Posts

UNSECURITY Podcast – Episode 96 Show Notes

/in /by

Hope you had a fantastic Labor Day weekend! Personally, it was nice to get away with family and disconnect for a while!

Did you know the history of Labor Day?

It’s always the first Monday in September, ad it’s dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. The first state to recognize the holiday was Oregon in 1887, and it became a federal holiday in 1894. So, this year we celebrate more than 125 years of American work!

Read more about the history of Labor Day on the U.S. Department of Labor website.

Brad’s out today.

Like most weeks, I’m writing the show notes last minute. On the way into work this morning (2:30am), Brad sent me a text message informing me that he is not feeling well. We think it might be a bout of food poisoning, so he should be OK with some rest. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers.

No Brad today, so this means I’m left to my own devices. This will be the first episode I’ve done by myself. We’ll see how this shakes out.

Let’s get on with it! These are my (Evan) notes.

SHOW NOTES – Episode 96

Date: Tuesday, September 8st, 2020

Episode 96 Topics

  • Opening
  • Catching Up
  • Context Means Everything A Lot
  • News
  • Wrapping Up – Shout outs
Opening

[Evan] Good morning everyone. Thanks for tuning in. The date is September 8th, 2020 and this is episode 96 of the UNSECURITY Podcast! I’m your host, Evan Francen, and my buddy is out sick today. Normally Brad Nigh joins me as co-host, but he informed me early this morning that he might have a case of some food poisoning.

Wishing Brad a fast and full recovery!

Be warned. Without Brad, I might end up rambling a bit!

Catching Up

[Evan] Regular listeners to our show know that Brad and I normally start off with catching up with each other. No Brad today, so I’ll bore you with some of the stuff I’ve been up to:

  • Great weekend camping with my wife, my daughter, my good friend Ryan Cloutier, and his wife Aimee
  • Bunch of meetings last week, including 11 last Tuesday; Chubb, the Cybercrime Support Network, Schneider Downs (makers of Red Lure), etc.
  • Lots of great work going on at both companies; FRSecure and SecurityStudio.
    • New service offerings at both companies.
    • S2Org – working on a global S2Score, integrating S2Team, S2Vendor, and new deeper-dive risk assessments.
    • S2Vendor – working on customized workflows, custom due dates, integration of something called the “Cowbell Factor”, vendor breach data/news, etc.
    • S2Me – Redesign based on user feedback, definition of four new “normal” language dialects, and the introduction of “Sam”.
  • The Security Shit Show last Thursday night; topic was “Negativity is Bullsh*t”.
  • Some other miscellaneous things…

Crazy week, but it appears as though business is really picking up and market sentiment is positive(r).

[Evan] Alright, again, no Brad to catch up with. Hoping he had a great week and weekend, minus the food poisoning thing. Now on to the topic for today’s show.

Transition

Context Means Everything A Lot

[Evan] If you know me, you know I use many sayings/themes to try to get my point across. One saying I’ve muttered many times:

One of the easiest tells for determining a good information security advice from bad is using context.

Context is critical. Think about it. You make decisions all day, from the seemingly insignificant ones to the critical ones, and everything in between. How does the lack of context effect your decision-making? Without context, the quality of your decisions will suffer.

Without context people make crappy decisions

Recent conversation with “James”:

  • [James] We get the importance of a risk assessment, but we’re just not focusing on that right now. We’re focusing on partnering with firms with forensics capabilities and setting up a security operations center (or “SOC”).
  • [Mike] Are these our most significant risks to focus on right now?
  • [James] We think so. We don’t have any forensics capabilities and we don’t feel like we’re able to identify events happening in our environment.
  • [Mike] What’s the environment look like? How many servers, how many systems, how many applications, etc.?
  • [James] We’ve probably got 100(ish) servers and a couple hundred applications I’d guess.
  • [Mike] You guess?

A recent article “Most cyber-security reports only focus on the cool threats”

A recent conversation with “Bill”. Bill is the CEO:

  • [Bill] Hey Mike. We need to stop everything we’re working on and take care of this exploit I heard about from a friend.
  • [Mike] I’ve never heard of this exploit. Why do we need to stop everything and focus on it?
  • [Bill] My buddy over at XYZ company was just telling me about how his company got hit.
  • [Mike] OK, we’ll get right on it.

