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.
In the UK, the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) runs an information assurance scheme called Cyber Essentials. Our blog post series looks at each of the framework’s five focus areas and offers practical hints and tips on security requirements and value to organisations wishing to follow its advice.
This post is the fourth in the Cyber Essentials series, you can read the earlier posts here, here and here. In this post, we look at the importance of controlling access to your critical business information and business services. Access control is the third on NCSC’s list of five Cyber Essentials security controls, and whilst its importance is not as obvious as some of the others, once you look at the detail, you’ll see why access management is crucial in securing your business.
Controlling access to data and services refers to limiting users to only those information assets or services they need to do their job. If someone in your sales team has no need to access your organisation’s HR files or secret plans for a new product, you can apply special permissions to ensure those members of staff can only see the data they need – sales and commercial information. The rest of your company data is blocked.
Access control, however, is about more than just blocking access to information. It is also a consideration for threat management, both from internal and external attackers who may seek to exploit weaknesses in permissions for their own nefarious gains. You can reduce the extent an attacker can move through your environment by ensuring all accounts (and hence compromised accounts) only have the access they need, so attackers are limited in their ability to jump laterally around the business looking for data to steal.
You should also consider a granular approach to access control for administrators too, since they have superuser powers (and superuser access) to your business. This means that any breach of those accounts could be even more devastating than a normal user account breach.
Ideally, we’d recommend that you decide on required permissions and privileges for each type of user and administration account to do their jobs; administrative roles should be a priority and only have administrative role functionality, for example, if you have a service desk technician who resets user passwords, they should not have permissions and privileges to delete event logs, backups or add new users to groups.
There should be at least two kinds of accounts within your business, but there may be more depending on how you segment workforce responsibilities. There are some valid reasons for having multiple accounts per user, but it’s important that you don’t overdo it as it adds an administrative overhead. Use common sense and make risk your priority in any decision making.
The simplest example of using multiple accounts in practice is when you give system administrators one account for their administrative duties and one for normal user work. By using the normal user account for general business activities such as browsing the Internet or sending company emails, any compromise of that account limits the harm the hacker can cause to the permissions of the normal user. If an administrator account is breached, this is a lot worse. By prohibiting the normal user activities from the administrator account, you can stop the system administrators from being phished or hacked from outside the organisation: most hacks begin with phishing attacks delivered to the victim over email.
Some businesses also separate the duties of other critical roles, not just the system administrator/normal user divide. For example, an organisation concerned that it’s bank accounts might be compromised might have a special account that can only access their bank accounts and payment services. This approach limits the attack surface and closes the email and open browser access, restricting it to the online website provided by the bank.
The primary value of access control to your organisation is implementing a need-to-know model that limits the harm user accounts are exposed to if they go rogue or are compromised. You will need to consider more than the technology elements of access control to fully implement a measure that protects the business, since assurance processes need to be used to make sure the technical position you expect is maintained over time.
If a user changes roles within the business, new permissions are added to their profile to allow them to do their job. Organisations sometimes forget to remove old permissions that are no longer required for that user, and over time users accumulate more permissions than they need to do their job. This accumulation poses a greater risk for the business as a breached account opens access to a lot more of the business’s data than it should.
If your organisation already audits permissions, we’d recommend that you also review active user accounts. In some cases, this is the only way of discovering certain users you thought had been deactivated are not suspended. The risk of not checking this is the scenario where a user leaves the organisation and their account is left active, the user could log back into the business later and download data they are no longer permitted to see. Furthermore, if that account was breached, and there was no active user to notice odd behaviour, an attacker may have free reign over the business for an indefinite amount of time.
In this post, we looked at the Cyber Essentials requirement to control access to your data and services.
In future posts, we will look at the remaining two baseline technical controls and explain how each one can play a vital role in determining an organisation’s security posture.
<<< 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
Attack Surface Management (ASM) characterises a business’s security risks as the monitoring and risk mitigation of a constantly changing and vulnerable “risk-surface”. Importantly, this attack surface extends to both internal and external assets and services. Some ASM solutions deliver clear visibility across both Internet facing and internal assets. Others do not. Instead, they assess external […]Read more
The UK Government has released its annual “Cyber Security Breaches Survey 2023”. It provides some valuable insights into how cyber security is currently being managed in the UK, by a range of organisations. It also speaks to how current competing economic priorities are impacting the effectiveness of some cyber security management efforts. The full report […]Read more
Solving the mismatch between cyber security reporting and directors’ requirements You are undoubtedly familiar with the headlines; you may have even become in part desensitised to them: ‘Cyber-attacks are increasingly damaging’, or ‘large amounts of personal data are most at risk’. The important take-away, however, is that modern day thieves can easily gain access to […]Read more
A system to address the untrustworthy security environment Zero trust approaches to security have been talked about for a while; but in recent times they have certainly gained more currency. As a model for protecting data and services, the simplicity of the concept is its biggest strength – assume, as a default position, there is […]Read more
The ongoing protection of Critical Infrastructure from cyber-attacks has implications for us all – whether it’s supporting our health, well-being or simply our way of life, there is good reason to reflect on the effectiveness your cyber security. Cyber security risks are nothing new and the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to them (and the heightened […]Read more
Read by directors, executives, and security professionals globally, operating in the most complex of security environments.