Our cyber security products span from our next gen SIEM used in the most secure government and critical infrastructure environments, to automated cyber risk reporting applications for commercial and government organisations of all sizes.
Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation, or CDM, is a term for a strategy around cyber security defence that tries to shift from a stance of: Prevent – Detect – Respond, to an approach that is more real-time, continuous, operational and automatic.
In the US, the Department of Homeland Security contains the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which has particularly embraced the ethos of this more operationalised approach to security, and it mirrors the concept of “security by default” or security being “designed in” that is found in many other sets of requirements such as GDPR.
The Continuous Diagnostics and Mitigation (CDM) program is a dynamic approach to fortifying the cybersecurity of government networks and systems. CDM provides federal departments and agencies with capabilities and tools that identify cybersecurity risks on an ongoing basis, prioritize these risks based upon potential impacts, and enable cybersecurity personnel to mitigate the most significant problems first.
At its heart CDM is about situational awareness, understanding and rapid response. It combines technology, automation, human processes and increasingly, some of the more advanced analytics techniques available in security. This makes it possible to detect and respond as part of “business as usual”, rather than having to triage, filter and diagnose manually when things go wrong. CDM aims to:
Overall, the scope of management and operational activities fits into a familiar circular process model of
Whatever your cybersecurity strategy – following whatever model and building in whatever compliance standards and requirements – there is a need to adopt a risk based approach. This applies to the data and systems that need to be protected, the controls that are put in place and – critically – in the prioritisation of human effort.
Security operations, improvement projects and the response to events often suffer from the lack of available bandwidth of the security team. The well-publicised skills shortage that persists in cyber security means that there is often not quite enough people to achieve improvements as quickly as the business might desire, to spend as much effort maintaining levels of protection or responding to event and incidents.
In this last case, the massive growth in organisations’ dependence on IT systems and the rapidly expanding nature of cyber threats mean that human operators are often having to deal with machine generated data and machine-based attacks at machine operating speeds.
Every business and organisation has its own specific security needs; perhaps a legacy system that is key to its operation, an initiative to develop a mobile app for customer interactions, or an especially diverse network managed by several third parties for historical or compliance reasons.
These are the risk areas that the security team needs to be investing time, effort and resources in thinking about – areas where there are challenges that require deep consideration and thought.
At the opposite end of the scale are the “basics” of cyber security. Those things that pertain to every single business and are widely acknowledged as common problem areas, but where the solutions are not so much complex but never-ending and resource-intensive such as patching across large heterogeneous networks or keeping tabs on privileged user group memberships.
These essential “cyber hygiene” controls are critical as they are commonly exploited by attackers when they fail or are found lacking. Getting them wrong, or not having sufficient visibility of when issues occur, means giving attackers easy access to networks and data. But implementing and continuously monitoring these controls can be resource intensive.
The more time that can be freed up from managing the basics the better. If you can take the most commonly exploited controls and the most widespread problems and automate the implementation and oversight of those, then there is more bandwidth available for the more esoteric and complex threats and risks that need the attention of experts.
Security teams can utilise technology, the automation of control measurement and reporting, for those security controls that have the largest impact on their vulnerability to attack. Ensuring they are in place and continuously monitored or able to be easily checked on a periodic or ad hoc basis helps build an organisation’s cyber resilience.
Research has shown that failure of basic controls accounts for 85% of successful attacks. Automating the oversight of these means that scarce and expensive security resources can focus on the remaining 15% of threats and just deal with exceptions and issues as and when they arise. Potentially, this means that up to 6 times more effort can be directed to the company-specific problems that need solving.
Huntsman Security’s Essential 8 Auditor and Essential 8 Scorecard solutions follow this ethos. They make it easy to conduct point in time checks or continuous monitoring and reporting on security control effectiveness. This kind of automation doesn’t detract from, or replace, the expertise of the security professionals. It just saves them the legwork and effort needed to gather performance data and report on it.
For events or alerts that arise in networks or as a consequence of user activity you can also look to apply the same principles. Complex attacks will need complex responses, but the vast majority of attacks will start simple and then as the attacker finds out what they can do, they will become more sophisticated.
By detecting issues early and automatically verifying the nature of them, you can cover the majority of issues more easily i.e. you build in the kind of validation steps a human would follow into the monitoring solutions themselves. You can achieve one or both of these outcomes:
You can discover more about Huntsman Security’s automated security control measurement tools here.
To explore how getting cyber hygiene right can free up time we have written this blog post.
To learn about Automated Threat Resolution we have resources here.
There is a number of resources on the US CDM approach at: https://www.us-cert.gov/cdm/faq
As cyber risks increase, organisations are encountering the longer life cycle of insurance renewals and the need to demonstrate better management of security controls and their effectiveness.Read more
Highlights and insights from the recent Managed Services Summit in London & the ISACA Central Chapter Conference on Digital Trust, in Birmingham, UK. With two recent conferences in the space of three days, some interesting challenges were very evident in the topics discussed. Being very different events, the challenges were quite different, but interestingly they […]Read more
In early August 2023, the latest joint advisory on persistent vulnerabilities was issued by the intelligence and security agencies of the “Five-eyes” community. These joint advisories are becoming more common. Perhaps recognising the growing importance of shared security information and the common nature of many of the threats faced – the weight they carry makes […]Read more
The quality of your risk assessment and the security information it provides is important; if you plan to use it to actively manage your operational and cyber resilience activities. Organisations are constantly exposed to a rapidly changing threat environment, so you really need a similarly rapid evidence-based feedback system that informs you of the ongoing […]Read more
The UK market has its own regulators, security standards and challenges. And while rulings from SEC in the US or the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) in Australia don’t apply to UK companies, for the most part, the observations are undoubtedly relevant and the resulting advice instructive. It would be wrong to think UK financial […]Read more
<<< Part 2a: Australia’s Essential Eight: Beyond Endpoint Control <<< Part 2b: Activating UK NCSC & US NIST Guidelines: Beyond Endpoint Control Part 4: Systematic Measurement of Cyber Controls >>> As much as we invest into cyber security controls, external threats are inevitable. In a recent Notifiable Data Breaches Report from the Office of the […]Read more
Keen campers, scouts and even the Swiss Army know – that a good penknife is indispensable. This simple device has mitigated many a disaster at one point in time or another. Whether it’s to cut through a bit of string, tighten a screw or simply to solve the problem of no bottle opener in the […]Read more
Supply chain risk is an area of cyber security that demands the ongoing attention of every enterprise; because it can make the difference between being resilient or not. It’s no surprise that insurers warn that the vulnerability of supply chains is potentially a systemic risk that can quickly propagate across supply chain dominated industries. Organisations […]Read more
It took a “tripartite cyber assessment” by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) to identify that a sample of financial organisations had inadequate cyber security: poor security control management, a lack of business recovery planning and inadequate 3rd party risk assessment. Why were there gaps? Where is the failure? Clearly the common practice of unsubstantiated […]Read more
The discussion over data-driven vs qualitative cyber security assessment has been going for some time. Nowadays, it is at the top of the priority list for many security and senior executive teams. Managing cyber security has always been a noble ambition but without reliable measurement, the lack of actionable information makes evidence-based management decisions almost […]Read more
Read by directors, executives, and security professionals globally, operating in the most complex of security environments.