Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Cloud

Keys for Working with Modern MSSPs

How to determine what an MSSP can do for your organization, and the questions to ask before signing a contract.

Managed security service providers (MSSPs) are critical elements of a cybersecurity infrastructure for many organizations large and small. So what are some best practices for working with MSSPs?

As with the rest of the security industry, MSSPs are constantly evolving the services they offer and the way they work with their customers.

The first step in working with an MSSP is understanding what you need from the partnership. Maxine Holt, research director of security at Ovum, says the three basic steps in cybersecurity — prevent, detect, and respond — are where the discussion begins. In a presentation during the Cybersecurity Crash Course at Interop last week in Las Vegas, she recommended applying those three security processes to the seven stages of the Mitre ATT&CK kill chain to answer a critical question: Where do I have gaps in my coverage?

When it comes to filling those gaps, MSSPs tend to promise a lot, according to Fred Kwong, CISO at Delta Dental Plans Association, who also discussed MSSPs in a presentation at the Interop Cybersecurity Crash Course. Among the features an MSSP might offer to potential customers, he said, are 24 x 7 monitoring, qualified security pros watching your network full-time, advanced correlation between behaviors and incidents, and reduced time to detect intrusions — all at a lower cost to organizations than performing those tasks in-house.

When those features are broken into their individual functional components, the result is a significant laundry list of possible services. Kwong said that figuring out which of those tasks to contract out, and how deliverables on each are defined, are critical for defining the customer/MSSP partnership and who "owns" which part of the total cybersecurity process.

Holt said that two words should be at the top of the list during the discussion over ownership: integrate and automate. Integration is critical, she said, because even in those cases in which an MSSP will take over essentially all of a company's security functions, effective cybersecurity has to be integrated into the overall IT infrastructure.

And when a company looks for an MSSP to take over a portion of the cybersecurity function, then task can't have any functional or visibility gaps between it and the customer-owned parts of the infrastructure if it's to remain effective.

Ensure there are no functional or visibility gaps between the MSSP's duties and the customer-owned, on-premise infrastructure to ensure the outsourced function is doing the job required with the necessary level of integration with other security functions -- and at the price agreed upon in the contract.

No matter how the MSSP's services are integrated into the customer infrastructure, you can't outsource accountability, Kwong said. Regardless of the the contract language, the MSSP customer is ultimately responsible for making sure that their IT infrastructure is secure, both Kwong and Holt warned.

Related Content:

Curtis Franklin Jr. is Senior Editor at Dark Reading. In this role he focuses on product and technology coverage for the publication. In addition he works on audio and video programming for Dark Reading and contributes to activities at Interop ITX, Black Hat, INsecurity, and ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 7/13/2020
Omdia Research Launches Page on Dark Reading
Tim Wilson, Editor in Chief, Dark Reading 7/9/2020
Russian Cyber Gang 'Cosmic Lynx' Focuses on Email Fraud
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/7/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
This report describes some of the latest attacks and threats emanating from the Internet, as well as advice and tips on how your organization can mitigate those threats before they affect your business. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-19338
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-13
A flaw was found in the fix for CVE-2019-11135, in the Linux upstream kernel versions before 5.5 where, the way Intel CPUs handle speculative execution of instructions when a TSX Asynchronous Abort (TAA) error occurs. When a guest is running on a host CPU affected by the TAA flaw (TAA_NO=0), but is ...
CVE-2020-11749
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-13
Pandora FMS 7.0 NG <= 746 suffers from Multiple XSS vulnerabilities in different browser views. A network administrator scanning a SNMP device can trigger a Cross Site Scripting (XSS), which can run arbitrary code to allow Remote Code Execution as root or apache2.
CVE-2020-5766
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-13
Improper Neutralization of Special Elements used in an SQL Command ('SQL Injection') in SRS Simple Hits Counter Plugin for WordPress 1.0.3 and 1.0.4 allows a remote, unauthenticated attacker to determine the value of database fields.
CVE-2020-15689
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-13
Appweb before 7.2.2 and 8.x before 8.1.0, when built with CGI support, mishandles an HTTP request with a Range header that lacks an exact range. This may result in a NULL pointer dereference and cause a denial of service.
CVE-2019-4591
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-13
IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.6.0 and 7.6.1 does not invalidate session after logout which could allow a local user to impersonate another user on the system. IBM X-Force ID: 167451.