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.
The effectiveness of cyber security across the UK critical infrastructure sector has been an area of concern for a long time. The original EU NIS directive of 2016 (some background is here) led to regulations being adopted across all member states in an effort to provide a level of cyber security guidance and improved protection across critical infrastructure services.
In late 2022, NIS itself was replaced by NIS2 in the EU – a successor that we blogged about here.
Meanwhile in the UK, now independent of EU edicts, the earlier NIS regulations have remained in place. The UK government has been consulting on the changes needed to upgrade these local regulations to better match those of its international partners.
The consultation process has now concluded (as reported here) and the results and needs of the sector and its changing cyber threat landscape will now be translated into updated legislation. There are three main areas where changes are planned.
The big change, and it has occurred universally since the previous round of NIS / Critical Infrastructure regulations, is the increased recognition of the importance of a broader number of critical utilities, technology and managed services providers now included in the sector.
While certain digital service providers are already within the scope of the NIS, many of these additional technology and managed service providers are not, yet they underpin the existing operations of many critical infrastructure businesses. The impact of a successful attack on any of these service providers could have serious knock effects on the delivery of services to end-customers and citizens. This could extend to impairing the ability of businesses to trade more broadly (with a consequent economic impact). Some examples might include payment processing companies (eg. Paypal or Stripe), cloud providers (e.g. Amazon or Google), marketplaces (eg. Etsy or Ebay).
The new inclusions also comprise a range of cyber security service providers – many of whom provide the specialist security services that many businesses outsource; and which bring with them the systematic risks associated with service outages or third-party breaches.
Digital service providers will therefore include several new business service categories:
While not currently as broad a scope as the new EU NIS2 directive, the list of industries within scope of the new UK regulations may grow further.
The existing regulatory approach is largely reactive in nature – picking up and dealing with issues (or breaches) after the fact. This is not a dissimilar approach to that taken by regulators in many other sectors. Where a digital service provider is deemed ‘critical’, the new laws will provide a mechanism for the regulators to take a more proactive supervisory approach.
For example, the approach in Australia, where critical infrastructure providers now have positive security obligations, the regulation of CI allows for the authorities to direct, supervise and drive the maintenance of security controls and to formulate improvements to prevent attackers exploiting emerging and ongoing vulnerabilities.
Hence more proactive supervision will likely extend beyond mandatory rules and standards, to control improvements, and enable the continuing evolution of oversight processes.
This means a busier, more active regulatory regime, and a degree of decision making (particularly around risk management decisions) being taken out of the hands of organisation’s management teams as security management directives become more prescriptive for digital service providers.
The requirement for the reporting of security incidents is to be expanded to include further circumstances in which incidents must be reported.
This means that specified critical events will now need to be logged, tracked and reported – giving regulators (and potentially the public) a greater level of intelligence about the state of the security environment and the resilience of the industries that operate within it. The trend towards greater reporting and transparency can only be of assistance to all stakeholders.
The primary benefit of this is that organisations will have to provide better and more accurate information about incidents that they suffer, more often. This greater level of intelligence will allow better communication of risk information between the regulator and industry participants and enable any emerging trends in the sector to be identified and effectively responded to, at scale.
There is a clear trend of greater regulation and oversight of cyber security in critical sectors everywhere:
This means a more robust and resilient society, with less vulnerability to hackers, vandals and hostile nation states. It also means a need for greater security controls and oversight within these critical infrastructure organisations, increasing the requirement to protect data and systems and to support the greater visibility and accountability required of this critical sector.
Having knowledge of the state and effectiveness of security controls and being able to use that information to better manage cyber security risk will be fundamental to critical infrastructure managing the improvement of its cyber resilience.
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
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
Read by directors, executives, and security professionals globally, operating in the most complex of security environments.