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

10/31/2013
04:42 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Once-A-Year Risk Assessments Aren't Enough

Why experts believe most organizations aren't assessing IT risks often enough

While it may be important that security organizations employ effective methods to walking through an IT risk assessment, the frequency with which they go through that process is almost as important as the means of carrying them out. Unfortunately, even when security organizations cover all of their bases in an IT risk assessment, if they don't assess often enough they could still be keeping themselves open to a great deal of risk.

Even though many compliance mandates such as HIPAA require risk assessments only be performed annually, that's not nearly often enough for most organizations, says Gary Alterson, director of risk and advisory services for Neohapsis.

[How do you know if you've been breached? See Top 15 Indicators of Compromise.]

"Given the rapidly changing threat environment and how fast IT moves, I recommend that risk assessments be refreshed and reviewed at least quarterly, if not monthly," Alterson says.

But the reality is that most organizations today have a hard enough time keeping up with their annual risk assessments, says Jim Mapes, chief security officer at BestIT, which is why he says that organizations have to rethink the way they approach the process.

"A better approach is to make risk assessments more of a life cycle and process within the organization," he says. "Perform assessments continuously throughout the year, collecting data on new vulnerabilities, remediation of older vulnerabilities, and identification of problem areas where vulnerability could not be remediated and recording the business decision to mitigate the risk and impact to some other acceptable level."

Crucial to that evolution to a life cycle mentality is building time and resources into the IT life cycle for internal auditors, says Alterson's colleague, Nathaniel Couper-Noles, principle security consultant for NeoHapsis. According to Couper-Noles, one of the most common refrains he has heard from auditees is they're too busy for an internal audit.

"Paradoxically, a lack of reserve capacity actually justifies audit attention as this is often the case when schedules are too aggressive, when projects are in the lurch, controls may be relaxed, and uncorrected small issues lead to bigger ones," he says. "Audit early and audit often, and condition IT teams to design processes and systems so that they can be audited comprehensively, painlessly and effectively."

Part of that design should include day-to-day tracking of operational risk factors that affect the business' security posture. This is especially key for keeping track of changes in the IT environment or the threat environment that happen between assessments. While it may seem a tall task, organizations can at least get started on a more continuous assessment process by prioritizing.

"Don't try to conquer the world all at once! Focus on what matters most by identifying the proprietary, financial, and customer data that we tend to be most risk-adverse about when it comes to its protection," says Luke Klink, security consultant for Rook Consulting.

Finally, most critical is that organizations shouldn't just be assessing risks but also working on mitigating them throughout the life cycle. Leaving the same critical risks to be identified in assessment after assessment is the security equivalent to wheel-spinning and something that Eric Cabetas, managing partner of Include Security, says says organizations do all of the time.

"I've seen a company have an AppSec SDLC assessment conducted yearly, and they pay $200,000 for it just to ignore the recommendations of the consulting company year after year," he says. "The consulting company happily takes their pay and leaves until next year, not providing any value at all to the assessed company. They should have instead done an analysis of why originally identified risks are not being addressed within the client company."

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.

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
Jonathan_Camhi
50%
50%
Jonathan_Camhi,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/1/2013 | 3:51:26 PM
re: Once-A-Year Risk Assessments Aren't Enough
I wholeheartedly agree that the threat landscape right now is changing at too fast of a pace for any organization to wait a fully year in between risk assessments.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.