Group items tagged

Companies in the technology, media and telecommunications industries (TMT) significantly reduced investment in security spending in 2008, according to a new survey from Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. The third edition of the Deloitte TMT Global Security Survey reveals that 32 percent of respondents reduced their information security budgets, while 60 percent of respondents believe they are "falling behind" or still "catching up" to their security threats -- a significant increase from 49 percent over the previous year. "This year's results indicate companies are explicitly scaling back. With funding decreasing and the threats increasing, it is more important than ever for TMT companies to be highly cost efficient in addressing their security risks," said Irfan Saif, a principal in Deloitte & Touche LLP's Audit and Enterprise Risk Services practice. "Companies that do not have a sound understanding of their security risk profile, or who under-invest in security now, may find themselves exposed to significant and increasingly sophisticated threats that they are not equipped to mitigate." With the proliferation of digitized assets, security should claim a significant portion of a company's overall IT budget. However, only 6 percent of respondents allocate 7 percent or more of their total budget to IT security. This year represents a significant decline from the previous edition of the survey, which showed that 36 percent of the respondents allocated 7 percent or more of their budget to IT security. The survey also indicates that declining security investment is hindering adoption of new security technologies, with only 53 percent of respondents considering their organizations to be early adopters, or part of the early majority, down from 67 percent in 2007. Companies are focusing more effort on optimizing solutions that are already in place rather than investing in cutting-edge technology that can be capitalized upon during economic recovery.

IT security typically has been deemed one of those services best provided in-house. But the stigma attached to outsourcing security and Security as a Service -- namely that an outsider does not know your company well enough to protect it -- may be falling away, as businesses look for more ways to cut costs. Certainly, some heavy-hitter providers believe attitudes are changing. This month, McAfee Inc. announced its new SaaS Security Business Unit. Headed by former Hewlett-Packard Co. SaaS executive Marc Olesen, the unit will oversee all McAfee products delivered over the Internet, including security scanning services, Web and email security services and remote managed host-based security software and hardware. Meanwhile, last April, IBM launched some hosted and managed services that it says help midsized businesses better manage risk and improve the security of their IT systems, all while offering cost savings over traditional products. Indeed, much of IBM's security strategy during the next 24 months will focus on moving security technologies into the cloud and expanding its managed services offerings, said Jason Hilling, an enterprise services business line executive with IBM Internet Security Systems. That includes providing some hosted implementations of technologies that once were located only at the customer premises. "Because the economy is struggling, I think there will be enough excitement in the marketplace over the cost benefits of Security as a Service that we are going to see a much higher degree of willingness to look at it as a real viable option," Hilling said. Hilling contended that a midmarket company with between 500 and 700 employees can realize costs savings from 35% to upwards of 60% by doing security as a managed service. Savings diminish as the deployment gets larger and more complicated, and the costs of managed services escalate. Yet outsourcing security is not just about cost. The world is becoming very hostile, said Sadik Al-Abdulla,

The key points of the plan closely mirror recommendations offered late last year by a bipartisan commission of computer security experts, which urged then president-elect Obama to set up a high-level post to tackle cyber security, consider new regulations to combat cyber crime and shore up the security of the nation's most sensitive computer networks. The strategy, as outlined in a broader policy document on homeland security priorities posted on the Whitehouse.gov Web site Wednesday, states the following goals: * Strengthen Federal Leadership on Cyber Security: Declare the cyber infrastructure a strategic asset and establish the position of national cyber advisor who will report directly to the president and will be responsible for coordinating federal agency efforts and development of national cyber policy. * Initiate a Safe Computing R&D Effort and Harden our Nation's Cyber Infrastructure: Support an initiative to develop next-generation secure computers and networking for national security applications. Work with industry and academia to develop and deploy a new generation of secure hardware and software for our critical cyber infrastructure. * Protect the IT Infrastructure That Keeps America's Economy Safe: Work with the private sector to establish tough new standards for cyber security and physical resilience. * Prevent Corporate Cyber-Espionage: Work with industry to develop the systems necessary to protect our nation's trade secrets and our research and development. Innovations in software, engineering, pharmaceuticals and other fields are being stolen online from U.S. businesses at an alarming rate. * Develop a Cyber Crime Strategy to Minimize the Opportunities for Criminal Profit: Shut down the mechanisms used to transmit criminal profits by shutting down untraceable Internet payment schemes. Initiate a grant and training program to provide federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies the tools they need to detect and prosecute cyber crime. *

