The old saying goes, there are only two kinds of organizations: those that have been breached and those that will be soon. Clearly, the “moat-and-castle” approach to security has not worked. Simply being “inside” a network – behind a firewall, DMZ and other traditional defenses – does not confer trustworthiness, whether it’s a device, a user, network traffic, or an application.
“Hope for the best, plan for the worst”. This ancient principle still applies, especially for systems with high availability requirements. Principles are easy to quote, but how does an organization implement them effectively?
You have heard it enough to make you aim a fire extinguisher at your firewall: “compliance does not mean security”. Compliance work can consume up to 70% of security budgets in Federal government agencies, and it is common to spend more money identifying, documenting, and gaining approval for a remediation than the remediation itself costs.
Defending against insider threats is a top priority for the U.S. government. When surveyed by MeriTalk, 85% of federal cybersecurity professionals say their agency is more focused on combating insider threats in 2017 than they were just a year ago.
When it comes to controlling logins and privileges on Unix/Linux servers, Centrify’s philosophy is aligned with modern NIST recommendations, as opposed to traditional vendors whose solutions are centered around a Password Vault. Centrify believes users should login directly as themselves and elevate privileges granularly as needed and authorized.
From veterans to tax payers, contractors to military personnel, the U.S. government is one of the world’s largest harbors of personally identifiable information (PII). Year after year of security breaches has done nothing but destroy public trust in the government’s ability to protect PII about citizens, employees, and contractors.
When it comes to enhancing their cybersecurity postures, federal agencies have to wade through an entire alphabet soup of regulatory compliance guidelines. From the RMF (Risk Management Framework) to FISMA (Federal Information Security Management Act) and DISA STIGs (Defense Information Systems Agency Security Technical Implantation Guides), there are a number of requirements that agencies must implement to satisfy the government’s definition of a secure environment.
Another month, another regulation deadline to comply with. But this time, it’s defense contractors who are in the hot seat.
To safeguard defense information in non-federal systems and organizations, U.S. defense contractors and soon all federal agencies, must meet the DFARS 7012 mandate and implement all of the requirements of NIST Special Publication 800-171 Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).