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

5/3/2012
05:40 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

2012 Strategic Security Survey: Pick The Right Battles

Whether it's cloud computing, mobile devices, or insecure software, some threats are more prevalent than others. Our latest survey delves into where security pros are putting their resources.

InformationWeek Green - Mar. 7, 2011 InformationWeek Green
Download the entire May 7, 2012 issue of InformationWeek, distributed in an all-digital format as part of our Green Initiative
(Registration required.)
We will plant a tree for each of the first 5,000 downloads.

Pick Your  Battles

What's the biggest challenge facing security teams? It's not preventing breaches, meeting compliance demands, or even vying for executive attention. It's managing complexity, our InformationWeek 2012 Strategic Security Survey finds. Now, we've been running this study for 15 years, and security has never, ever been simple. But over the past decade the threats have piled up; we have too many fancy technologies to deploy and long-winded policies to enforce--with no guarantee that any of them will reduce risk.

So let's break it down. Prioritize the threats most likely to affect your company. If you try to block every conceivable attack, you'll stretch your people and resources so thin that something is bound to break. Stop worrying about what you can't control or predict and focus like a laser on where you can make an impact. That includes tried-and-true basics like strong access control. It includes taking a hard look at potential cloud providers' security claims, and writing Web apps and business software with an eye toward reducing vulnerabilities. It means being prepared for when a salesperson leaves an iPad in a taxi or has her phone snatched out of her hand.

We'll provide guidance on these areas in this article and go into more depth in our full 2012 Strategic Security Survey report. We'll also delve into what 946 business technology and IT security professionals from companies with 100 or more employees told us in our latest in-depth look at the security landscape.

What's In That Cloud, Anyway?

Our 2012 State of Cloud Computing Survey shows adoption of public cloud on a consistent upward pace; just 27% of 511 respondents from companies with 50 or more employees aren't in the market for these services. Unfortunately, in 2011, only 18% of our Strategic Security respondents actually assessed the security of cloud providers. This year, that number jumped to 29%. However, another 14% rely on the self-audit reports vendors provide. An example is the SSAE 16, a widely used set of auditing standards that providers say attest to controls they have in place.

We don't recommend blindly accepting these reports. One reason is that SSAE 16 attestations contain different sets of scope and system descriptions, so one provider's SSAE 16 may be dramatically different from another's. A better bet? The Cloud Security Alliance explicitly lays out a set of security best practices for cloud providers across a variety of domains, including encryption, data center management, cloud architecture, and application security. The CSA's guidelines are much more prescriptive, and the group offers the Security Trust and Assurance Registry, a free, publicly accessible registry that documents the security controls inherent in various cloud offerings. All providers can submit self-assessment reports that document compliance with CSA-published best practices.

When it comes to cloud computing risks, the most prominent concern among our survey respondents is unauthorized access to or leak of customer information. That's unchanged from 2011. Other top concerns include worries about security defects in cloud technology and the loss of proprietary data.

Pick The Right Battles

Our full 2012 Strategic Security report is available free with registration.

This report includes 44 pages of action-oriented analysis, packed with 38 charts. What you'll find:
  • Security guidance on cloud, mobile and more
  • How to get value from collecting security metrics
Get This And All Our Reports


To read the rest of the article,
Download the May 7, 2012 issue of InformationWeek

 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Doug Barbin
50%
50%
Doug Barbin,
User Rank: Apprentice
5/8/2012 | 4:12:45 AM
re: 2012 Strategic Security Survey: Pick The Right Battles
Based on the comments in the narrative regarding SSAE 16 and CSA STAR, I was hoping that the survey itself would provide more depth on the types of assurance tools that security professionals use and/or rely on it. If there is such data not included in the findings report, I believe the readers would find it relevant. SSAE 16 (or SOC 1) has specific use cases. STAR, as shown via Microsoft's submissions has a nice tie-in to ISO 27001 certification but could also be attached to an attestation report. What about PCI and FedRAMP? https://www.BrightLine.com contains additional information for SSAE 16, SOC 2, PCI DSS, ISO 27001 certification, and more.
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/3/2020
Pen Testers Who Got Arrested Doing Their Jobs Tell All
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  8/5/2020
New 'Nanodegree' Program Provides Hands-On Cybersecurity Training
Nicole Ferraro, Contributing Writer,  8/3/2020
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
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
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
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-2020-11937
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-06
In whoopsie, parse_report() from whoopsie.c allows a local attacker to cause a denial of service via a crafted file. The DoS is caused by resource exhaustion due to a memory leak. Fixed in 0.2.52.5ubuntu0.5, 0.2.62ubuntu0.5 and 0.2.69ubuntu0.1.
CVE-2020-15114
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-06
In etcd before versions 3.3.23 and 3.4.10, the etcd gateway is a simple TCP proxy to allow for basic service discovery and access. However, it is possible to include the gateway address as an endpoint. This results in a denial of service, since the endpoint can become stuck in a loop of requesting i...
CVE-2020-15136
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-06
In ectd before versions 3.4.10 and 3.3.23, gateway TLS authentication is only applied to endpoints detected in DNS SRV records. When starting a gateway, TLS authentication will only be attempted on endpoints identified in DNS SRV records for a given domain, which occurs in the discoverEndpoints func...
CVE-2020-15701
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-06
An unhandled exception in check_ignored() in apport/report.py can be exploited by a local attacker to cause a denial of service. If the mtime attribute is a string value in apport-ignore.xml, it will trigger an unhandled exception, resulting in a crash. Fixed in 2.20.1-0ubuntu2.24, 2.20.9-0ubuntu7.1...
CVE-2020-15702
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-06
TOCTOU Race Condition vulnerability in apport allows a local attacker to escalate privileges and execute arbitrary code. An attacker may exit the crashed process and exploit PID recycling to spawn a root process with the same PID as the crashed process, which can then be used to escalate privileges....