Data security is an essential part of the day-to-day mission for any diligent business, but it is also a challenge because of the complexity of how we store, access, and use data while continuing to grow. Therefore, finding effective ways to secure it has been a priority, which has led to the development of data security posture management (DSPM) solutions.

What Value Does a DSPM Solution Provide?

DSPM solutions help organizations build a detailed view of their data environment and associated security risks across three key areas:

• Discovery and classification: This is the fundamental first step, as you can’t secure what you don’t know exists. Solutions look across cloud repositories—platform as a service (PaaS), infrastructure as a service (IaaS), and software as a service (SaaS)—as well as on-premises sources to discover and classify data, looking for sensitive information that could be misused.
• Access reviews: Monitoring who is using critical data, what they’re doing with it, and where they’re doing it from is the next step. It’s also important to track the ways in which sensitive data moves through and out of an organization. DSPM solutions review this information looking for misconfigurations, patterns, poorly configured repositories, and over-provisioned rights.
• Risk analysis: Once the above analysis is complete, DSPM solutions present a clear proposed security posture. They highlight risks, report on compliance against security frameworks, and offer guidance on how to lower these risks. Without insight into these areas, it’s impossible to apply robust data security.

This type of analysis can be done with native tools and skilled operations teams, but DSPM solutions bring all of these actions and insights into one tool, automating the effort and providing additional intelligence along the way—often more quickly and more accurately than a human.

How Will AI Impact the DSPM Market?

The original purchase drivers of data security tools were the introduction of GDPR, the European Union regulation, and a flurry of other data privacy legislation. Organizations needed to understand their data and where it presented regulatory risk, driving an increased adoption of discovery, classification, and security tools.

It’s likely that artificial intelligence (AI) will drive a new wave of DSPM adoption. AI learning models present a range of opportunities for businesses to mine their data for new insights, creativity, and efficiency, but they also present risks. Given the wrong access to data or even access to the wrong data, AI tools can introduce a range of security and commercial business risks. For example, if tools surface information to users that they would not normally be able to access or present inaccurate information to customers and partners, this could result in negative commercial and legal impacts.

Therefore, it’s essential for organizations to take steps to ensure that the data models that AI is using are both accurate and appropriate. How do they do that? They need insight into their data and to understand when and what information AI learning models are accessing and whether that data is still valid. AI usage should have us thinking about how to ensure the quality and security of our data. DSPM may just be the answer.

Are DSPM Solutions Worth the Investment?

The reality is “it depends.” It’s useful to realize that while DSPM solutions can definitely deliver value, they are complex and come with a cost that’s more than financial. Fully adopting the technology, as well as an effective DSPM process, requires operational and cultural change. These types of changes do not come easily, so it’s important that a strong use case exists before you begin looking at DSPM.

The most important thing you should consider before adoption is the business case. Data security is fundamentally a business problem, so adopting DSPM cannot be an IT project alone; it must be part of a business process.

The strongest business case for deployment comes from organizations in heavily regulated industries, such as finance, healthcare, critical infrastructure, and pharma. These usually demand compliance with strict regulations, and businesses must demonstrate their compliance to boards, regulators, and customers.

The next most common business case is companies for which data is the business, such as those involved in data exchange and brokering. They demand the most stringent controls because any failures in security could lead to business failure.

If you’re not in one of those types of organizations, it doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t adopt a DSPM solution, but you do need to consider your business case carefully and ensure there’s buy-in from senior management before you begin a DSPM project.

Stand Up Straight, and Get your Data Security Posture Right

A good data security posture is essential to all businesses. A DSPM tool will give you the insight, guidance, and controls you need and do it more quickly and effectively than pulling together information from several different tools and resources, improving your organization’s posture more quickly and saving on costs at the same time.

So, don’t slouch, sit up straight, and improve your data security posture.

Next Steps

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s DSPM Key Criteria and Radar reports. These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating DSPM Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for DSPM

The post Everything Your Parents Told You About Posture Is True! Even For Data Security appeared first on Gigaom.

Data is core to all organizations and has become an essential asset. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, data is increasingly dispersed across a range of locations. No longer limited to on-premises shares and databases, today data is stored in multiple cloud repositories and data platforms. This complexity presents a significant risk to the security and privacy of data, one that cannot go unchecked, as the impact of a data loss incident is becoming increasingly severe.

The risks associated with the proliferation of data are well known, but the move to the cloud presents specific issues. The ease of use and perceived low cost of cloud repositories means they are often created outside of normal controls. Often, they are used for specific tasks and then discarded and forgotten by original project owners. This leads to shadow data repositories that exist outside of established data storage and security controls. Even those with good data security tools often find that they struggle to identify such shadow repositories, leaving them unprotected and unsecured.

Moreover, the proliferation of data in different repositories has led to the adoption of an array of separate, often platform-specific solutions, which increases complexity and adds cost and risk. Couple this with the ongoing security threats and stringent compliance requirements users must adhere to, and it becomes clear organizations need a better way to stay on top of data security and risk.

DSPM solutions have emerged to give organizations the comprehensive view they need by providing visibility across multiple data platform types, both in the cloud and on-premises. Often cloud-based, DSPM solutions can easily integrate with a wide range of data repositories. They are often able to automatically find data repositories and build a data map. They analyze data movement and lineage to understand how data flows through an organization and where it may introduce risk. DSPM solutions can also discover shadow data stores and analyze the data held within them. They can use this data to help give an organization a clear picture of its data estate, its compliance position, and its security posture. Once deployed, DSPM solutions should continuously monitor security posture, provide guidance on access controls, understand user behavior to quickly identify threats, and enable those threats to be rapidly mitigated.

While some DSPM vendors are well-established providers of data management solutions that have evolved to provide DSPM, this is a new and evolving market in which there are many new and innovative providers with solutions built specifically to tackle this problem.

As organizations’ data demands grow, including in areas such as analytics and AI, diligent IT leaders can’t allow potential threats to remain undetected and unchecked. DSPM is becoming one of the best ways to address this challenge, and that’s something modern data security leaders must consider.

This is our first year evaluating the DSPM space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This GigaOm Radar report examines 12 of the top DSPM solutions and compares offerings against the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and nonfunctional requirements (business criteria) outlined in the companion Key Criteria report. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading DSPM offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

The post GigaOm Radar for Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) appeared first on Gigaom.

The question is: which one is right for your business?

Head-to-Head SSE vs. SASE

The key differences between SSE and SASE primarily revolve around their scope and focus within the IT security and network architecture landscape.

Target Audience

• SSE is particularly appealing to organizations that prioritize security over networking or have specific security needs that can be addressed without modifying their network architecture.
• SASE is aimed at organizations seeking a unified approach to managing both their network and security needs, especially those with complex, distributed environments.

Design Philosophy

• SSE is designed with a security-first approach, prioritizing cloud-centric security services to protect users and data regardless of location. It is particularly focused on securing access to the web, cloud services, and private applications.
• SASE is designed to provide both secure and optimized network access, addressing the needs of modern enterprises with distributed workforces and cloud-based resources. It aims to simplify and consolidate network and security infrastructure.

Scope and Focus

• SSE is a subset of SASE that focuses exclusively on security services. It integrates various security functions, such as cloud access security broker (CASB), firewall as a service (FWaaS), secure web gateway (SWG), zero-trust network access (ZTNA), and other security functions into a unified platform.
• SASE combines both networking and security services in a single, cloud-delivered service model. It includes the same security functions as SSE but also incorporates networking capabilities like SD-WAN, WAN optimization, and quality of service (QoS).

Connectivity

• SSE does not include SD-WAN or other networking functions, focusing instead on security aspects. It is ideal for organizations that either do not require advanced networking capabilities or have already invested in SD-WAN separately.
• SASE includes SD-WAN and other networking functions as part of its offering, providing a comprehensive solution for both connectivity and security. This makes it suitable for organizations looking to consolidate their network and security infrastructure into a single platform.

Implementation Considerations

• SSE can be a strategic choice for organizations looking to enhance their security posture without overhauling their existing network infrastructure. It allows for a phased approach to adopting cloud-based security services.
• SASE represents a more holistic transformation, requiring organizations to integrate their networking and security strategies. It is well-suited for enterprises undergoing digital transformation and seeking to streamline their IT operations.

In summary, the choice between SSE and SASE depends on an organization’s specific needs. SSE offers a focused, security-centric solution, while SASE provides a comprehensive, integrated approach to both networking and security.

Pros and Cons of SSE and SASE

While cloud-based security solutions like SSE and SASE have been gaining traction as organizations move toward more cloud-centric, flexible, and remote-friendly IT environments, each has pros and cons.

Pros of SSE and SASE

Enhanced Security

• SSE provides a unified platform for various security services like SWG, CASB, ZTNA, and FWaaS, which can improve an organization’s security posture by offering consistent protection across all users and data, regardless of location.
• SASE combines networking and security into a single cloud service, which can lead to better security outcomes due to integrated traffic inspection and security policy implementation.

Scalability and Flexibility

• Both SSE and SASE offer scalable security solutions that can adapt to changing business needs and accommodate growth without the need for significant infrastructure investment.

Simplified Management

• SSE simplifies the management of security services by consolidating them into a single platform, reducing complexity and operational expenses.
• SASE reduces the complexity of managing separate networking and security products by bringing them under one umbrella.

Improved Performance

• SSE can improve user experience by providing faster and more efficient connectivity to web, cloud, and private applications.
• SASE often leads to better network performance due to its built-in private backbone and optimization features.

Cost Savings

• Both SSE and SASE can lead to cost savings by minimizing the need for multiple security and networking products and reducing the overhead associated with maintaining traditional hardware.

Cons of SSE and SASE

Security Risks

• SSE may not account for the unique needs of application security for SaaS versus infrastructure as a service (IaaS), potentially leaving some attack surfaces unprotected.
• SASE adoption may involve trade-offs between security and usability, potentially increasing the attack surface if security policies are relaxed.

Performance Issues

• Some SSE solutions may introduce latency if they require backhauling data to a centralized point.
• SASE may have performance issues if not properly configured or if the network is not tuned to work with cloud-native technologies.

Implementation Challenges

• SSE can be complex to implement, especially for organizations with established centralized network security models.
• SASE may involve significant changes to traditional infrastructure, which can disrupt productivity and collaboration during the transition.

Data Privacy and Compliance

• SSE must ensure data privacy and compliance with country and regional industry regulations, which can be challenging for some providers.
• SASE may introduce new challenges in compliance and data management due to the distribution of corporate data across external connections and cloud providers.

Dependency on Cloud Providers

• Both SSE and SASE increase dependency on cloud providers, which can affect control over data and systems.

Vendor Lock-In

• SSE could further confuse some who initially believe it is something separate from SASE, leading to potential vendor lock-in.
• With SASE, there’s a risk of single provider lock-in, which may not be suitable for businesses requiring advanced IT security functionality.

While both SSE and SASE offer numerous benefits, they also present numerous challenges. Organizations must carefully weigh these factors to determine whether SSE or SASE aligns with their specific needs and strategic goals.

Key Considerations When Choosing Between SSE and SASE

When choosing between SSE and SASE, organizations must consider a variety of factors that align with their specific requirements, existing network infrastructure, and strategic objectives.

Organizational Security Needs

• SSE is ideal for organizations prioritizing security services embedded within their network architecture, especially those in sectors like finance, government, and healthcare, where stringent security is paramount.
• SASE is suitable for organizations seeking an all-encompassing solution that integrates networking and security services. It provides secure access across various locations and devices, tailored for a remote workforce.

Security vs. Network Priorities

• If security is the top priority, SSE provides a comprehensive set of security services for cloud applications and services.
• If network performance and scalability need to be improved, SASE may be the better option.

Support for Remote Workers and Branch Offices

• SSE is often integrated with on-premises infrastructure and may be better suited for organizations looking to strengthen network security at the edge.
• SASE is often a cloud-native solution with global points of presence, making it ideal for enterprises seeking to simplify network architecture, especially for remote users and branch offices.

Cloud-Native Solution vs. Network Infrastructure Security

• SSE is deployed near data origin and emphasizes strong load balancing and content caching with firewalls or intrusion prevention systems.
• SASE enables secure, anywhere access to cloud applications, integrating various network and security functions for a streamlined approach.

Existing Network Infrastructure

• Organizations with complex or legacy network infrastructures may find SASE a better choice, as it can provide a more gradual path to migration.
• For cloud-native organizations or those with simpler network needs, SSE may be more appropriate.

Vendor Architecture and SLAs

• Ensure the chosen SSE vendor has strong service-level agreements (SLAs) and a track record of inspecting inline traffic for large global enterprises.
• For SASE, a single-vendor approach can simplify management and enhance performance by optimizing the flow of traffic between users, applications, and the cloud.

Flexibility and Scalability

• SSE should be flexible and scalable to address enterprise needs without sacrificing function, stability, and protection.
• SASE should be adaptable to dynamic business needs and offer a roadmap that aligns with IT initiatives and business goals.

Budget Considerations

• SASE solutions are typically more expensive up front but can offer significant cost savings in the long run by eliminating the need for multiple security appliances and tools.
• SSE might be a more cost-effective option for organizations that do not require the full suite of networking services included in SASE.

Transition Path to SASE

• SSE can serve as a stepping stone in the transition from traditional on-premises security to cloud-based security architecture, providing a clear path to SASE when the organization is ready.

