Source URL: https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2024/10/roger-grimes-on-prioritizing-cybersecurity-advice.html
Source: Schneier on Security
Title: Roger Grimes on Prioritizing Cybersecurity Advice
Feedly Summary: This is a good point:
Part of the problem is that we are constantly handed lists…list of required controls…list of things we are being asked to fix or improve…lists of new projects…lists of threats, and so on, that are not ranked for risks. For example, we are often given a cybersecurity guideline (e.g., PCI-DSS, HIPAA, SOX, NIST, etc.) with hundreds of recommendations. They are all great recommendations, which if followed, will reduce risk in your environment.
What they do not tell you is which of the recommended things will have the most impact on best reducing risk in your environment. They do not tell you that one, two or three of these things…among the hundreds that have been given to you, will reduce more risk than all the others…
AI Summary and Description: Yes
Summary: The text highlights the inefficiency of unranked lists of cybersecurity guidelines and recommendations, emphasizing the need for prioritization based on risk reduction impact. It identifies patching and multifactor authentication (MFA) as key actions that significantly reduce cybersecurity risks but are not adequately emphasized in the typical recommendations.
Detailed Description:
The text critiques the traditional approach to cybersecurity guidelines, which often involves overwhelming professionals with extensive, unprioritized lists of controls and recommendations. Key points include:
– **Challenge of Un-Ranked Lists**:
– Professionals frequently encounter extensive lists of cybersecurity controls and threats without a clear ranking based on risk mitigation.
– Existing guidelines, such as PCI-DSS, HIPAA, SOX, and NIST, provide valuable recommendations but fail to indicate which would be the most effective in reducing risks.
– **Consequences of Lack of Prioritization**:
– Without ranked guidance, security professionals may struggle to identify the most impactful actions, leading to a misallocation of resources and efforts.
– This can result in focusing on less significant items while neglecting critical actions that could have a more substantial effect on reducing risk.
– **Recommendations for Improvement**:
– The author suggests a paradigm shift to only accepting risk-ranked lists of controls, threats, and defenses.
– Enhancing the focus on risk evaluation allows organizations to prioritize their cybersecurity initiatives more effectively.
– **Highlighting Key Actions**:
– Among the numerous recommendations provided by CISA, patching and multifactor authentication (MFA) are emphasized as the two most crucial actions for risk reduction.
– Despite being ranked lower on the list, the relative significance of patching and MFA should be underlined to inform decision-makers accurately.
– **Call to Action for Cybersecurity Governance**:
– The text advocates for a better framework in cybersecurity governance that clearly conveys which controls will lead to the most significant improvement in risk management.
In summary, this text provides valuable insights for security professionals by emphasizing the importance of prioritization in cybersecurity recommendations, which can lead to more effective risk management strategies. Implementing a change towards risk-ranked recommendations could lead to better resource allocation, more efficient risk reduction strategies, and improved overall security posture.