Welcome Guest. | Log In | Register | Membership Benefits

Report: Noncompliance Much More Costly Than Compliance

Ponemon Institute study finds average cost of not complying with security regulations and policies is more than two-and-a-half times as high as what it costs to comply

Jan 31, 2011 | 05:23 PM | 

By Kelly Jackson Higgins
Dark Reading
If you're wondering whether the cost of complying with security regulations is really worth it financially, think again, according to a new report: Noncompliance costs organizations, on average, 2.65 times more than meeting compliance rules does.

The Ponemon Institute study -- which was commissioned by Tripwire -- of 46 global firms during a 12-month period found that meeting compliance costs on average $3.5 million, while noncompliance can add up to around $9.4 million in costs including business disruption, productivity loss, revenue loss, and fines. Ponemon conducted benchmark studies of organizations in various industries (none of which were customers of Tripwire) and interviewed some 160 executives in those organizations.

Companies spent between $446,000 to more than $16 million during that period, according to the Ponemon report, with the most expensive compliance efforts being data protection and enforcement. Technologies for data protection and incident response management incurred the biggest bills.

In noncompliant scenarios, business disruption and loss of productivity were the costliest outcomes -- an average of $3.2 million and $2.4 million, respectively.

"It still costs more to be noncompliant," says Rekha Shenoy, vice president of strategy for Tripwire. "And noncompliance costs grow a lot more when companies grow," according to the report, Shenoy says.

Larry Ponemon, chairman and founder of the Ponemon Institute, said in a statement that he hopes the dollar values the report attaches to noncompliance will provide IT security and compliance professionals more ammunition for compliance initiatives in their organizations. "Companies that invest in compliance activities such as frequent audits, enabling technologies, staff training, and operational processes will find the most success in reducing risk and realize the ROI associated with preventing or reducing non-compliance costs," he said.

According to the findings in the report, organizations that run three to five internal audits per year incur the lowest per-capita compliance cost, an average of $154, whereas those firms that don't conduct in-house audits incur the highest, an average of $341. Overall, 28 percent say they don't run internal audits, and 11 percent perform more than five per year.

"The question is not should I be compliant, but how can I drive down the cost of being compliant?" says Joshua Corman, research director for the enterprise security practice at The 451 Group. "How do I reduce the cost of compliance such that I can liberate funds, time, and cycles to focus on going beyond compliance? ... An attacker knows you are compliant, and he does not care."

Ponemon measured organizations' security postures with its security effectiveness score metric, which showed that companies with the better security or with a higher score tend to be noncompliant less often than others. So the more you spend on compliance relative to the IT budget overall, the less your noncompliance costs, the report concludes.

None of the organizations in the study were free from getting hit by breaches, Tripwire's Shenoy says. "The ones with the highest noncompliance are getting breached the most," Shenoy says. "And those with a higher security effectiveness score have lower non-ompliance practices."

A big challenge for companies is managing multiple compliance programs. "They tend to struggle with multicompliance, with audit after audit," Shenoy says.

And compliance costs are different for different industries: Energy spends more than $24 million; education and research spend $6.8 million; healthcare, $8.86 million; and retail, $9.24 million.

Corman says the report's findings on the percentage of compliance to the total IT budget were surprising. According to the Ponemon report, 39 percent of the organizations spend 6 to 10 percent on compliance; 39 percent spend 11 to 15 percent; 11 percent spend 16 to 20 percent; and 7 percent spend a whopping 21 to 25 percent of their IT budgets on compliance. "That seemed high," Corman says.

A full copy of "The True Cost of Compliance" report is available here for download.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.



Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

Dark Reading encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, Dark Reading moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. Dark Reading further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
Subscribe to RSS



Security Monitoring Reports

report Fundamentals of User Activity Monitoring
Benchmarking normal activity and then monitoring for users who stray from that norm is an essential strategy for getting ahead of potential data and system breaches. But choosing the right tools is only part of the effort. Without sufficient training, efficient deployment and a good response plan, attackers could gain the upper hand.

report Does SIEM Make Sense For Your Company?
A security information and event management system serves as a repository for all the security alerts and logging systems from a firm's devices. But this can be overkill for a company that is understaffed or has overestimated its security information needs. In this report, we discuss 10 questions to ask yourself in determining whether SIEM makes sense for you--and how to pick the right system if it does.

report Monitoring Tools and Logs Make All The Difference
It's no longer a matter of "if" you get hacked, but when. In this special report, we take a look at ways to measure your security posture and the challenges that lie ahead with the emerging threat landscape.

Other reports from the Security Monitoring Tech Center:

Related Content

Security Management 2.0: Time to Replace Your SIEM?
Is it time? Are you waving the white flag? Has your first gen SIEM failed to meet expectations despite your investment? If you are questioning whether your existing product or service can get the job done, you are not alone. Read this Securosis white paper to learn how easy it can be to replace your SIEM with a next generation solution.

IT Executive Guide to Security Intelligence: Transitioning from SIEM to Total Security Intelligence
Read this whitepaper to learn how adopting a next generation SIEM solution provides security intelligence, to allow organizations to maintain comprehensive and cost-effective information security. Discover how security intelligence enables critical concerns in five key areas: Data silo consolidation, threat detection, fraud discovery, risk assessment/risk management, and regulatory compliance.

The Return on Security of QRadar: Improving Operational Efficiencies in Federal Government
In this study, IANS interviewed two Q1 Labs customers using QRadar to assess their Return On Security (ROS). The two customers were providers of service to the U.S. Government and had highly secure environments dealing with extremely sensitive data. The data yielded from the interviews showed substantial benefit to the organizations for the cost, both in money and staff time.

SANS What Works Webcast: Worldwide Retailer Boosts Privacy with Security Intelligence
A leading retailer with stores worldwide was seeking a more innovative tool to protect customer privacy and intellectual property. PCI compliance mandated log collection, but a vast number of different tools generated an overwhelming amount of log data, making it difficult for the small security team to review it effectively. The solution the company chose had to fit into a diverse network, provide intelligent reporting and offer a centralized management console.

Learn How Security Intelligence Can Help Combat WikiLeaks Stuxnet and Advanced Threats
WikiLeaks and Stuxnet have illustrated a few fundamental IT security issues that have underscored the need for Total Security Intelligence to counter advanced threats and to detect anomalous behavior. See how government and commercial organizations are using QRadar as an integral component of their IT security program to identify emerging threats based on context and situational awareness.




Featured Webcasts
Featured Whitepapers
Featured Reports