Consultation with Experts

• It is advisable to consult with network security experts to assess needs and requirements before recommending the best solution for the organization.

Next Steps

In summary, the choice between SSE and SASE depends on an organization’s specific needs. While SSE offers a focused, security-centric solution, SASE provides a comprehensive, integrated approach to both networking and security.

Take the time to make a thorough assessment of your organization’s needs before deciding which route to take. Once that’s done, you can create a vendor shortlist using our GigaOm Key Criteria and Radar reports for SSE and/or SASE.

These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating SSE Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for SSE
• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating SASE Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for SASE

If you’re not yet a GigaOm subscriber, you can access the research using a free trial.

The post SSE vs. SASE: Which One is Right for Your Business? appeared first on Gigaom.

Microsegmentation is a Multiple-Entity Construct

In absolute terms, when you define a microsegment, you dictate the policies applied to a single entity, such that it allows some traffic or requests while blocking others. However, traffic always flows between two entities, so both endpoints must be considered.

On one end, you have the entity you want to isolate—let’s say a container. On the other, you have all the other entities that will communicate with the container you want to isolate. It’s worth noting that these requests are likely bidirectional, but for the sake of simplicity, we will assume ingress traffic only.

When looking to isolate a container, sophisticated policies (other than allow/block) need to consider requests from a wide range of entities, which include other containers, virtual machines, developers and administrators, function as a service (FaaS)-based microservices, external APIs, monolithic applications, IoT devices, and OT devices.

The underlying technologies that can define policies between containers and all these other types of entities include container networking interfaces for container-to-container communication, service meshes for service-to-container communication, ingress controllers for cloud or data center workload-to-container communication, secure shell for administrator-to-container communication, and so on.

It quickly becomes obvious that defining these policies involves a lot of components that span across disciplines. Some solutions choose to deploy agents as a single point for managing policies, but organizations increasingly favor agentless solutions.

When working with a microsegmentation solution, the day-to-day activities of defining and managing these policies will not involve directly working with all these technologies because they abstract all these aspects and provide an intuitive GUI.

The reason I am highlighting this is to evaluate a solution. Depending on the types of assets you need protected, the supported entities are by far the most important evaluation aspect. If you want to protect IoT devices, but a solution does not support that, it should be immediately excluded.

Microsegmentation is Not Just Network-Based

Those with a networking background, myself included, borrow the segmentation concept from firewall-defined network segments. It’s both useful and relevant, and you can see this concept being carried over in distributed firewall solutions provided by the likes of Aviatrix, VMware, and Nutanix.

But there are two more ways of isolating entities besides using network constructs:

1. Using identity-based policy enforcement. This offers controls that are independent of network constructs such as IPs. Access can be governed using attributes such as operating system type, patch status, VM name, Active Directory groups, and cloud-native identities like labels, tags, and namespaces. Solutions can also assign labels or categorize entities natively to remove dependencies on third-party labeling systems.
2. Using process-based policy enforcement. For example, the microsegmentation solutions can monitor the running processes on every entity, capturing detailed context for each process and its associated libraries. Process and library hashes can be assessed against a threat data feed to identify malicious code execution and detect variation from known good processes. Processes can include applications, services, daemons, or scripts, and details such as process name, path, arguments, user context, and parent processes. If a malicious process is detected, the entity is then isolated from communicating with the rest of the network.

At the end of the day, you can’t cut off communications without involving the network, but the microsegmentation policy itself does not have to be dependent on networking constructs, such as 5-tuples.

Next Steps

When evaluating microsegmentation solutions, I recommend you approach them as highly sophisticated designers of security policies. Most often, an entity can be isolated just by blocking ports. So, the effectiveness of the solution will depend on whether it can support all the entities you need to protect and how easy it is to manage all the policy permutations.

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s microsegmentation Key Criteria and Radar reports. These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Microsegmentation Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for Microsegmentation

If you’re not yet a GigaOm subscriber, you can access the research using a free trial.

The post There’s Nothing Micro About Microsegmentation appeared first on Gigaom.

At its core, SSE converges multiple cloud-delivered security services, including cloud access security broker (CASB), firewall as a service (FWaaS), secure web gateway (SWG), and zero-trust network access (ZTNA) into a unified, cloud-based platform that ensures secure access to the web, cloud services, and private applications. By shifting security closer to users and devices, SSE enhances protection, reduces latency, and ensures secure access to cloud-based resources.

