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.

Comments
What We Talk About When We Talk About Risk
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
REISEN1955
50%
50%
REISEN1955,
User Rank: Ninja
7/11/2018 | 2:59:02 PM
Re: Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy
Small Business - general rule is that a small business (I guess 50 emps or less) can live for only 2 weeks following a major crash of systems.  I supported such shops and always had a backup-restore plan in working place and used it on several critical cases inclusive of server drive failure and ransomware attack.   Measure THAT!!!   (Lesson - always ask for a large check for services in such cases).
jonesj26
50%
50%
jonesj26,
User Rank: Author
7/11/2018 | 1:44:13 PM
Re: Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy
Thanks, Christian.  You're absolutely right about this problem being discussed for some time now.  Unfortunately, I don't believe it's broadly recognized yet as a foundational Achilles Heel for our profession.  Hopefully we can elevate it within the minds of our colleagues and accelerate the evolution of our profession.

Cheers

Jack
Christian Bryant
50%
50%
Christian Bryant,
User Rank: Ninja
7/11/2018 | 11:43:29 AM
Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy
These are excellent points - in fact, the very list of risks you noted that are typically raised when asked are the ones I tend to see in initial project documents that relate to security.

Cybersecurity Risk Taxonomy (A. M. Rea-Guaman, T. San Feliu, J. A. Calvo-Manzano, I. D. Sanchez-Garcia) is a paper published under the International Conference on Software Process Improvement, 2017. It covers an interesting deep dive into studies published from 1990 to 2017. They found "132 papers and some of them mention some risk taxonomies within the scope of IT (information technologies) cybersecurity, although only five primary elements were selected, identifying the main risk taxonomies."

The perspectives covered include Asset, Attacks, Service, Business and External, with papers covering a wide range of combinations of taxonomy descriptions. Some of the items in the taxonomies include Business objects and dynamics models, Social engineering, Systems and technology failures, Failed internal processes, Resource or target information and Actions of people.

Your example InfoSec risks make sense upon more reading of studies like the one above, which is a great piece indicating this conversation of risk in InfoSec has been going on for some time.


97% of Americans Can't Ace a Basic Security Test
Steve Zurier, Contributing Writer,  5/20/2019
TeamViewer Admits Breach from 2016
Dark Reading Staff 5/20/2019
How a Manufacturing Firm Recovered from a Devastating Ransomware Attack
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  5/20/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-5798
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Lack of correct bounds checking in Skia in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform an out of bounds memory read via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5799
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect inheritance of a new document's policy in Content Security Policy in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5800
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Insufficient policy enforcement in Blink in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to bypass content security policy via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5801
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect eliding of URLs in Omnibox in Google Chrome on iOS prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page.
CVE-2019-5802
PUBLISHED: 2019-05-23
Incorrect handling of download origins in Navigation in Google Chrome prior to 73.0.3683.75 allowed a remote attacker to perform domain spoofing via a crafted HTML page.