Regulators and auditors are notorious for missing context and often take us down the road of compliance management versus risk management.

Penetration testers, especially those who are newer to our industry are notorious for getting things out of context. Context is critical.

Same concept applies to the world Around Us

The information security industry is unique, but it’s not unique in the fact that human beings are the ones making decisions. Context works the same way.

Take COVID-19 for instance:

  • The headline reads “South Dakota dismisses ‘elite class of so-called experts,’ carries on with state fair after Sturgis rally fueled COVID-19 surge” – The words “Sturgis rally fueled COVID-19 surge” is troubling. If we made a decision based on these words it might be different than a decision with some context. The article goes on to say (buried in 6th paragraph) “Nationally, about 300 cases have been linked to the rally.” For context, there were an estimated 460,000 attendees. 300 cases out of 460,000 attendees works out to about .065%. Granted, there will likely be more, but the rally was a month ago now.
  • Another headline reads “New challenges in US battle against Covid-19 come with the approaching fall season” – This article goes on to say “The holiday crowds mark the unofficial end to a devastating summer across the country, with Covid-19 infections surging to more than 6.3 million and deaths topping 189,000.” The word “devastating” is not only subjective, but it lacks context. A single infection and a single death is bad, but in context it seems a little less devastating. 6.3 million people is about 1.91% of the U.S. population. More than 640,000 people die each year from heart disease and almost 600,000 die from cancer.

IMPORTANT: COVID-19 is a pandemic and it is VERY serious. I don’t mean to minimize the coronavirus in any way, but I do want to put it into context. Be courteous to others. Wear a mask and follow the CDC’s guidance. Speaking of the CDC, this is a great source for context!

Racism and police violence is another hot button issue. Judging from some of the news and reactions from some of the public, you’d certainly think this was worth burning down the “establishment”. I’m someone who wants to fix broken things, so if I’m interested in fixing broken things, I need to make good decisions in context. Here’s some context.

Spend some time reviewing the statistics and graph above. Don’t jump to any conclusions yet! There is a significant issue here, but I’d prefer to use logic versus emotion to drive my reaction.

Now, here’s a couple more things to think about:

Interesting information for sure, and I’m NOT going to draw any conclusions for you. Racism is a thing and it’s a very bad thing. Decisions about what we’re going to do about the problem will be more effective with context.

IMPORTANT: Racism is real and I’m praying for constructive solutions to end it versus destructive solutions that will probably make it worse.

Context is VERY important for decision-making and problem-solving.

Here’s another saying I use often:

Empty spaces get filled.

Without context, what do we rely on to make our decisions? Usually it’s assumptions, bias, and/or emotions. Where we lack information to make a good decisions, some of us have a tendency to make up our own information to fill the gap. You know what they say about assumptions, right? Bias is prejudice in favor of or against one thing, person, or group compared with another, usually in a way considered to be unfair, and this doesn’t sound like a good base for decision-making. Emotions are variable and always play a role in decision-making, but it can become a problem when it’s the dominant role. Emotions like fear, anger, and frustration can easily be played against you and drive you to make a decision you’ll come to regret.

So, what to do?

First, understand that information security is about risk management. Risk is the likelihood of something bad happening and the impact if it did. This requires context!

Slow down. Think about the data your consuming and ask yourself if there’s more to the story. Is the new exploit your boss read about the most critical thing you should be attending to? If someone asks you what your most significant risk is, would you have an answer? Could you defend your answer if challenged?

About the world stuff, in short:

  • Will COVID-19 be the end of the world? – No, it’s highly unlikely. COVID-19 is a pandemic and all pandemics come to an end.
  • Is COVID-19 serious? – Absolutely! People get sick and people die. It’s 100% serious and we should all do what we can to help ourselves and each other be safe.
  • If you’re a black man in America, are you going to die at the hands of police? – Even by the most credible research I could find, there’s a 99.9% chance that this will NOT happen. Even .1% is way too high! We need to do everything we can to drive this number much lower. In context, the problem goes beyond the police though.

Well, I hope this helped. Remember to put things into context as much as you are able.

[Evan] Let’s move on to some news topics.

