauge key decision-makers’ awareness and understanding of the ever-evolving data privacy regulations and policies across 15 different jurisdictions in the region.
Some senior people have admitted to me that their organizations have not traditionally taken data privacy issues terribly seriously within their AP operations. However, in a clear sign that this is beginning to change, GRC practitioners are starting to see increased demand for their compliance-related services from both government and business sectors, particularly since late 2012. Regardless of where you stand on this spectrum, the reality is that the awareness levels of data-related regulations – and the level of compliance required to abide by these regulations – varies widely across the region.
This should not be particularly surprising. The concept of “privacy” or “right to privacy” is relatively new in large parts of the region, and legislative environments are highly fragmented among AP countries. With drastic economic changes and technology advancement under way, many AP governments have imposed sector-based data privacy and security measures, aiming to regulate telecommunication network infrastructure and banking systems in particular.
Below are some of the broader trends we’re seeing across the region:
On Monday the Wall Street Journal ran a story on hacking back titled, “Support Grows to Let Cybertheft Victims Hack Back.” The article describes a growing desire to permit the private sector to retaliate against attackers. Being proactive is one thing, but the notion of enterprises retaliating against attackers is ludicrous. I honestly cannot understand why this topic is still in the public discourse. I thought debating this was so 2012. Legality is an issue, but so is the ability of companies to successfully conduct these types of operations without blowback.
The article explains, “… companies that experience cybertheft ought to be able to retrieve their electronic files or prevent the exploitation of their stolen information." I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but for most organizations, once the data has left your environment the chances of you retrieving it are very slim. Your data has left the building and it isn’t going to “re-spawn.” If you couldn’t prevent exfiltration of this data in the first place, what would make you think that you could prevent the subsequent exploitation of it?
For years we have talked about the requirement to make the top security and risk (S&R) role increasingly business-facing, and this is now turning into a reality. Surprisingly, however, we see an increasing number of non-IT security folk stepping up to take the CISO role, often ahead of experienced IT professionals.
These "next-gen" CISOs are commonly savvy business professionals, experienced at implementing change and evolving processes, and adept at dealing with strategies, resource plans and board-level discussions. Their placement into these S&R roles often comes as an unwelcome surprise to those that have been working within the IT security teams; however, we have to recognise that this new breed are simply filling a gap. Unfortunately, although we have talked about the professionalization of the role and the need for greater business engagement, many S&R professionals are still not ready for the leap, and this opens up an opportunity for others to steal their way in.
Make no mistake; this is a significant change in the traditional S&R professional career path.
This week Deloitte announced the acquisition of Vigilant. This is important news for several reasons. With over 14,000 consultants that specialize in information security, Deloitte is the largest and broadest of any security consultancy globally. Deloitte provides customized security solutions across a broad number of vertical industries, including financial services, aerospace, defense, retail, manufacturing, technology, communications, energy and pharmaceuticals. The company's offerings include[i]: