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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

10/31/2017
10:30 AM
Ed Bellis
Ed Bellis
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

Stop Counting Vulnerabilities & Start Measuring Risk

When security teams report on real risk, executive teams can gain a much better understanding of the company's security posture.

As a security team, you are what you measure. The problem is that too many security teams are counting vulnerabilities, not measuring risk. It's time we examine how vital it is for security teams to establish risk-based metrics, while offering some examples of both the right and wrong measures to use.

Why is the distinction between these approaches so vital? It's essential for security teams to understand the spectrum of risk, based both on the likelihood of an incident and the potential damage that may result.

Fundamentally, risk measurement provides a way for security teams to work smarter. They can focus their time, budget, and resources on what matters most: reducing risk. Risk measurement also provides teams with a centralized way to accumulate, analyze, and report on risk, which helps significantly improve operational efficiency.

When you adopt a risk management approach, you focus on what poses the largest and likeliest effects on the business, effectively tracking and making progress toward the ultimate goal: reducing uncertainty. Contrast this with measuring the quantity of vulnerabilities, where metrics are focused on measuring work rather than outcomes.

Before we can discuss risk, let's establish definitions. Rather than starting from scratch, I'd suggest you take a look at these from the Open Group and Daniel Miessler:

It's often easiest to think of risk as uncertainty, and our job as security professionals is to remove as much uncertainty as we can.

The Problem: Security Can't Go It Alone
The security team has started taking a risk management approach and everything is going to be rosy, right? Not exactly. Once a security team embraces risk management, the hard work is just beginning. The rest of the organization needs to start following the team's example. How does security build support for risk management across teams?

For security teams and the business to succeed in reducing uncertainty, risk management must be incorporated into operations across the organization. When security starts to be part of operations — rather than an ad hoc afterthought— the critical efforts that need to happen, do happen.

To begin, focus on two key steps:

  • Measurement. Practitioners must make sure they're measuring actual risk. All key stakeholders should buy off on what is being measured and ensure actual risk reduction is being addressed.
  • Integration. Once you're reporting on risk, it's critical to make sure risk management is part of operations.

Step 1: Selecting the Right Metrics for Measuring Risk
I meet with practitioners from a wide range of industries and often see the same missteps. Chief among these is that security teams are measuring the wrong things.

More often than not, teams take a "best practices" approach. Security analysts may run a report and find their checklist of vulnerabilities has been unaddressed for longer than 90 days. Then they'll prioritize efforts based on this aging data, focusing on how long a vulnerability has existed. Likewise, I often see companies focusing on the security news of the day over items that may be less attention-getting but pose a greater risk.

Contrast these somewhat arbitrary approaches with a risk-based strategy. With a risk-based approach, you may realize that those older vulnerabilities don't pose as much risk, but that three vulnerabilities discovered yesterday pose both a great likelihood of resulting in an incident and significant potential damage to the business. With this insight, the need to remediate these three vulnerabilities sooner is clear.

When you focus on the quantity or aging of vulnerabilities, you deprioritize higher-risk items that have a high likelihood or impact.

These contrasting scenarios underscore the importance of tracking and reporting with the right metrics. Metrics are vital in guiding behavior and play a key role in measuring success, tracking progress, getting buy-in, and investing in new approaches

It can be far better to address one high-risk vulnerability than even 100 low-risk vulnerabilities. The key is to establish metrics and analytics that measure risk in an empirical, meaningful way, so you can make these calculations with clarity.

While specific metrics that are optimal will vary somewhat depending on the nature of the business and environment, there are some common do's and don'ts when it comes to choosing metrics.

Here are some metrics to avoid:

  • Total open vulnerabilities
  • Average vulnerability age
  • Total vulnerabilities open longer than X days

Organizations that use a risk-based approach can consider tracking a number of key metrics:

  • Remediation rate of high-risk vulnerabilities with breakdowns
  • Median time to remediate a high-risk vulnerability
  • Median time to discover a high-risk vulnerability
  • Number of high-risk assets (which is very different than tracking high-risk vulnerabilities)

By and large, if you're tracking these metrics and seeing progress, you are making real improvements in reducing risk.

Step 2: Integrate Risk Management into Operation Processes
When it comes to operationalizing risk management, don't start by trying to create new operational processes. Instead, focus on transparently integrating risk management into existing processes.

Too often, security teams create out-of-band tools and procedures — and results suffer. Under any circumstances, it will be challenging to get teams to focus on security activities. Creating unique tools and workflows significantly exacerbates this challenge.

To significantly enhance your odds of success, leverage existing teams' processes wherever possible. Look to bake risk management into existing tools and workflows that staff members are using every day, including bug tracking and incident management. In effect, you're starting with what everyone is doing today and applying a risk-based lens to it.

The Payoff of Operationalizing Risk Management
When security teams adopt risk management, good things start to happen for these groups:

  • Security staffers start measuring real risk and understand how best to reduce uncertainty.
  • Those in IT operations become more productive. They aren't stuck feeling like they're doing busywork for the security folks; rather, they get visibility into risks facing the business and how they can play a part in reducing them.

When security teams start tracking and reporting on real risk, executive teams can gain a much better understanding of the company's security posture, how it's changing, and, most importantly, which efforts and investments need to be made to improve it.  

Related Content:

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two days of practical cyber defense discussions. Learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the INsecurity agenda here.

 

Ed Bellis is a security industry veteran and expert and was once named Information Security Executive of the Year. He founded Kenna Security to deliver a data-driven, risk-based approach to remediation and help IT teams prioritize and thwart would-be security threats. Ed is ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Data Leak Week: Billions of Sensitive Files Exposed Online
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  12/10/2019
Intel Issues Fix for 'Plundervolt' SGX Flaw
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  12/11/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The Year in Security: 2019
This Tech Digest provides a wrap up and overview of the year's top cybersecurity news stories. It was a year of new twists on old threats, with fears of another WannaCry-type worm and of a possible botnet army of Wi-Fi routers. But 2019 also underscored the risk of firmware and trusted security tools harboring dangerous holes that cybercriminals and nation-state hackers could readily abuse. Read more.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-19794
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
The miekg Go DNS package before 1.1.25, as used in CoreDNS before 1.6.6 and other products, improperly generates random numbers because math/rand is used. The TXID becomes predictable, leading to response forgeries.
CVE-2019-19795
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
samurai 0.7 has a heap-based buffer overflow in canonpath in util.c via a crafted build file.
CVE-2019-19796
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
Yabasic 2.86.2 has a heap-based buffer overflow in myformat in function.c via a crafted BASIC source file.
CVE-2019-5253
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
E5572-855 with versions earlier than 8.0.1.3(H335SP1C233) has an improper authentication vulnerability. The device does not perform a sufficient authentication when doing certain operations, successful exploit could allow an attacker to cause the device to reboot after launch a man in the middle att...
CVE-2019-5260
PUBLISHED: 2019-12-13
Huawei smartphones HUAWEI Y9 2019 and Honor View 20 have a denial of service vulnerability. Due to insufficient input validation of specific value when parsing the messages, an attacker may send specially crafted TD-SCDMA messages from a rogue base station to the affected devices to exploit this vul...