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.
We continue to see the publication of guidance, advice and regulations by various international cyber security agencies. These have been for specific sectors, suppliers to government and for businesses more generally. What varies, and it seems to depend on the jurisdiction, is the strength of the encouragement, or enforcement, of the guidance or rules (in fact, for some, are they rules at all).
Most recently we have seen increasing insistence, even enforcement, of the adoption of sound cyber security practices – a good example is the Essential Eight framework in Australia. There have also been increasing moves to issue joint guidance where intelligence agencies have worked together to publish threat information and common recommendations (we have blogged about that here and here).
The US Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) recently issued a “Binding Operational Directive” (Reference BOD 23-01) as part of a series of instructions to improve security of federal networks and systems.
This one is focussed on “Improving Asset Visibility and Vulnerability Detection on Federal Networks” – and it follows on from previous BODs covering patching (BOD 19-02) and vulnerability management (22-01) amongst others.
At the risk of stating the obvious (and there being no need to repeat the information CISA has published), asset discovery is a key foundation to having visibility of the risks faced by an organisation and vulnerability detection means understanding the exposures of those assets. Hence the link to previous directives: it is hard to know if you are doing a good job of patching if you don’t know what systems you have that need patching or what patches those systems need (based on the vulnerabilities they contain). The same is true, of course, for a variety of configuration issues that might be present in systems (like default passwords or unneeded services).
BOD 23-01 provides a set of instructions and a timeline that is mandated for US Federal departments and agencies to follow. There is a full explanation in the document, but in summary the timeline is as below:
This is a prescient initiative that will take some effort to comply with, but it highlights the direction of travel in the US, building on previous work it is undoubtedly vital in improving security networks and systems. The likelihood is that other jurisdictions will (or are already) following suit.
In the UK for example the Cyber Essentials scheme already applies to government suppliers (in either the basic audited or more in-depth CE+ guise) and Australia mandates its Essential Eight framework for Federal Government agencies, a number of State government agencies and their suppliers.
Risk management is now the key driver of effective cyber security resilience and providing information on assets, configurations, vulnerabilities and patching status is vital. The jigsaw pieces fit together as we explained (and as CISA are now clear on) – systematic asset discovery and vulnerability detection/enumeration must go hand in hand with vulnerability management otherwise, the oversight of particular systems can put the whole organisation at risk.
Where these standards, mandates and initiatives are all heading, is a solid recognition of the need for Cyber Security Posture Management and Attack Surface Management, the internal flavour of which is the less than memorable – Cyber Asset Attack Surface Management (CAASM).
CAASM means having a view of all the assets, both internal and internet facing, within the organisation and the security exposures they present. Using these technologies ensures that issues, new vulnerabilities, configuration weaknesses or rogue devices can be identified and prioritised for mitigation.
It also means that cyber posture and security performance can be clearly reported to stakeholders, thus informing the management and oversight processes and providing quantitative scoring, maturity and risk measurement that echo directly, the CISA directive discussed above.
Specific/official details of the directive can be found here:
For information on Huntsman Security’s Attack Surface Management solutions:
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.