In belt-tightening times, making the case for security investment is more difficult than ever. Security Catalyst founder Michael Santarcangelo details five steps risk professionals can use to communicate value effectively. The biggest challenge security teams face in their organization is one of perception, according to Michael Santarcangelo, founder of Security Catalyst, a New York-based consultancy focused on changing the way people protect information. Santarcangelo, who was recently a keynote speaker at the CSO Perspectives conference, said professionals focused on security are practiced at looking at risks and reducing them. Unfortunately, the rest of society often doesn't see risks the same way, making communication difficult (See also: Security and Business: Communication 101). "They lack relevant context," said Santarcangelo. "So security people get wrapped up in thinking: 'The CFO wants an ROI. We better work on ROI.' But what the CFO is really saying is:' I don't understand what you do. So you have to justify it to me.' Santarcangelo outlined his strategies for making the case for security investments at the three-day event held in Clearwater, Florida. He gave an audience of security professionals the details of his five step process for getting executives and boards to understand, and even approve, spending decisions in tough economic times. Create Santarcangelo believes one of the most effective ways to communicate value is to place focus back on the person to whom you are trying to make your pitch (See also: A CEO and CSO Who Actually Communicate). "The reason why someone changes a behavior or takes an action is because there is an inherent benefit to the person," said Santarcangelo. "But when many people start to create, they forget that. They tend to fall into the trap of thinking: 'I'm really smart and I know a lot of stuff. So I'm just going to say it and hope they will understand the value of it.'" Instead, Santarcangelo recommends creating

The Government Accountability Office issued another scathing report saying that federal agencies still don't do enough to secure government IT assets. "Persistent weaknesses in information security policies and practices continue to threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical information and information systems used to support the operations, assets and personnel of most federal agencies," Gregory Wilshusen, GAO director of information security issues, wrote in a 66-page report issued Friday. "Recently reported incidents at federal agencies have placed sensitive data at risk, including the theft, loss, or improper disclosure of personally identifiable information of Americans, thereby exposing them to loss of privacy and identity theft." In a written response accompanying the report, federal CIO Vivek Kundra said OMB is committed to the vision of a secure federal government, and are taking steps to make that vision a reality. OMB, he said, has initiated a review of the language in the current reporting instructions to identify and clarify confusion in the annual reporting. OMB also is working with the CIO Council and the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to improve guidance to agencies. The GAO report also said that nearly all of the 24 major federal agencies last year had weaknesses in information security controls. "An underlying reason for these weaknesses is that agencies have not fully implemented their information security programs," Wilshusen said. "As a result, agencies have limited assurance that controls are in place and operating as intended to protect their information resources, thereby leaving them vulnerable to attack or compromise."

1. You get what you pay for. 2. Americans do not take information or security as seriously as they do their love for profit & cost savings. If one does not value what they are trying to protect accurately, the investment one is prepared to make will always be insufficient. Then there are hindsight and rationalization (a.k.a. politicians) - Karl The Government Accountability Office issued another scathing report saying that federal agencies still don't do enough to secure government IT assets. "Persistent weaknesses in information security policies and practices continue to threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of critical information and information systems used to support the operations, assets and personnel of most federal agencies," Gregory Wilshusen, GAO director of information security issues, wrote in a 66-page report issued Friday. "Recently reported incidents at federal agencies have placed sensitive data at risk, including the theft, loss, or improper disclosure of personally identifiable information of Americans, thereby exposing them to loss of privacy and identity theft." In a written response accompanying the report, federal CIO Vivek Kundra said OMB is committed to the vision of a secure federal government, and are taking steps to make that vision a reality. OMB, he said, has initiated a review of the language in the current reporting instructions to identify and clarify confusion in the annual reporting. OMB also is working with the CIO Council and the Council of Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency to improve guidance to agencies. The GAO report also said that nearly all of the 24 major federal agencies last year had weaknesses in information security controls. "An underlying reason for these weaknesses is that agencies have not fully implemented their information security programs," Wilshusen said. "As a result, agencies have limited assurance that controls are in place and operating as intended to protect their inf

GoogleApps is an upgade to the Los Angeles computer systems security? Doesn't that explain a lot?! Google Inc. this week came swinging at critics who have cited privacy and security concerns in calling on the city of Los Angeles to rethink its plan to implement the Google Apps hosted e-mail and office applications. In an interview yesterday, Matt Glotzbach, director of product management for Google Enterprise, said the angst voiced by consumer groups and others about the Los Angeles project is overstated and based on incomplete information. In fact, he contended that transitioning the applications to Google will strengthen the security of the city's data and better maintain its privacy. "From what I know of the city's operation, this is a security upgrade," Glotzbach said. "Those who may be unfamiliar with cloud computing see this as a security risk simply because it is new and because it is something different," he said. Glotzbach said he believes that at least some of the concerns raised originated from Google's competitors. Meanwhile top managers at the Los Angeles Information Technology Agency (ITA), which oversees technology implementations in the city, yesterday said the city is still committed to implementing Google Apps. The agency insisted that provisions are in place for addressing the security and privacy issues raised by critics. A spokesman for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said the city council will sign off on the project only after it is assured that the privacy and security concerns have been properly addressed.

Google Inc. this week came swinging at critics who have cited privacy and security concerns in calling on the city of Los Angeles to rethink its plan to implement the Google Apps hosted e-mail and office applications. In an interview yesterday, Matt Glotzbach, director of product management for Google Enterprise, said the angst voiced by consumer groups and others about the Los Angeles project is overstated and based on incomplete information. In fact, he contended that transitioning the applications to Google will strengthen the security of the city's data and better maintain its privacy. "From what I know of the city's operation, this is a security upgrade," Glotzbach said. "Those who may be unfamiliar with cloud computing see this as a security risk simply because it is new and because it is something different," he said. Glotzbach said he believes that at least some of the concerns raised originated from Google's competitors. Meanwhile top managers at the Los Angeles Information Technology Agency (ITA), which oversees technology implementations in the city, yesterday said the city is still committed to implementing Google Apps. The agency insisted that provisions are in place for addressing the security and privacy issues raised by critics. A spokesman for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said the city council will sign off on the project only after it is assured that the privacy and security concerns have been properly addressed.

The discovery of documents with students' personally identifying information stored in an unlocked room has launched protests against the university's chief information security officer. Students at Binghamton University in New York are circulating a petition to remove the university's chief information security officer following the discovery of boxes full of documents listing personal information of students and parents in an unlocked storage room. The existence of the unsecured documents was discovered March 6 by a reporter working for student radio station WHRW and disclosed on March 9. For that investigative work, the student reporter could face criminal charges. Binghamton University has had other recent problems with information security. In the past year, according to an article written by Robert Glass, the WHRW news director, university employees accidentally e-mailed the Social Security numbers of 338 students to another group of 200 students, sent the personal information of exchange students -- passport scans and birth certificates -- to student groups, and disposed of information about more than 70 former graduate students in trash bins atop a pile of shredded documents. Those breaches led the university to create an information security council, with a full-time information security officer, to prevent further incidents, according to Glass. Glass did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A University spokeswoman characterized the hiring of Terry Dylewski as the university's chief information security officer as a reflection of the school's ongoing concern about information security rather than a response to past breaches. Asked about the status of the students' petition to remove Dylewski, as reported by Broome County Fox affiliate WICZ TV, she said that question should be directed to the students. The spokeswoman said the university is treating the incident as a possible crime and that a criminal investigation is ongoing. She sai

"Knowledge is the currency of the future," says Sidney Pearl, Global Director of Enterprise Security Solution management for the Unisys Global Financial Services business. And according to the latest Unisys Security Index, Americans are getting much smarter - and more demanding - about the basic information security they expect from government and businesses. In an exclusive interview, Pearl discusses: Results of the latest Unisys Security Index; The security topics that mean the most to U.S. consumers; What these findings mean for government agencies and banking institutions. Pearl's Enterprise Security Solutions Management Group has worldwide responsibility for defining and managing the company's Fraud, Risk Management and Enterprise Security services offerings for the financial industry. Unisys provides Security Business Operations services and solutions to financial services clients in over 40 countries.

Government Information Security Podcasts As a GovInfoSecurity.com annual member, this content can be used toward your membership credits and transcript tracking. Click For More Info Probing Federal IT Security Programs: Gregory Wilshusen, GAO February 23, 2009 Government Accountability Office auditors will have a busy spring, examining a number of federal government programs aimed at securing government information systems and data. In an interview with GovInfoSecurity.com, Gregory Wilshusen discusses how the GAO is looking at how private industry and two dozen federal agencies employ metrics to measure the effectiveness of information security control activities. Other current GAO information security investigations he discusses include: Federal Desktop Core Configuration intended to standardize security features on personal computers purchased by the government. Trusted Internet Connection initiative aimed at slashing government Internet connections to fewer than 100 from more than 2,000. Einstein automated networking monitoring program run by U.S Computer Emergency Readiness Team. Gregory Wilshusen is director of information security issues at GAO, where he leads information security-related studies and audits of the federal government. He has more than 26 years of auditing, financial management and information systems experience. Before joining GAO in 1997, Wilshusen served as a senior systems analyst at the Department of Education as well as the controller for the North Carolina Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources.

Joshua Corman would seem an unlikely critic of IT security vendors. After all, he works for one. Yet Corman, principal security strategist for IBM's Internet Security Systems division, is speaking out about what he sees as eight trends undermining the ability of IT security practitioners to mount an effective defense against online outlaws. Having worked for the vendor side, Corman says he is uniquely positioned to grasp its weaknesses up close. And so, with a PowerPoint presentation on the "8 Dirty Secrets" of the market in hand, he has traveled to seminars and worked the phones, hoping to motivate a change for the better. Here is the breakdown of those 8 dirty secrets and what Corman sees as practical ways to keep the vendors honest. [Related podcast: The Dark Side of the Security Market] Click here to find out more! Dirty Secret 1: Vendors don't need to be ahead of the threat, just the buyer This is the problem that leads to the seven "dirty secrets" that follow. In essence, Corman said, the goal of the security market is to make money, not to ensure the customer's security. Tom Vredenburg, regional IM manager for Houston-based Wartsila Corp., said Corman's take is consistent with what he has experienced in the trenches. "Not only has security become a phantom deliverable, but the vendors themselves have become equally tough to pin down and evaluate. Are they software sellers or risk managers? Are they service providers or network designers? Am I buying partnerships or licenses? Most of them don't know themselves what they are -- only that they need to sell something that most people don't really want to buy in the first place -- insurance."

Compared to other key corporate executives, CEOs appear to underestimate the IT security risks faced by their own organizations, according to a survey of C-level executives released today by the Ponemon Institute. The Ponemon survey (download PDF) of 213 CEOs, CIOs, COOs and other senior executives reveals what appears to be a perception gap between CEOs and other senior managers concerning information security issues. For instance, 48% of CEOs surveyed said they believe hackers rarely try to access corporate data. On the other hand, some 53% of other C-level executives believe that their company's data is under attack on a daily or even hourly basis. The survey also found that the top executives were less aware of specific security incidents at their companies than other C-level executives and are more confident that data breaches can be easily avoided. Ponemon found that CEOs tend to view data protection efforts as vital to maintaining good customer satisfaction levels and to the company's brand image. The other managers, however, were more likely to say that the most important role for data security efforts is to satisfy regulatory requirements. The survey also found that CEOs and other top managers differed in their opinion of who is responsible for protecting corporate data. While eight out of 10 respondents said they believe there is one person responsible for data protection in their organization, there was a sharp difference of opinion on just who that person was. More than half of the CEOs said that CIOs are responsible for protecting data at their companies; only 24% of other senior managers felt the same way. And 85% of respondents said someone else would be held responsible for a data breach. "On the issue of accountability, we found that while people acknowledged that data breaches were a problem, very few people felt that if [their company] suffered a breach, they would be held responsible," said Larry Ponemon, founder of the Ponemon Institute.

Compared to other key corporate executives, CEOs appear to underestimate the IT security risks faced by their own organizations, according to a survey of C-level executives released today by the Ponemon Institute. The Ponemon survey (download PDF) of 213 CEOs, CIOs, COOs and other senior executives reveals what appears to be a perception gap between CEOs and other senior managers concerning information security issues. For instance, 48% of CEOs surveyed said they believe hackers rarely try to access corporate data. On the other hand, some 53% of other C-level executives believe that their company's data is under attack on a daily or even hourly basis. The survey also found that the top executives were less aware of specific security incidents at their companies than other C-level executives and are more confident that data breaches can be easily avoided. Ponemon found that CEOs tend to view data protection efforts as vital to maintaining good customer satisfaction levels and to the company's brand image. The other managers, however, were more likely to say that the most important role for data security efforts is to satisfy regulatory requirements. The survey also found that CEOs and other top managers differed in their opinion of who is responsible for protecting corporate data. While eight out of 10 respondents said they believe there is one person responsible for data protection in their organization, there was a sharp difference of opinion on just who that person was. More than half of the CEOs said that CIOs are responsible for protecting data at their companies; only 24% of other senior managers felt the same way. And 85% of respondents said someone else would be held responsible for a data breach. "On the issue of accountability, we found that while people acknowledged that data breaches were a problem, very few people felt that if [their company] suffered a breach, they would be held responsible," said Larry Ponemon, founder of the Ponemon Institute.

This year was an interesting year in privacy and information security, and by looking back, we can clearly discern trends that will likely be a major part of the security management landscape in 2009. More and more states passed breach-notification laws and several enhanced or extended existing legislation. Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) and virtualization really took off, and compliance's looming presence grew with PCI DSS version 1.2 and some actual enforcement of HIPAA. Of particular note was Massachusetts' data breach law 201 CMR 17.00: Standards for The Protection of Personal Information of Residents of the Commonwealth. This is to date the most comprehensive law of its kind, setting a new standard for what breach-notification laws should look like; it covers both paper and electronic records, it mandates appropriate security awareness training as well as security and risk assessments and, most importantly, requires companies to make changes to their security programs in accordance with the findings of those risk assessments. Similarly, California enhanced the well-known CA-1386 to include not just traditional financial information, but also health care and health insurance data as well. With new mandates popping up all the time, it's no wonder compliance was one of the biggest focus areas for enterprise information security teams in the past year, and this trend will clearly continue in 2009; there will be more regulation on both the state and federal levels, and stronger enforcement of existing regulations. Fines and other penalties for violations of PCI DSS and HIPAA will continue to rise, along with the inevitable rise in discoveries of malfeasance. As a result, there will be an even larger focus on compliance by upper management, which also means decreased time and budget for necessary security controls that don't clearly fall under a compliance umbrella.

At last, my summer reading list is complete!

In what it described as an historic document, the National Institute for Standards and Technology issued a special report entitled Recommended Security Controls for Federal Information Systems and Organizations. Special Publication 800-53, Revision 3, is historic in nature. For the first time, and as part of a continuing initiative to develop a unified information security framework for the federal government and its contractors, NIST has included security controls in its catalog for national security and non-national security systems in its latest revision, No. 3, of Special Publication 800-53. "The important changes described (in the publication) are part of a larger strategic initiative to focus on enterprise-wide, near real-time risk management; that is, managing risks from information systems in dynamic environments of operation that can adversely affect organizational operations and assets, individuals, other organizations, and the nation," Ron Ross, NIST's Federal Information Security Management Act implementation project leader, said in a message incorporated into the 220-page report. According to the document, the updated security control catalogue incorporates best practices in information security from the Department of Defense, intelligence community and civilian agencies to produce the most broad-based and comprehensive set of safeguards and countermeasures ever developed for information systems.

The loss of personally identifiable information, such as an individual's Social Security number, name, and date of birth can result in serious harm, including identity theft. Identity theft is a serious crime that impacts millions of individuals each year. Identity theft occurs when such information is used without authorization to commit fraud or other crimes. While progress has been made protecting personally identifiable information in the public and private sectors, challenges remain. GAO was asked to testify on how the loss of personally identifiable information contributes to identity theft. This testimony summarizes (1) the problem of identity theft; (2) steps taken at the federal, state, and local level to prevent potential identity theft; and (3) vulnerabilities that remain to protecting personally identifiable information, including in federal information systems. For this testimony, GAO relied primarily on information from prior reports and testimonies that address public and private sector use of personally identifiable information, as well as federal, state, and local efforts to protect the security of such information. GAO and agency inspectors general have made numerous recommendations to agencies to resolve prior significant information control deficiencies and information security program shortfalls. The effective implementation of these recommendations will continue to strengthen the security posture at these agencies. Identity theft is a serious problem because, among other things, it can take a long period of time before a victim becomes aware that the crime has taken place and thus can cause substantial harm to the victim's credit rating. Moreover, while some identity theft victims can resolve their problems quickly, others face substantial costs and inconvenience repairing damage to their credit records. Some individuals have lost job opportunities, been refused loans, or even been arrested for crimes they did not commit as a result of identit

The loss of personally identifiable information, such as an individual's Social Security number, name, and date of birth can result in serious harm, including identity theft. Identity theft is a serious crime that impacts millions of individuals each year. Identity theft occurs when such information is used without authorization to commit fraud or other crimes. While progress has been made protecting personally identifiable information in the public and private sectors, challenges remain. GAO was asked to testify on how the loss of personally identifiable information contributes to identity theft. This testimony summarizes (1) the problem of identity theft; (2) steps taken at the federal, state, and local level to prevent potential identity theft; and (3) vulnerabilities that remain to protecting personally identifiable information, including in federal information systems. For this testimony, GAO relied primarily on information from prior reports and testimonies that address public and private sector use of personally identifiable information, as well as federal, state, and local efforts to protect the security of such information. GAO and agency inspectors general have made numerous recommendations to agencies to resolve prior significant information control deficiencies and information security program shortfalls. The effective implementation of these recommendations will continue to strengthen the security posture at these agencies. Identity theft is a serious problem because, among other things, it can take a long period of time before a victim becomes aware that the crime has taken place and thus can cause substantial harm to the victim's credit rating. Moreover, while some identity theft victims can resolve their problems quickly, others face substantial costs and inconvenience repairing damage to their credit records. Some individuals have lost job opportunities, been refused loans, or even been arrested for crimes they did not commit as a result of identit

Two firms certified to asses a company's compliance with the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS) have been placed under remediation by the PCI Security Standards Council. Two firms certified to asses a company's compliance with the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS) have been placed under remediation by the PCI Security Standards Council. "We have a contractual relationship with the PCI Security Standards Council and they can pull our certification at any time," Bates said, adding that the firm is working wholeheartedly to remedy the situation. Chris Konrad, senior vice president of client services at Fortrex, did not return a phone call seeking comment. Fortrex's business is U.S-based. The company is in its sixth year assessing service providers and merchants. In addition to being certified to conduct payment application quality security assessments, the firm sells risk management consulting services. It is a reseller in security vendor Qualys Inc.'s PCI Partner Program, according to the company website. Qualys said its "program gives partners generous margins based on their level of certification." The PCI Council launched its quality assurance program for assessors in September to address growing concerns from merchants about the quality of their assessments and other issues. Merchants have complained that some QSAs don't appear to have the technical skills necessary to conduct a thorough assessment. Other merchants have raised issues with QSA's pitching security products during the assessment process. Merchants that receive negative feedback are placed on probation and a revocation process is in place if assessors do not address the issues identified by the council.

Ask a room full of security practitioners for a list of security settings that'll make Internet Explorer (IE) safe to use and you'll either hear laughter or advice to get a new browser like Mozilla Firefox, Opera, Safari or Google Chrome. Even as Microsoft has worked diligently to improve security in its troubled browser, especially in IE7 and the newly-released IE8, security pros simply don't trust it. Most have turned to alternative browsers, especially Firefox. [See: Microsoft Releases IE8, Stresses Security] But the intoxication security pros find in Firefox and the other alternatives comes with a big hangover. When one wakes up from an evening of online adventuring on one of the alternative browsers, the painful reality is that they will never be able to get away from IE completely. The obvious reason is that IE is so tightly integrated into the Windows operating system, though some industry voices have called on Microsoft to divorce it from the OS. [See: Security Expert: Microsoft Should Sever IE from Windows] "We aren't going to be able to get away from IE in the corporate world anytime soon," said Christopher Mendlik, a threat analyst at Wachovia. Besides the tight integration with Windows, there's the simple reality that some business applications will only work when used in IE. At CSOonline and other media outlets, for example, the programs used to post content online tend to be allergic to non-IE browsers. Those who have no choice but to use IE have turned to a number of coping mechanisms.

