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.

Partner Perspectives  Connecting marketers to our tech communities.
8/24/2015
01:30 PM
Torry Campbell
Torry Campbell
Partner Perspectives
50%
50%

Survey Says: Incident Response Is Fighting Back

Companies appear to be recognizing the need for increased incident-response spending.

Today the SANS Institute released a new incident-response survey that we co-sponsored, with some useful and encouraging findings for practitioners and managers of security operations.

There’s quite a bit of good news. At least in part thanks to the increased integration of correlation and analytics, time to remediation has dropped since last summer. The chart below comparing the two years’ of data shows an overall shift to the left -- an improvement in the elapsed time from detection to remediation.

The area in red shows 2015 responses, the area in blue shows 2014 responses to the question: “From the time the incident was discovered, how much time elapsed until remediation was achieved?”

This survey also agreed with findings in other surveys that real-time analytics are helping companies progress. The SANS report says, “A notable 42% of respondents have fully integrated, and 33% have partially integrated SIEM [security information and event management] into their IR ecosystems for analytics during response. Some may also be relying on their CTI [cyberthreat intelligence] tools or services to do the analytics for them, with 26% fully integrating and 28% partially integrating CTI within their functions. The 13% of organizations not currently integrating analytics such as SIEM into their response should consider this a top priority to mature their SOC and IR processes.”

One of the reasons to integrate analytics and SIEM is that centralized tools can accelerate remediation. Even if the decision to remediate needs to involve a human, centralized tools simplify access to and implementation of the right correction. Specifically, centralized tools help more people, including surge resources, get involved in and accurately follow remediation workflows. Automation further improves results. SIEM, EDR, and unified policy management systems are all beneficial ways to centralize and automate approved remediation actions.

Companies appear to be recognizing the need for increased incident-response spending. IR teams should be pleased that the industry is planning increased investments in areas that simplify detection such as correlation and improved visibility into vulnerabilities and threats. (See chart below.)

Question: What improvements in IR is your organization planning to make in the next 12 months?

Our work with enterprises shows that these capabilities complement existing SIEM deployments and help companies mature their overall security operations.

Read the survey and see how your team and plans stack up to the industry’s.

Torry Campbell is the Chief Technology Officer for Endpoint and Management technologies for Intel Security, formerly McAfee. From a decade at McAfee, he couples his security operations background with product management, development, and customer implementation experience to ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
For Cybersecurity to Be Proactive, Terrains Must Be Mapped
Craig Harber, Chief Technology Officer at Fidelis Cybersecurity,  10/8/2019
A Realistic Threat Model for the Masses
Lysa Myers, Security Researcher, ESET,  10/9/2019
USB Drive Security Still Lags
Dark Reading Staff 10/9/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-17545
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-14
GDAL through 3.0.1 has a poolDestroy double free in OGRExpatRealloc in ogr/ogr_expat.cpp when the 10MB threshold is exceeded.
CVE-2019-17546
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-14
tif_getimage.c in LibTIFF through 4.0.10, as used in GDAL through 3.0.1 and other products, has an integer overflow that potentially causes a heap-based buffer overflow via a crafted RGBA image, related to a "Negative-size-param" condition.
CVE-2019-17547
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-14
In ImageMagick before 7.0.8-62, TraceBezier in MagickCore/draw.c has a use-after-free.
CVE-2019-17501
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-14
Centreon 19.04 allows attackers to execute arbitrary OS commands via the Command Line field of main.php?p=60807&type=4 (aka the Configuration > Commands > Discovery screen).
CVE-2019-17539
PUBLISHED: 2019-10-14
In FFmpeg before 4.2, avcodec_open2 in libavcodec/utils.c allows a NULL pointer dereference and possibly unspecified other impact when there is no valid close function pointer.