Latest Blog Posts

Focus on 2012: 5 key areas in Enterprise IT

(19 December 2011)

From in-house to consultancy: moving to the ‘dark side’

(01 December 2011)

Brace for the feared double dip: IT planning can maximise mergers and acquisitions

(27 October 2011)

The tricky business of justifying IT expenditure

(19 October 2011)

IT consultants should drop the ITIL clichés to win clients over

(19 October 2011)

Steps to a successful Service Transition – new white paper by Plan-Net

(26 September 2011)

‘Cloud Consultancy’ – Experience On Demand

(26 September 2011)

ITIL 2011: Continual Service Improvement or just the result of V3 being rushed?

(03 August 2011)

The GLOCAL IT Service Desk

(26 June 2011)

Oh no… Not another Service Management initiative!

(20 June 2011)

5 reasons to employ an IT consultant

(22 May 2011)

Financial firms’ IP is safe with VDI

(11 May 2011)

IT Support: grow-your-own or buy organic?

(11 May 2011)

Where is that ‘cultural change’ which makes ITSM Best Practice effective?

(19 April 2011)

Executive exceptions: Best Practice killers or just business as usual?

(10 April 2011)

Desktop Virtualisation: Still not a perfect View

(23 March 2011)

What is the impact of the Cloud on the existing IT environment?

(10 March 2011)

Private vs. public sector IT security: more dedicated staff, yet less awareness

(03 March 2011)

Surviving IT spending cuts in the public sector

(15 February 2011)

10 things we learnt in 2010 that can help make 2011 better

(23 December 2010)

IT workforce continuity

(17 December 2010)

Minimising IT downtime for finance professionals

(30 November 2010)

ITIL V3 – should you bother?

(24 November 2010)

Taking the third option

(25 October 2010)

The peculiarities of Metro Bank’s IT outsourcing model

(19 October 2010)

Saving ITIL – how to protect the reputation of Best Practice frameworks

(11 October 2010)

5 tips for moving Disaster Recovery to the Cloud

(04 October 2010)

Does the future of business mobile computing lie in hybrid tablet devices?

(27 September 2010)

How many police officers does it take to email 10,000 criminal records to a journalist by accident?

(15 September 2010)

The perils of commoditising IT Support

(01 September 2010)

Life after ITIL – creating a culture of Continual Service Improvement

(02 August 2010)

10 reasons to migrate to Exchange 2010

(27 July 2010)

Are you Off-Sure about your IT Service Desk?

(14 July 2010)

Mind the skill gap

(11 July 2010)

Microsoft should fear not – is Apple even in the same league?

(24 June 2010)

Is your IT Service Desk future proof?

(22 June 2010)

The quest for a portable office - are all mobile devices safe for work?

(21 June 2010)

Will Tablets rule the future?

(16 June 2010)

Getting back to work - but with a service provider.

(15 June 2010)

Cloud computing: how to minimise lock-in risks

(09 June 2010)

Public sector, private data - is outsourcing the Service Desk too risky?

(02 June 2010)

Doing more with less: an opportunity to learn

(06 May 2010)

Sharing the IT Service Desk: sharing cost, sharing quality

(03 May 2010)

So, Microsoft outsources IT support – What’s all the fuss about?

(27 April 2010)

Survey reveals 1/3 of UK organisations put off Windows 7 roll-out, but are they wise to wait?

(13 April 2010)

Is information safe enough at NHS trusts?

(31 March 2010)

Best Practice and Virtualisation: essential tools in Business Resilience and Continuity planning

(25 March 2010)

What to look for when bringing offshore work back home

(22 March 2010)

5 thoughts on the IT Service Desk that need re-thinking

(10 March 2010)

Microsoft System Center Service Manager 2010: a credible challenger in the Service Management software market?

(17 February 2010)

Do you really want to lose (inter)face?

(15 February 2010)

A new lease of IT life

(11 February 2010)

From ITIL v2 to v3 – where to start?

(08 February 2010)

Can you afford not to invest in Best Practice?

(02 February 2010)

Experiential Learning explained through Confucius

(02 February 2010)

Quick win, quick fall if you fail to plan ahead

(11 January 2010)

Cloud computing – Help your IT out of the Tetris effect

(08 January 2010)

One of you may be fired

(17 December 2009)

Hot or not. ..Says who?

(15 December 2009)

2012: avoiding the IT Apocalypse

(03 December 2009)

Punishment alone does not work

(03 August 2009)

HSBC Data Loss

(26 July 2009)

ITIL for ITILs sake

(02 June 2009)

VDI and Windows 7

(06 May 2009)

The art of deception

(05 May 2009)

VDI - the revolution begins...

(04 May 2009)

Wake up and tackle the real VDI issues!

(24 March 2009)

ITIL Version 3

(18 February 2009)

Virtualisation - making the headlines

(18 February 2009)

Batten down the Hatches!

