Q1. Alex, what is it that enterprises need to understand about third-party risks and how to manage them?
First, mitigating third-party risk relies on all members of an organization, and consequently, an effective cybersecurity program mandates a common security language. The CISO, CSO, and CTO need to present information in a language that explains security concepts in business terms. Often technical staff members focus on a vendor's encryption methodologies and other granularities about the vendor's approach to security. The reality is boards, investors, CISOs and other business leaders need access to all the important technical details, but they also need a simple and clear language to be able to easily communicate how a company and its third parties manage their security.
The SecurityScorecard platform provides this by distilling a company's overall health to a letter grade: something easy to understand whether the consumer is technical or not. Second, information security professionals must educate the C-level on risk mitigation strategies and how to create a resilient organization by monitoring vendor activities. Attack landscapes and vectors constantly evolve, and most information security professionals understand fully locking down an ecosystem is an impossible task. Working off the assumption that an organization will be hacked puts information security teams in a better position to develop controls that will ensure business continuity.
Third, organizations need to not only map assets but also ensure appropriate control levels. Third parties should only access the information they need. Organizations need to create thoughtful control mechanisms that secure sensitive data and provide limited access to it. Moreover, they need to focus on maintaining relationships only with vendors whose risk tolerances match theirs in both words and action. Thus, continuous monitoring becomes more valuable long-term.
Q2. Sam, describe the process by which SecurityScorecard assigns risk scores/ratings to vendors. How should enterprises use the scores/ratings in managing third-party risk?
SecurityScorecard grades the cybersecurity health of organizations based on the information collected by ThreatMarket, our proprietary data engine, as well as our own internal collection activities. Threatmarket collects information from several sources like data feeds, sensors, honeypots, and sinkholes. Both methods collect data that is externally accessible and public, meaning no intrusive techniques are used to gather the information. Once assembled, ThreatMarket mathematically weighs riskier issues more heavily using industry-accepted standards. This means each company can look at a carefully measured, holistic, and statistically relevant view of the cybersecurity risk associated with its IP footprint and that of its vendors.
Ultimately, the SecurityScorecard platform reports on whether a company's behaviors contribute to or mitigate cybersecurity risk over time and provides the user with clear identification of vulnerabilities or gaps in a company's systems. This enables organizations to monitor their vendors continuously in a streamlined way and to engage with their ecosystem to reduce risk.
Q3. Alex, SecurityScorecard's 2018 Government Cybersecurity Report painted a pretty dismal picture about the readiness of government entities to deal with cyber threats. Why is security such a struggle for government given all the money that is being poured into the effort over the past few years?
On the federal level, increased spending should lead to stronger infrastructures, but even the Department of Homeland Security failed its annual IT audit by running outdated software and leaving critical vulnerabilities unpatched. For example, DHS missed patches on Windows 2008 and 2012 systems, including security updates released in 2013. When even the agency tasked with protecting U.S. cybersecurity fails its IT audit, the security industry, as a whole, needs to make strategic interventions.
In part, new infrastructure costs outpace the funding allocated thus leaving legacy systems in place. A single new device costs anywhere between $200 and $400. Multiply that by the number of federal government users accessing data, and the amount cripples the budget. Apply that to state and local governments trying to manage decreased educational funding, and, again, the costs cripple those taxpayers. Outdated systems accessing the organization/agency network lead to endpoints running outdated and insecure browsers, vulnerable operating systems, and insufficient malware protection software. Moreover, the cybersecurity skills gap and national hiring freezes due to budgetary restrictions create overworked and undereducated IT departments. Eighty percent of cyberattacks exploit CVEs. Overworked departments have difficulty tracking assets to updates. Undereducated departments cannot triage risks appropriately.
A look at the 2018 report shows that governmental organizations/agencies do well with application security. They do far worse with endpoint security and patching cadence. By focusing more on high-need areas, government agencies can more effectively combat risk.
Q4. Sam, what do you expect will be some of the hot topics at Black Hat USA 2018 and why?
A consistently hot topic has been monitoring ecosystem risk: we know point-in-time reporting and assessments only show a limited picture of the cybersecurity posture of an ecosystem. And we know a large percentage of breaches emanate from third parties. This year, expect more discussions regarding ecosystem risks and how to test vendors. Increasingly attackers now find a single exploit and review entire ecosystems just for that vulnerability. What those attack vectors are and finding effective ways to foresee and respond to systemic risks are both likely topics this year. Lastly, in the last few years, as IoT devices flooded the tech market, IoT discussions focused on proof of concept for hacking the devices. 2018 is the year we expect to hear more about enterprise IoT device controls and tools to protect against IoT hacks in an automated way.