News

[Evan] Here’s some news I thought was interesting:

Wrapping Up – Shout outs

[Evan] OK. That’s about it. Episode 96 is coming to an end. Lonely without Brad, but hopefully useful to our listeners.

[Evan] Shout out…

[Evan] We’re very grateful for our listeners and we love hearing from you. Send us messages by email at unsecurity@protonmail.com or check us out on Twitter, @UnsecurityP.

If you wanna socialize with me or Brad directly, we dare you! I’m @evanfrancen, and Brad’s @BradNigh. We work for people and if you want to follow those people, SecurityStudio is @studiosecurity and FRSecure is @FRSecure.

That’s it, talk you all again next week!

The UNSECURITY Podcast – Episode 79 Show Notes – K12 Cybersecurity

/in /by

56 days.

That’s how many days have passed since we officially closed our (physical) offices at FRSecure and SecurityStudio. The date was March 16th, 2020, and it’s a common closure date for many organizations. It’s crazy, but I hardly remember the month of April or the first week and a half of May! I’ve either lost context, or I’m losing it in a big way. These are times like no other.

This thought about context got me thinking about how it applies to our work as information security professionals. I believe one of the biggest tells about good or bad information security leadership is the ability or inability to put risk into context. I think there’s a whole series of podcasts we could do on this topic focusing on how we can help people understand context better. The better we understand context, the better our information security decisions will be. Maybe we’ll start tackling this in a series of podcasts, starting with episode 80 next week.

This week, we’ve got a slightly different topic.

Today, in episode 79, we’re going to focus our attention on a recent report from the Consortium for School Networking (CoSN) titled “The State of Edtech Leadership in 2020“. There’s some really good information in this report, and kudos to CoSN for pulling it together!

Let’s just get to it, episode 79 show notes below…

SHOW NOTES – Episode 79

Date: Monday, May 11th, 2020

Episode 79 Topics

  • Opening
  • Catching Up (as per usual)
  • The State of Edtech Leadership in 2020
  • News
  • Wrapping Up – Shout outs
Opening

[Evan] Hey everyone! Welcome to the UNSECURITY Podcast. This is episode 79, the date is May 11th, 2020, and I’m Evan Francen. With me today is my co-host, Brad Nigh. Good morning Brad!

[Brad] Brad’ll say good morning I bet. He’s a super nice guy like that! 

[Evan] We’ve got a good show planned today! You and I both love helping people, and I think we’re covering some things in this episode that should help all our listeners. Before we get too deep though, let’s catch up. It’s what we do! How you doing and what’s new Brad?

Catching Up

Quick discussion about COVID-19, life, and other stuff.

The State of Edtech Leadership in 2020

[Evan] Like you Brad, I get asked a lot for my opinion about this or that in information security. If the question I get is focused, it’s easier to provide a quick answer, but when a question is vague or open-ended, it takes much longer. This hit home for me this weekend when I was asked to chime in on this article; K-12 Tech Leaders Prioritize Cybersecurity, But Many Underestimate Risks, Survey Says. There’s a lot to unpack here, and a good opinion takes more time.

[Brad] He probably hasn’t read the article yet, but we’ll see…

[Evan] One thought that came to mind when I was asked for my opinion was the concept of context. Anything taken out of context can be made to look anyway we want, good, bad, and/or anything in between. When I read the article, one statement stood out right away:

fewer than 20 percent marked any items on a list of cybersecurity threats as “high-risk” from their perspective

[Evan] What caught my attention were the words “from their perspective”. Questions popped into my head. How do Edtech leaders define “cybersecurity”? What’s on their list of “cybersecurity threats”? What’s “high-risk”? This is a can of worms.

The following are key quotes directly from the CoSN report.

Cybersecurity remains the number one technology priority for IT Leaders, yet the threat is generally underestimated.

For the third straight year, cybersecurity has ranked as the top priority. When it comes to maintaining network security, 69% of districts say they are proactive or very proactive – up significantly over last year’s 52%. Districts employ a variety of strategies to minimize risk, including the vast majority in which IT staff training is a top practice and a majority requiring teachers and principals to receive training as well. Despite concerns, the survey also found that less than a fifth of respondents (18%) have a dedicated full-time employee (FTE) whose sole job is cybersecurity. IT Leaders feel phishing scams pose the greatest risk to network security, with almost half (49%) rating them medium/high risk to high risk. Despite this, results also showed an overall trend to underestimate risk—less than a fifth of respondents considered any specific threat as high risk. This runs counter to the reality that school systems are being specifically targeted by cybercriminals with reported cyber incidents tripling in one year.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) holds both promise and peril for IT Leaders.