Too many companies leave themselves vulnerable to employees' ignorance or purposeful flouting of the rules when it comes to information security, suggests a survey conducted by (ISC)2. Focused on the 'basics' of policy management, the survey revealed that organisations are becoming confident in their ability to comply with the policies and procedures set out to secure their organisations. Analysis of the results, however, reveal education efforts to be immature, with most concerns relating to accountability and company-wide understanding of what is required. The survey questioned 737 information security professionals last month about their organisation's efforts in policy and awareness management. A great majority, 80 percent, said their company's ability to comply with security policy was satisfactory, good or very good, leaving only 20 percent saying they were dissatisfied. However, this confident stance was tempered by concerns from nearly half of the respondents over a lack of training (48 percent) and poor employee understanding of policy (46 percent); a lack of defined accountability (42 percent); and an unsupportive company culture (48 percent). These obstacles to compliance with policy were cited by significantly more respondents than other issues of traditional concern, including a lack of budget, which only 22 percent were concerned about, and the ability to procure the latest technology, which concerned only 19 percent of respondents. "The challenges are shifting from the systems to the people," says John Colley, CISSP, managing director for EMEA (Europe, Middle East, Africa) for (ISC)2. "The relatively little concern expressed over budgets suggests security continues to be viewed as a business imperative, even in the current economic climate. Unfortunately, security requirements are not yet well understood, or worse flouted, often with management support, in order to get a job done. There is a colossal task ahead to ensure all emplo

Ignorant People are a big security risk.

Point by Marcus Ranum THERE'S AN OLD SAYING, "Sometimes things have to get a lot worse before they can get better." If that's true, then breach notification laws offer the chance of eventual improvements in security, years hence. For now? They're a huge distraction that has more to do with butt-covering and paperwork than improving systems security. Somehow, the security world has managed to ignore the effect voluntary (?) notification and notification laws have had in other fields-namely, none.We regularly get bank disclosure statements, stock plan announcements, HIPAA disclosures, etc.-and they all go immediately in the wastebasket, unread.When I got my personal information breach notification from the Department of Veterans Affairs, it went in the trash too. Counterpoint by Bruce Schneier THERE ARE THREE REASONS for breach notification laws. One, it's common politeness that when you lose something of someone else's, you tell him. The prevailing corporate attitude before the law-"They won't notice, and if they do notice they won't know it's us, so we are better off keeping quiet about the whole thing"-is just wrong. Two, it provides statistics to security researchers as to how pervasive the problem really is. And three, it forces companies to improve their security. That last point needs a bit of explanation. The problem with companies protecting your data is that it isn't in their financial best interest to do so. That is, the companies are responsible for protecting your data, but bear none of the costs if your data is compromised. You suffer the harm, but you have no control-or even knowledge- of the company's security practices. The idea behind such laws, and how they were sold to legislators, is that they would increase the cost-both in bad publicity and the actual notification-of security breaches, motivating companies to spend more to prevent them. In economic terms, the law reduces the externalities and forces companies to deal with the true costs of

Legislation to reform the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 will be introduced in the Senate on Tuesday, a Senate staffer who helped draft the bill told a panel at the RSA Conference in San Francisco on Thursday. Erik Hopkins' presentation provided further evidence that the White House could assume greater control in coordinating federal government security. In the panel - The New FISMA: Security Finally Transcends Compliance - Hopkins offered a diagram illustrating the bill that showed a cyber office reporting directly to the president. Hopkins, who works for the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, was the third federal official addressing conference attendees to suggest the White House will be given more authority in safeguarding federal government information systems. On Wednesday, Obama administration cybersecurity advisor Melissa Hathaway - who last week submitted to the president an assessment of federal cybersecurity policy - said the White House must lead federal government cybersecurity efforts. A day before, National Security Agency Director Keith Alexander said NSA would not lead the nation's cybersecurity efforts, suggesting a greater role for the White House. Hopkins said the benefits of FISMA reform includes improved coordination of security efforts, better economies of scale and greater situational awareness of security threats such as knowing where they originate and how the government will respond.