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.

Threat Intelligence

6/1/2017
10:00 AM
Joshua Goldfarb
Joshua Goldfarb
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

SMB Security: Dont Leave the Smaller Companies Behind

Helping improve the security posture of small and medium-sized businesses should be a priority for security organizations of all sizes.

The US Army prides itself on what it calls "The Warrior Ethos."  One of the key principles in this culture is to leave no one behind. In fact, one of the lines in the soldier’s creed states "I will never leave a fallen comrade." Whether or not you have a military background, I would argue that there is something here that the security community can learn from.

The security community leans heavily on vetted, close-knit circles of trust. There are definitely advantages to this model. Individuals do not gain the trust of the community until they prove themselves trustworthy. Organizations cannot join information sharing groups or gain access to certain forums until they show that they can be trusted to appropriately handle sensitive data.  Vendors are not taken seriously within the security community until they demonstrate an understanding of the responsibility that comes with being a member of it.

There is, however, a small issue with this model. Right, wrong, or indifferent, the model tends to be a bit elitist and exclusive.

Let’s take a step back and think about the vendor side of the equation for a moment. How many of us have worked with some mix of the same five or 10 vendors for five, 10, 15, or even 20 years? When was the last time you worked somewhere where you encountered at least three vendors you had never encountered before?

Of course, there are legitimate reasons why this is the case.  It takes a significant amount of time, effort, and money to develop a trusted, high-quality solution in the information security space. It also takes a significant amount of time to market, sell, and deploy that solution in a large number of places. The number of vendors that have the right mix of these different variables is relatively small in number.

The situation on the vendor side may be easy enough to understand, but what does the customer/enterprise side look like? The sad truth is that, unfortunately, for many small and midsize businesses, the security situation is not all that great. In my experience, it’s not because of a lack of awareness, understanding, or will, but rather something else entirely.

If we take a step back and look at the way most organizations mitigate risk, we realize that it is simply not a model that scales. Most organizations prioritize risk, identify gaps, and then proceed to identify the people, process, and technology required to mitigate that risk and fill those gaps. This approach is most certainly a sound and methodical one, but it is one that demands a large amount of resources. For a security organization with 50, 100, or 200 staff members and an annual budget in the 10s of millions of dollars, this approach to risk mitigation is an obvious choice.

But what are smaller organizations to do? For example, consider the typical mid-market organization. Their security team might consist of one, two, or perhaps five staff members. Their security budget may be a few million dollars, depending on their size, industry sector, and geographical location.

Unfortunately, these organizations often find themselves left behind by the security community and without access to trusted circles that could help them make progress. Just doing an assessment and developing a strategic plan alone would likely exhaust a year’s worth of security budget.  Never mind the cost to acquire, deploy, operate, and maintain even a few of the different types of technologies required to help mitigate a mid-market organization’s risk and fill some of its gaps. There simply isn’t enough to go around for all of the essential people, process, and technology required to actually run security on a day-to-day basis.  As a result, mid-market organizations often get left behind, unfortunately.

I know I am not the only one who has made these observations, but what can anything be done about it?  Luckily, I believe that there are a few ways in which we as a security community can help address these issues.

  • Make it easier for SMBs who want to get more serious about security to gain access to trusted circles. Will it require a little extra vetting and working with some people we may not have worked with in the past? Absolutely. But it will help improve SMB security tremendously.
  • Work collaboratively with SMBs to help them understand where they have security gaps and how those security gaps can most efficiently and effectively be addressed.
  • Help vendors to understand the unique challenges in the SMB space and develop solutions to address those challenges.

Over the past few years, we have seen that threat actors target personal information regardless of who its custodian is, as well as routinely attack organizations independent of their size, sector, or geography. Improving SMB security will not happen overnight. But it is a challenge that we as a security community will need to rise to sooner, rather than later.

Related Content: 

Josh (Twitter: @ananalytical) is an experienced information security leader who works with enterprises to mature and improve their enterprise security programs.  Previously, Josh served as VP, CTO - Emerging Technologies at FireEye and as Chief Security Officer for ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
7 Tips for Choosing Security Metrics That Matter
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer,  10/19/2020
IoT Vulnerability Disclosure Platform Launched
Dark Reading Staff 10/19/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-15270
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-22
Parse Server (npm package parse-server) broadcasts events to all clients without checking if the session token is valid. This allows clients with expired sessions to still receive subscription objects. It is not possible to create subscription objects with invalid session tokens. The issue is not pa...
CVE-2018-21266
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-22
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none.
CVE-2018-21267
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-22
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-27673
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-22
An issue was discovered in the Linux kernel through 5.9.1, as used with Xen through 4.14.x. Guest OS users can cause a denial of service (host OS hang) via a high rate of events to dom0, aka CID-e99502f76271.
CVE-2020-27674
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-22
An issue was discovered in Xen through 4.14.x allowing x86 PV guest OS users to gain guest OS privileges by modifying kernel memory contents, because invalidation of TLB entries is mishandled during use of an INVLPG-like attack technique.