Post by account_disabled on Dec 27, 2023 4:59:45 GMT
Of threat actors, how they operate today, and the best ways to spot these types of weak signals often has nothing to do with how many years of security experience someone has. At, we are fortunate to attract people with diverse types of experience to our information security team. Many good candidates don't have a computer science background. Instead, they have degrees in fields you wouldn't expect, like psychology or Greek mythology, and they're very successful in information security. We also have people who started as project managers and are now cybersecurity directors. In our field, you're always trying to think of all the ways that something.
It's worth approaching this problem from many different angles. We've seen this in action. Establish Ownership, Governance, and Accountability Historically, we've let business leaders and their technology peers decide who owns data and what's responsible for its security. But then we Job Function Email List discovered that they were giving much more liberal access to the data than we wanted. Now, we have introduced risk management, which is a separate function that works with us and strictly controls access to data. One difficulty with governance is that products contain integrated elements, with different business units.
The big question is: who is the real owner of the app? We haven't solved the problem yet. We are increasingly inclined to start from the perspective of user groups, that is, a certain department owns users. This is one way. But if the application is risk or legal related, we tend to exclude it and pass the responsibility to our legal team. Today, many of our clients often see legacy systems without clear ownership even from a technical perspective, let alone from a business ownership perspective. We usually make the distinction that someone is responsible for making sure the system is functioning properly. But the risk of potential compromise to that particular system depends on how it is used, who has access, and the type of data that runs through.
It's worth approaching this problem from many different angles. We've seen this in action. Establish Ownership, Governance, and Accountability Historically, we've let business leaders and their technology peers decide who owns data and what's responsible for its security. But then we Job Function Email List discovered that they were giving much more liberal access to the data than we wanted. Now, we have introduced risk management, which is a separate function that works with us and strictly controls access to data. One difficulty with governance is that products contain integrated elements, with different business units.
The big question is: who is the real owner of the app? We haven't solved the problem yet. We are increasingly inclined to start from the perspective of user groups, that is, a certain department owns users. This is one way. But if the application is risk or legal related, we tend to exclude it and pass the responsibility to our legal team. Today, many of our clients often see legacy systems without clear ownership even from a technical perspective, let alone from a business ownership perspective. We usually make the distinction that someone is responsible for making sure the system is functioning properly. But the risk of potential compromise to that particular system depends on how it is used, who has access, and the type of data that runs through.