The majority (55%) of IT Leaders anticipate that of the emerging technologies, AI will play a significant or transformational role in teaching and learning over the next five years. However, AI also poses concerns, with privacy being the biggest. Before AI becomes adopted at scale and can deliver on its promise, privacy issues will need to be addressed.

The top three challenges persist: budget, professional development, and department silos.

These three areas have been vexing IT Leaders since 2017. While budget is often beyond district control and directly affects professional development, it is within districts’ abilities to address the existence of silos. As outlined in CoSN’s “Digital Leap Success Matrix,” cross-functional executive team leadership is integral to the development of a successful digital learning environment. Until the executive leadership breaks down the silos, IT Leaders will continue to face difficulty in achieving their district’s own technology goals.

Other items from the report

Page 14:

Districts without a dedicated person on staff use a variety of methods to monitor network security. The most common approach is sharing the responsibility across several jobs (46%) followed by incorporating network security monitoring as part of another job (30%). Outsourcing is used by 11% of respondents. A concerning 10% of respondents have an ad hoc approach and do not have anyone assigned to monitoring their district’s network security. A makeshift approach to addressing cybersecurity is one reason why “school districts are proving to be particularly enticing to hackers.”

Page 15:

When it comes to maintaining network security, 69% of districts say they are proactive or very proactive. This represents a significant increase over the prior year’s 52%. Only 13% describe their activity as reactive or very reactive, a decrease from 23% the prior year. These year-over-year results indicate that districts are highly aware of increased network attacks in K-12 environments and are increasing efforts to thwart them. It is likely that lack of resources, not lack of awareness, is responsible for the 13% described as reactive/very reactive. As one respondent lamented: How is our small district able to fend off a multitude of possible cyber threats with the staff we have?

When asked to rate their perception of various risks to network security, respondents did not make significant distinctions between threat types. The largest segment fell into the Medium risk range—low/medium, medium, high/medium. With 49% rating it medium/high risk or high risk, phishing was deemed the greatest risk. It is surprising more did not consider it a greater risk. Phishing attacks have reached the “highest level in three years” with more than two-thirds of all phishing sites using SSL protection. With SSL decreasing as a reliable indicator of security, risks increase for users unable to spot phishing sites. Less than a third (31%) of respondents perceive ransomware attacks as medium/high riisk or high risk. This risk level assessment is also likely lower than it should be as the FBI is reporting ransomware schemes are being specifically designed to target public schools.8 With less than a fifth of respondents rating any threat as high risk (phishing received the most with 16%), threats overall appear underrated. Only 5% assessed student data to be at high risk, yet, according the most recent data on reported K-12 cybersecurity incidents, “the most frequently experienced type of school-related cyber incident…..were data breaches, primarily involving the unauthorized disclosure of student data.” With the number of reported K-12 cybersecurity incidents rising—nearly triple from 2018 to 201910—perceptions in perceived risks should start to realign more closely with reality.

[Evan] No doubt, we have a lot of work to do in K-12. It’s our obligation to do everything we can to help. Check out SecurityStudio’s free resources and do a holistic information security risk assessment like the S2School we developed earlier this year. Put information security risk into perspective and make much better choices.

News

[Evan] Alright. Good talk. Thanks Brad! Let’s cover a couple of interesting news stories before we wrap this up. Here are a couple stories that caught my attention:

Wrapping Up – Shout outs

[Evan] Sheesh! Lots of stuff. Well, that’s it for episode 79. Brad, you have any shoutouts?

[Brad] Maybe he does, maybe he doesn’t…

[Evan] Here’s mine…

[Evan] Seriously, a huge thank you to our listeners! We love your encouragement and we don’t take your advice lightly. You’re all great! Keep the questions and feedback coming. Send things to us by email at unsecurity@protonmail.com. If you’re the social type, socialize with us on Twitter, I’m @evanfrancen and Brad’s @BradNigh.

Have a great week!