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.

Operations

5/3/2016
05:30 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Enterprises Lack Top-Down Management Of Third-Party Risk

New report finds there's not enough leadership in managing risks from business partners and vendors.

Large-scale breaches that originate due to attackers targeting third-party weaknesses will continue to escalate until senior leadership and the C-suite starts taking third-party risk more seriously. A new survey out by the Ponemon Institute found that the C-level executives are not engaged in their organizations' third-party risk management processes and that a lack of formal programs in managing that risk is endangering the security and compliance of enterprises today.

Conducted among more than 600 individuals who have a risk management role in their organization, the Tone at the Top and Third Party Risk study takes a deep dive into how well enterprises are tackling the problem of threats targeted against their vendors and business partners.

About seven in 10 respondents believe that third-party risk is increasing or staying the same in their organizations, and 75% do see third-party risks as serious. The organizations represented in this research spent an average of $10 million in the last 12 months responding to security incidents coming as a result of negligent or malicious third parties.

In spite of that, enterprises don't view third-party risk as a primary risk management objective. Only 29% of respondents reported that their organization has a formal third-party risk management program and just 21% believed their organization's effectiveness in mitigating or curtailing third-party risk is highly effective. 

As things stand, only about 30% of organizations assess security controls of business partners, vendors, and other third parties. When they do a review, the most common practice is a legal review. And one-third of organizations who do review controls said it would be unlikely that their organization would cease or terminate an agreement with a third party if the controls were found to be lacking compared to requirements. What's more, over half of organizations say that their risk assessment of third-parties doesn't give them visibility into the intellectual property or other high-value data in the hands of third parties.

Finally, many organizations aren't mitigating risk of third-party damage through insurance, either. Fewer than half of organizations require business partners or vendors to have cyber insurance, and only 26% of organizations carry cyber insurance that includes specific provisions to reduce the impact of breaches caused by third-parties.

This lack of focus and prioritization of third-party risk likely comes from the top ranks. The survey showed that only 37% of respondents agree that C-level executives in their organizations believe they're ultimately accountable for third-party risk management. And only about 40% of their board of directors are involved in overseeing the management of third-party risk.

"The research reveals the gap between the growing increase in third party risk and the lack of a governance strategy to mitigate or curtail the risk," the report says. "The business case can be made for dedicating more resources to third party risk management by estimating the potential costs to your organization due to negligent or malicious third parties."

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  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 11/19/2020
New Proposed DNS Security Features Released
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  11/19/2020
How to Identify Cobalt Strike on Your Network
Zohar Buber, Security Analyst,  11/18/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: A GONG is as good as a cyber attack.
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-26890
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
Matrix Synapse before 1.20.0 erroneously permits non-standard NaN, Infinity, and -Infinity JSON values in fields of m.room.member events, allowing remote attackers to execute a denial of service attack against the federation and common Matrix clients. If such a malformed event is accepted into the r...
CVE-2020-28348
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
HashiCorp Nomad and Nomad Enterprise 0.9.0 up to 0.12.7 client Docker file sandbox feature may be subverted when not explicitly disabled or when using a volume mount type. Fixed in 0.12.8, 0.11.7, and 0.10.8.
CVE-2020-15928
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
In Ortus TestBox 2.4.0 through 4.1.0, unvalidated query string parameters to test-browser/index.cfm allow directory traversal.
CVE-2020-15929
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
In Ortus TestBox 2.4.0 through 4.1.0, unvalidated query string parameters passed to system/runners/HTMLRunner.cfm allow an attacker to write an arbitrary CFM file (within the application's context) containing attacker-defined CFML tags, leading to Remote Code Execution.
CVE-2020-28991
PUBLISHED: 2020-11-24
Gitea 0.9.99 through 1.12.x before 1.12.6 does not prevent a git protocol path that specifies a TCP port number and also contains newlines (with URL encoding) in ParseRemoteAddr in modules/auth/repo_form.go.