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.

Risk

12/8/2008
11:44 PM
George V. Hulme
George V. Hulme
Commentary
50%
50%

When It Comes To Database Security: Enterprises Seem Confused

This October, research firm Enterprise Strategy Group surveyed 179 North American businesses with 1,000-plus employees about their database security efforts. The survey results (published today) reveal the bifurcated nature and the scary state of database security.

This October, research firm Enterprise Strategy Group surveyed 179 North American businesses with 1,000-plus employees about their database security efforts. The survey results (published today) reveal the bifurcated nature and the scary state of database security.While this survey has a limited sampling of 179 companies, and was funded by a security vendor, the results are nonetheless frightening. And it is scary not because it seems security managers still lack adequate budget, manpower, and executive leadership to keep systems secure. That's always been the sad state of IT security at many companies.

And it's neither that the survey found most companies hold just about everyone "responsible" for database security. It's true. When asked in the survey what teams are responsible for database security, security admins came in highest at 66%. Then the IT operations group (60%), data center managers (58%), system administrators (57%), network administrators (49%), and DBAs (42%).

Now, all of these groups have a role to play in database security, for sure. But they all can't be "responsible" for it. The buck has to stop somewhere.

It wasn't even that disarray that was scariest. No. The headline in this survey is that 84% of the respondents believe that all to most of their company's confidential data is adequately protected. But this very same sample of survey respondents reported that they either had one confidential data breach (41%) or multiple confidential data breaches (8%).

So there you have it -- nearly 50% of respondents suffered a significant breach, yet a whopping majority believe (84%) their database security is adequate.

Does this mean that a single breach of confidential data is acceptable? Or, are these companies over-estimating the health of their risk posture?

Either way you slice that, the result doesn't add up.

Here's a link to a press release that announced the survey. I wasn't able to find a link to the survey results, but will update this post should one become available.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 5/22/2020
How an Industry Consortium Can Reinvent Security Solution Testing
Henry Harrison, Co-founder & Chief Technology Officer, Garrison,  5/21/2020
Is Zero Trust the Best Answer to the COVID-19 Lockdown?
Dan Blum, Cybersecurity & Risk Management Strategist,  5/20/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-13485
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
The Knock Knock plugin before 1.2.8 for Craft CMS allows IP Whitelist bypass via an X-Forwarded-For HTTP header.
CVE-2020-13486
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
The Knock Knock plugin before 1.2.8 for Craft CMS allows malicious redirection.
CVE-2020-13482
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
EM-HTTP-Request 1.1.5 uses the library eventmachine in an insecure way that allows an attacker to perform a man-in-the-middle attack against users of the library. The hostname in a TLS server certificate is not verified.
CVE-2020-13458
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
An issue was discovered in the Image Resizer plugin before 2.0.9 for Craft CMS. There are CSRF issues with the log-clear controller action.
CVE-2020-13459
PUBLISHED: 2020-05-25
An issue was discovered in the Image Resizer plugin before 2.0.9 for Craft CMS. There is stored XSS in the Bulk Resize action.