What would you do if you discovered that attackers had taken over your server and were in the process of stealing all your data?
What would you do if law enforcement came to your place of work and demanded all of your computers as part of an investigation?
What would you do if a tornado hit your building and spread all of your computers across a mile-wide radius?
If you are like most organizations, you don’t have a plan for everything. You can think of security (in an over-simplified way) of having three areas of control: Detective, Preventative and Reactive. We tend to start with Detective. When antivirus was new, it just alerted you when you had a problem. As the technology improved, it became preventative and would stop bad applications from running. Most security technology, in fact, has followed this pattern. Intrusion Detection moved to Intrusion Prevention. Patch Detection moved to Patch Management. Log Analysis moved to full-fledged SEIM systems.
However, this progression ignores a very powerful tool. As an example, here’s a video:
What would you do if you woke up one morning to find a moose in your swingset? Odds are you’d either deal with it yourself or call someone to deal with it for you. Response is key. When things happen, whether it involves an attacker taking over a system, an external agency taking your stuff or a natural disaster, reacting to the situation is important. You can either do it in an ad hoc way, or try to plan everything out.
In general, organizations that trust their people, just let their people do what they need to do. Organizations that do not trust their people, invest in planning and procedures. What’s interesting is that both methods work… though not always particularly well. Sometimes people hide behind policy and avoid doing the right thing. Sometimes, people hide behind uncertainty and avoid doing the right thing.
The problem here is that “right” and “wrong” are not always clear cut. Consider recent occurrences involving United Airlines, Penn State and FedEx. A reasonable response to events like these would be “we can’t trust our people,” and to address the issue by creating policies.
But, for an even more horrifying view of the world, check out this Google News search on “followed policy.” A wider search on this shows that people who follow policy result in death, brain death and murder suspects being released.
So it would seem that this is a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation, right?
It turns out to err is human… but human error can happen whether or not we are constrained by policy. Using policy to prevent bad things from happening requires not only that you have people who will always follow the policy, but also that you have policies that are 100% correct and written by people who can see the future. Perhaps a better approach would be to use policies as guides that people can refer to when they’re confused. Then, build a culture around the fact it’s okay to make mistakes so long as you’re willing to apologize, attempt to fix things and learn from your error.
Not everything can be avoided. Sometimes you just have to deal.
More on the moose is here.
This article was originally published on RJS Smart Security.