Co3 pulls together best practices for data loss reporting, minimizing errors in what's usually a manual process.
A startup that will officially come out of stealth mode on Wednesday has built a software-as-a-service offering for organizations to handle the mostly manual processes involved in responding to a data-loss breach.
Co3 Systems, based in Cambridge, Mass., is headed up by an executive team that hails from key security firms such as Symantec, McAfee, Counterpane, Arbor Networks, Application Security, @stake, and Verdasys. The firm's new SaaS offering encompasses event preparedness, data event analysis, liability assessment, and incident response workflow.
Most of these steps today are handled manually, and mishandling or mistakes can be costly, said Ted Julian, chief marketing officer at Co3 Systems. "[Victim organizations] are doing it themselves, with manual processes and spreadsheets," he said. Or they hire third-party forensics and incident response expert firms such as Mandiant, he said.
"The security industry is focused on pre-incident. There's very little on post-incident," Julian said.
Jon Oltsik, principal analyst with Enterprise Strategy Group, said Co3 has pulled together the tools for best practices for conducting due diligence in the aftermath of a data breach. "A lot of people make the mistake that it's all about incident response," Oltsik said of the post-breach phase. Co3's SaaS is more about the business process involved: how do you work with the legal and PR teams when your firm discovers it was breached, he said, or how do you get in touch with regulators. "All of those things have to be coordinated, and need to be managed," Oltsik said.
The SaaS offering incorporates regulatory reporting requirements, for example, and workflow management for all of the groups within an organization that have some role in the aftermath of a breach, including IT, security, privacy/compliance group, the legal department, and the finance and audit group.
Security professionals often view compliance as a burden, but it doesn't have to be that way. In this report, we show the security team how to partner with the compliance pros. Download the report here. (Free registration required.)
Published: 2015-05-27 The Btrfs implementation in the Linux kernel before 3.19 does not ensure that the visible xattr state is consistent with a requested replacement, which allows local users to bypass intended ACL settings and gain privileges via standard filesystem operations (1) during an xattr-replacement time windo...
Published: 2015-05-27 include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_extend.h in the netfilter subsystem in the Linux kernel before 3.14.5 uses an insufficiently large data type for certain extension data, which allows local users to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and OOPS) via outbound network traffic that trig...
Published: 2015-05-27 Stack-based buffer overflow in the get_matching_model_microcode function in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/microcode/intel_early.c in the Linux kernel before 4.0 allows context-dependent attackers to gain privileges by constructing a crafted microcode header and leveraging root privileges for write access to t...
Published: 2015-05-27 arch/x86/kernel/entry_64.S in the Linux kernel before 3.19.2 does not prevent the TS_COMPAT flag from reaching a user-mode task, which might allow local users to bypass the seccomp or audit protection mechanism via a crafted application that uses the (1) fork or (2) close system call, as demonstrate...
Published: 2015-05-27 The ndisc_router_discovery function in net/ipv6/ndisc.c in the Neighbor Discovery (ND) protocol implementation in the IPv6 stack in the Linux kernel before 3.19.6 allows remote attackers to reconfigure a hop-limit setting via a small hop_limit value in a Router Advertisement (RA) message.
After a serious cybersecurity incident, everyone will be looking to you for answers -- but you’ll never have complete information and you’ll never have enough time. So in those heated moments, when a business is on the brink of collapse, how will you and the rest of the board room executives respond?