Insights blog.

In 2015, Bitsight published a report, Beware the Botnets: Botnets Correlated to a Higher Likelihood of a Significant Breach. In that report, researchers discovered that companies with botnet grades of ‘B’ or lower were more than twice as likely to experience a significant data breach. Now two years since that study, researchers examined more than 70,000 organizations and found similar results, including additional risk vectors that correlate to an increased likelihood of an organization experiencing a breach. Organizations have begun to take action based on these findings by communicating with trusted third parties who are likely to experience a data breach based on their security posture.

PwC recently published The Global State of Information Security Survey 2016, which highlights security trends in a number of industries and key themes across all industries.

There are many different metrics that the CISO or CIO collects to measure the performance and effectiveness of its cybersecurity program. But only a select number of these metrics hold enough weight to be reported to the C-suite. The security metrics and measurements that make it to the boardroom should be presented in a language the Board understands, and should speak directly to whether the organization is taking the right steps toward security. 

Assessing the security performance of your vendors and third parties is crucial considering the amount of access to sensitive information we grant to these partners. However, for those assessments to be effective, and for you to actually know what the results mean, you need to know what performance trends you should be looking for and to be able to contrast and compare the results. This is where benchmarking comes in.

In late January, Anthem announced that it had been breached, compromising data from 80 million people. It is the largest publicly-disclosed breach of a healthcare company.

During last month's SANS webinar, Quantifying Security Performance: The What, Why and How of Security Ratings, Bitsight CTO and Co-Founder Stephen Boyer answered questions from attendees. Here are some of the most interesting questions people posed, and our answers for each one. There are also two clips from the webinar recording.

Data breaches at higher education institutions are becoming more and more common, putting them near the top of the list of industries most affected by cyber security risks. Hackers target .EDU networks because they tend to be left wide open for attacks, either because the schools fail to prepare against such intrusions or because network users fall victim to vicious phishing scams. As our latest Bitsight Insights report revealed, university security teams juggle diverse IT infrastructure needs and unique challenges, including BYOD culture and multiple network access points. This leads to a major slump in security performance throughout the school year. So how can universities overcome these challenges?

As executives and corporate boards are increasingly being called upon to act on cyber security issues, security practitioners need new tools to better communicate performance to upper level management. Benchmarking, a tool used by businesses to track performance, can (and should) be used to better communicate and understand security posture.

It took a long time for the CISO role to emerge in corporate America (and maybe 25% of large enterprises have one), so it will be quite a while before it becomes a consistent board seat.  In the meantime, corporate boards are made up of current and former CEOs, CIOs & CFOs, academia and distinguished public servants from civilian and military backgrounds.  I believe they are all too aware of the implication of cybersecurity risk.  Like many senior executives, boards have recently had a crash course in the impact of security breaches.  Either because they have witnessed them first hand….or from ‘a safe distance’ as competitors and peers have struggled through cyber attacks and loss disclosures.  But there is no existing framework for discussing cybersecurity risk among a corporate board, certainly nothing that equates to their existing framework for discussing growth, profitability, legal exposure, supply chain, M&A, HR best practices, geopolitical risk etc.  For those perpetual board meeting topics there is a consistent push for internal data and instrumentation that can be compared and benchmarked with a peer group, an industry or a competitor.
For 'the practice' of board oversight to extend to cybersecurity risk, those same benchmarks must exist.  Without objective comparison between peer/competitor/industry, how can the experience and advice of your celebrated academic, retired CEO, distinguished public servant or maverick CIO have any context? How can measurement be put in place?
Mr. Aguilar is on the right track. Boards must start taking responsibility for the cybersecurity of their companies. If not, there will likely be financial and reputational repercussions for board members that fail to place this issue as a critical priority in retaining and growing the value of a company. Yet, while the time for board level discussions on cyber security has come, it is also the time for new innovative solutions to enable this practice. This is where Security Ratings come in.

Companies are spending more and more on IT security. A recent report by Canalys found that the worldwide IT security market will grow 6.6% annually, becoming a $30.1 billion dollar industry by 2017. This increase in spending may have something to do with the heightened consequences of data breaches and security events. Another recent study, this one from the Ponemon Institute, found average data breach costs to be a lofty $3.5 million. But, as companies spend more and more money on IT security products and services, how can they verify that their overall security is improving?

As a result of their major data breach late last year, Target has undergone a major house-cleaning to signify to the market just how seriously they are taking cyber security.