Perimeter
6/1/2012
09:21 AM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%
Repost This

Systems Are Not Compliant; Organizations Are Compliant

IT cannot make your organization compliant

Computer systems do not operate in a vacuum. They are neither isolated from people, disconnected from other computers, nor are they sealed off from the outside world. Rather, computer systems are tools your staff uses to run your organization. Companies are operated by people using their tools to perform tasks, create products, and provide services.

Car manufacturers and auto service departments cannot make you a good driver. Buying a high-tech kitchen will not make you a great chef, and buying a smart phone does not make you smarter. The car, oven, and phone are only tools. How well, or how poorly, you use these tools is determined by your willingness and attitude. It’s the same with the technology tools you use in your business.

“Compliance” is defined by the laws, regulations, and rules an organization meets, so compliance is more about how things are done, than which tools are used. Of course, compliance requires the appropriate technology tools, but none of them alone can make your company compliant.

When we discuss security and compliance assessments with potential new clients, usually the first thing they do is introduce us to the person in charge of IT. The problem is, the head of IT is rarely in charge of the business processes within the organization or the management of non-technical staff. These aspects of the business, however, are crucial to compliant operations.

IT must provide secure, usable systems. They must fine tune these tools to help an organization maintain appropriate privacy, risk management, accountability, and protection. The tools must be accessible in every way necessary for effective business operations.

Unfortunately, too many (including some in IT leadership) believe a common myth: that making the tools secure creates sufficient security and compliance. This myth is sometimes a result of misunderstanding compliance, and other times it is merely a convenient excuse for handing off work by management. To be candid, many embrace this myth to avoid dealing with the real issues. “Make our systems secure,” is an easy order for a busy leader to make, but extremely often, it is a flawed decision.

System security alone will never bring a company into compliance with applicable requirements. Employees must also operate in compliant ways, must follow secure processes, and have the discipline to avoid unsecure and non-compliant shortcuts.

Technical system security alone does not make an organization compliant with any law, regulation, or rules. It is only one element in an organization’s successful compliance program.

Glenn S. Phillips, the president of Forte' Incorporated, works with business leaders who want to leverage technology and understand risks within. He is the author of the book Nerd-to-English and you can find him on twitter at @NerdToEnglish.

Glenn works with business leaders who want to leverage technology and understand the often hidden risks awaiting them. The Founder and Sr. Consultant of Forte' Incorporated, Glenn and his team work with business leaders to support growth, increase profits, and address ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
MROBINSON000
50%
50%
MROBINSON000,
User Rank: Apprentice
6/12/2012 | 12:15:32 PM
re: Systems Are Not Compliant; Organizations Are Compliant
Indeed, many IT people believe
that making the tools secure creates sufficient security and compliance. Security
training has to extend beyond a statement of policies to a new hire and the
annual training. That means everyone has to have a role, from management to
admin staff. You can find more details on this topic here: http://blog.securityinnovation...
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2008-3277
Published: 2014-04-15
Untrusted search path vulnerability in a certain Red Hat build script for the ibmssh executable in ibutils packages before ibutils-1.5.7-2.el6 in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 6 and ibutils-1.2-11.2.el5 in Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) 5 allows local users to gain privileges via a Trojan Horse p...

CVE-2010-2236
Published: 2014-04-15
The monitoring probe display in spacewalk-java before 2.1.148-1 and Red Hat Network (RHN) Satellite 4.0.0 through 4.2.0 and 5.1.0 through 5.3.0, and Proxy 5.3.0, allows remote authenticated users with permissions to administer monitoring probes to execute arbitrary code via unspecified vectors, rela...

CVE-2011-3628
Published: 2014-04-15
Untrusted search path vulnerability in pam_motd (aka the MOTD module) in libpam-modules before 1.1.3-2ubuntu2.1 on Ubuntu 11.10, before 1.1.2-2ubuntu8.4 on Ubuntu 11.04, before 1.1.1-4ubuntu2.4 on Ubuntu 10.10, before 1.1.1-2ubuntu5.4 on Ubuntu 10.04 LTS, and before 0.99.7.1-5ubuntu6.5 on Ubuntu 8.0...

CVE-2012-0214
Published: 2014-04-15
The pkgAcqMetaClearSig::Failed method in apt-pkg/acquire-item.cc in Advanced Package Tool (APT) 0.8.11 through 0.8.15.10 and 0.8.16 before 0.8.16~exp13, when updating from repositories that use InRelease files, allows man-in-the-middle attackers to install arbitrary packages by preventing a user fro...

CVE-2013-4768
Published: 2014-04-15
The web services APIs in Eucalyptus 2.0 through 3.4.1 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service via vectors related to the "network connection clean up code" and (1) Cloud Controller (CLC), (2) Walrus, (3) Storage Controller (SC), and (4) VMware Broker (VB).

Best of the Web