(18 February 2009)

Overcome the Freeze

(10 January 2007)

Batten down the Hatches!

Posted in Information Security on 18 February 2009 by

The problem with most security companies is they are very product driven - you name your security problem, and they can sell you a product to fix it. Whilst it's always tempting to think that you can fix a problem by buying something from a catalogue, the reality is often very different. Take the current hot potato of regulatory compliance, e.g. Sarbanes Oxley. If you believe the marketing, you can identify any number of products which will solve your SOX problems for you, which completely ignores the fact that compliance is all about opinions - specifically, convincing the relevant auditors that you have the necessary business processes and culture in place to be compliant. Good products can help - but they can also be a placebo and lull you, literally, into a false sense of security.

The other problem of a product led approach to security is that you can end up spending a fortune and still not be secure. Take the simple example of internal versus external security. Most companies have realised that there is a significant risk in connecting their internal networks to the wider world (in the shape of the Internet) and have therefore implemented multi-layered firewall defences to stop rogue traffic coming in. Yet the most high profile security breach of recent times, the foiled £220m sting at Sumitomo Bank, was probably initiated by an insider installing keyboard logging software onto workstations used for moving large quantities of money. Frankly, it doesn't matter how big a lock you put on the front door if the crook is already inside the building.

Of course products have a part to play in information security, but they should not be the first consideration. If information security is to be improved in an organisation, what's needed upfront is a clear recognition and statement that information security is a "whole business" issue and not something that's confined to the IT department. This fact hits home even more when you realise that one of the widest recognised information leakage scenarios is employees talking loudly about their confidential business activities in the pub after work - I'd be very interested to know how you'd tackle that one from an IT perspective!

A standards framework, such as BS7799, provides good security practise that suits most types of organisation. BS7799 has a reputation as a solution that only fits large companies, but in reality an implementation can be focussed at specific parts of the business and then expanded to other areas when appropriate. BS7799 also provides the benefit of independent verification that the security practices are in-force and effective on an ongoing basis.

The first step within any such framework is to understand the information you're trying to protect. To do that, you need to understand what information you have, what its value is, what the threat to the information is, and the consequence if that information is compromised. This piece of work constitutes the risk assessment, and by doing this you can determine what needs to be addressed, what the priorities are, and where your budget is going to be spent. With this approach it's easier to find and eliminate unworkable scenarios - such as where an information asset is worth £5k but you need to spend £500k to secure it. An IT focused approach probably wouldn't give you this information.

Once you understand the information that you have, the next step is to look at how that information flows through your business. Again, an IT focused approach will probably identify any number of products to secure the information in the place where it's normally stored. But unless you understand where and how that information moves in the organisation, you're back to a "weakest link" scenario, with a weak security spot in one place completely compromising all your investment in another.

One of the major points about looking at Information Security rather than just IT Security is that plugging the security holes is not simply about products. The thing that makes the biggest positive impact to a secure environment is shaping employee behaviour so that good security practice is built into the standard operations and culture of the organisation. Formal policies and guidelines are the starting point here, but they need to be backed up by training, enforcement and reinforcement to prevent behavioural lapses.

Of course, the project that attempts to improve information security across the whole organisation is going to be a daunting one, and one that may struggle to get off the ground no matter how much business sense it makes. Some organisations prefer an approach tackling one or more departments in isolation first - such as the IT department. Whichever department it is, there is always the need for involvement from internal departments offering common services across the business such as HR, Finance and Legal. What needs to be borne in mind however is that as you're strengthening processes and behaviours in one part of the organisation, other departments which aren't involved in such activities need to be considered as "untrusted".

Ultimately Information Security will determine the need for ‘Controls'; these may be any combination of, training, procedure or technology. Often the fix does not have to involve technology and does not have to have any real cost. When it does involve technology, organisations may still end up making the same technology choices but in this scenario the reason and justification have come through business involvement and the use of a repeatable process that should provide consistent results.

One of the most interesting aspects of the recent Sumitomo case is that the bank elected to go public with the information, since in the past, organisations have gone to great lengths to keep major security breaches quiet. A mitigating factor here is that the security breach was foiled and the bank didn't lose any money. However, it's also likely that compliance regulations such as Sarbanes are starting to have an influence. These regulations insist on full and prompt disclosure of significant business events which could impact the share price - and a major security breach certainly fits into that category. We may well be entering an era where there is much greater openness about security incidents, and therefore an even greater imperative for companies to get on top of their information security problems.

Adrian Polley, CEO, Plan-Net

Plan-Net Security solutions

Bo Alexander Said,
@ 21 Feb 2010 22:26
You have really great taste on catch article titles, even when you are not interested in this topic you push to read it
Avery Watson Said,
@ 20 Feb 2010 12:55
Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now. Keep it up! And according to this article, I totally agree with your opinion, but only this time! :)
Post your Comments

(required)

(required, never displayed)