Risk
7/11/2007
04:30 PM
50%
50%

Are You Spending Your IT Security Dollars Wisely? If You Don't Know, You're Not Alone

How do companies know they're getting their money's worth when they invest in IT security products and services? InformationWeek's upcoming 10th Annual Global Security Survey indicates that a surprising number of companies don't measure the value of their security investments at all. (Hint: it's up from last year).

How do companies know they're getting their money's worth when they invest in IT security products and services? InformationWeek's upcoming 10th Annual Global Security Survey indicates that a surprising number of companies don't measure the value of their security investments at all. (Hint: it's up from last year).It was one of the most surprising results I came across as I studied the data in preparation to write this year's security survey story, which will debut on InformationWeek.com July 14. IT budgets have always been tightly controlled; some companies won't even talk about how much they spend. But security is different. Companies have a longer leash when it comes to spending on security because no one wants to be the next company to make headlines because of a major data breach, either through lost or stolen information.

That's why the Veterans Affairs Department last year signed up SMS Inc. to a $3.7 million contract to install GuardianEdge Technologies and Trust Digital mobile encryption software on all laptops. Is that investment paying off? Hard to say because the VA has since found new ways of losing information about the men and women who've served this country. In January, an IT specialist with the VA lost an external hard drive that may have contained information on more than 1 million vets as well as non-VA physicians, and it's unclear how much of that information was encrypted. What is clear is that not all of that information was encrypted, a condition that pokes holes in the VA's efforts following the landmark theft of a VA laptop in May 2006 containing about 27 million records.

Maybe this is why not every organization measures the value of its security investments. In the 2006 Annual Global Security Survey, about half of the U.S. respondents measured value based on workers spending less time on security-related issues, while 41% used any decline in the amount of network downtime to justify security spending. Forty-percent cited better protection of customer records as an important factor in determining whether their security investments cut the muster. Yet 22% of U.S. survey respondents said they didn't measure the value at all.

Are IT security dollars that easy to come by, or have companies simply written IT security off as an exercise in futility? Be sure to check out the 10th Annual Global Security Survey next week to see how you compare with your peers.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2015-5084
Published: 2015-08-02
The Siemens SIMATIC WinCC Sm@rtClient and Sm@rtClient Lite applications before 01.00.01.00 for Android do not properly store passwords, which allows physically approximate attackers to obtain sensitive information via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-5352
Published: 2015-08-02
The x11_open_helper function in channels.c in ssh in OpenSSH before 6.9, when ForwardX11Trusted mode is not used, lacks a check of the refusal deadline for X connections, which makes it easier for remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions via a connection outside of the permitted time ...

CVE-2015-5537
Published: 2015-08-02
The SSL layer of the HTTPS service in Siemens RuggedCom ROS before 4.2.0 and ROX II does not properly implement CBC padding, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to obtain cleartext data via a padding-oracle attack, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-3566.

CVE-2015-5600
Published: 2015-08-02
The kbdint_next_device function in auth2-chall.c in sshd in OpenSSH through 6.9 does not properly restrict the processing of keyboard-interactive devices within a single connection, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct brute-force attacks or cause a denial of service (CPU consumptio...

CVE-2015-1009
Published: 2015-07-31
Schneider Electric InduSoft Web Studio before 7.1.3.5 Patch 5 and Wonderware InTouch Machine Edition through 7.1 SP3 Patch 4 use cleartext for project-window password storage, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information by reading a file.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
What’s the future of the venerable firewall? We’ve invited two security industry leaders to make their case: Join us and bring your questions and opinions!