Cybersecurity

Patching your cybersecurity foundation

gloved hands

All too often, an organization's focus on cybersecurity looks outward to external threats, solutions and guidance. But the real problem might not only be inside, but within the organizational structures that comprise an agency's operations writ large.

While the insider threat is a hot topic and a very real concern, it is the division between internal teams – specifically the IT and information security operations teams -- which can allow the opportunity for insiders to go bad. Combined with a lack of awareness or support at the top, the fractured approach can equal a cracked cybersecurity foundation.

"There is a disconnect between the C-suite staff, those business managers, the IT staff and the information security staff," said Rich Cespiva, assistant professor of cyber at the information and integrated operations department, part of National Defense University's iCollege "Does your information security team have an understanding of your organization that actually rivals what your C-suite staff and higher-level managers have? Because having an understanding of what your agency does and how it does it leads to an enhanced and protected posture."

Cespiva spoke Oct. 16 at an FCW-sponsored cybersecurity event in Washington, D.C.

Having those teams operating in separate silos can be costly from a security and financial standpoint, particularly when a single cyberattack can end up costing an agency millions of dollars. It is a risk that continues to grow as increasingly high-tech solutions are introduced and systems become more interdependent amid shared services.

Information security and IT operations "being disconnected ultimately leads to lapses in security and puts data and systems at risk," said Sanjay Castelino, vice president of market leader network management business at SolarWinds Inc., an IT management and monitoring software firm. "This is not a new risk, but as systems have grown more complex, the risk of [information security and IT operations] running from different sets of data, viewed through the lens of different systems, can make it harder to identify threats and address them in a timely manner."

Central to the issue is the ease of accessing and sharing data that is critical to enterprise security, including what is happening on the organization's networks. Conventionally that data has been used to monitor network availability and performance, but exploiting it for security and forensic uses can better secure the network, Castelino noted.

The goal is to have all the data collected available to both IT and information security operations as common tools, allowing for more of a continuous-monitoring approach.

"Talking the same language, seeing the same data – that wasn't always the case in the past," Castelino said. "That's a big shift. It means there are efficiencies gained because you're not either buying or building completely disparate separate systems, you're investing together in solutions that will help access shared data."

About the Author

Amber Corrin is a former staff writer for FCW and Defense Systems.

The Fed 100

Save the date for 28th annual Federal 100 Awards Gala.

Featured

  • computer network

    How Einstein changes the way government does business

    The Department of Commerce is revising its confidentiality agreement for statistical data survey respondents to reflect the fact that the Department of Homeland Security could see some of that data if it is captured by the Einstein system.

  • Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. Army photo by Monica King. Jan. 26, 2017.

    Mattis mulls consolidation in IT, cyber

    In a Feb. 17 memo, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told senior leadership to establish teams to look for duplication across the armed services in business operations, including in IT and cybersecurity.

  • Image from Shutterstock.com

    DHS vague on rules for election aid, say states

    State election officials had more questions than answers after a Department of Homeland Security presentation on the designation of election systems as critical U.S. infrastructure.

  • Org Chart Stock Art - Shutterstock

    How the hiring freeze targets millennials

    The government desperately needs younger talent to replace an aging workforce, and experts say that a freeze on hiring doesn't help.

  • Shutterstock image: healthcare digital interface.

    VA moves ahead with homegrown scheduling IT

    The Department of Veterans Affairs will test an internally developed scheduling module at primary care sites nationwide to see if it's ready to service the entire agency.

  • Shutterstock images (honglouwawa & 0beron): Bitcoin image overlay replaced with a dollar sign on a hardware circuit.

    MGT Act poised for a comeback

    After missing in the last Congress, drafters of a bill to encourage cloud adoption are looking for a new plan.

Reader comments

Mon, Oct 21, 2013

None of this is new. Info Sec professionals have been touting this message for some time. There are several reasons the message hasn't been getting though, though. 1. The C-suite has difficulty translating security investments into business value. In many cases security is seen as a capital expense, part of a risk mitigation strategy, and while partially true, the actual risks involved are largely intangible and hard to define in a way that follows common business logic. Trust but verify is not a good model for mitigating insider threats. 2. Budget priorities. Security is often seen as a separate item from IT operations and infrastructure, and without some type of ROI or intrinsic business value, getting sufficient budget for the physical and personnel needs can be an uphill battle. 3. Lack qualified security personnel. There is a huge gap in understanding about the actual needs of security personnel are. There are two kinds - process, and applied. The issue is that you need both, as it is rare to find individuals with sufficient depth in both, which presents a different kind of security concern, similar to the issue with dev-ops being given authoritative control over systems. Separation of duties and collusion awareness are absolutely critical to managing the insider threat risk. It is, for some reason, extraordinarily difficult to convey this to C-suite in a way that begets appropriate actions.

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above

More from 1105 Public Sector Media Group