Furthermore, the importance of SSE stems from its ability to adapt security measures to where workloads, devices, and users are at any point in time, enhancing protection and ensuring secure access to resources regardless of location in today’s remote work and cloud-centric landscape—where traditional perimeter-based security models fall short. Moreover, by addressing the basic security concerns associated with cloud transition, digital business enablement, and remote work, SSE is evolving as an essential element for constructing cloud and networking security that can accelerate digital transformation by securing enterprise cloud services, private applications, and software as a service (SaaS).

As the SSE market evolves, we expect to see significant growth driven by demand for more agile, scalable, and integrated security solutions that can support the dynamic needs of businesses. Key trends shaping the future of SSE include the integration of advanced AI/ML technologies for better threat detection, the emphasis on zero-trust principles, and the need for solutions that offer seamless integration with existing IT infrastructures. In preparation, organizations must understand the SSE vendor landscape, evaluate integration capabilities, and adopt phased implementation strategies to ensure a smooth transition to these more advanced security models.

This is our first year evaluating the SSE space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This GigaOm Radar report evaluates 16 of the top SSE solutions and compares offerings against the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and nonfunctional requirements (business criteria) outlined in the companion Key Criteria report. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading SSE offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

The post GigaOm Radar for Security Service Edge (SSE) appeared first on Gigaom.

Discovering XDR: Past and Present

My previous stint in developing an XDR prototype was imbued with the vision of creating a unified platform that could offer a panoramic view of security threats, moving beyond siloed defenses. Fast forward to my recent exploration, and it’s clear that the industry has taken this vision and run with it—molding XDR into a comprehensive solution that integrates across security layers to offer unparalleled visibility and control.

The research process was akin to piecing together a vast jigsaw puzzle. Through a blend of reading industry white papers, diving deep into knowledge-base articles, and drawing from my background, I charted the evolution of XDR from a promising prototype to a mature cybersecurity solution. This deep dive not only broadened my understanding but also reignited my enthusiasm for the potential of integrated defense mechanisms against today’s sophisticated cyberthreats.

The Adoption Challenge: Beyond Integration

The most formidable challenge that emerged in adopting XDR solutions is integration complexity—a barrier we had anticipated in the early development days and has only intensified. Organizations today face the Herculean task of intertwining their diversified security tools with an XDR platform, where each tool speaks a different digital language and adheres to distinct protocols.

However, the adoption challenges extend beyond the technical realm. There’s a strategic dissonance in aligning an organization’s security objectives with the capabilities of XDR platforms. This alignment is crucial, yet often elusive, as it demands a top-down reevaluation of security priorities, processes, and personnel readiness. Organizations must not only reconcile their current security infrastructure with an XDR system but also ensure their teams are adept at leveraging this integration to its fullest potential.

Surprises and Insights

The resurgence of AI and machine learning within XDR solutions echoed the early ambitions of prototype development. The sophistication of these technologies in predicting and mitigating threats in real time was a revelation, showcasing how far the maturation of XDR has come. Furthermore, the vibrant ecosystem of partnerships and integrations underscored XDR’s shift from a standalone solution to a collaborative security framework, a pivot that resonates deeply with the interconnected nature of digital threats today.

Reflecting on the Evolution

Since venturing into XDR prototype development, the sector’s evolution has been marked by a nuanced understanding of adoption complexities and an expansion in threat coverage. The emphasis on refining integration strategies and enhancing customization signifies a market that’s not just growing but maturing—ready to tackle the diversifying threat landscape with innovative solutions.

The journey back into the XDR landscape, juxtaposed against my early experiences, was a testament to the sector’s dynamism. As adopters navigate the complexities of integrating XDR into their security arsenals, the path ahead is illuminated by the promise of a more resilient, unified defense mechanism against cyber adversaries. The evolution of XDR from an emerging prototype to a cornerstone of modern cybersecurity strategies mirrors the sector’s readiness to confront the future—a future where the digital well-being of organizations is shielded by the robust, integrated, and intuitive capabilities of XDR platforms.

Next Steps

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s XDR Key Criteria and Radar reports. These reports provide a comprehensive overview of the market, outline the criteria you’ll want to consider in a purchase decision, and evaluate how a number of vendors perform against those decision criteria.

• GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating XDR Solutions
• GigaOm Radar for XDR

If you’re not yet a GigaOm subscriber, you can access the research using a free trial.

The post The Quest for Extended Detection and Response (XDR): Unraveling Cybersecurity’s Next Generation appeared first on Gigaom.

Identity and associated credentials, whether human or machine, are the tickets to access and privileges, so gaining control of them is a priority for cyberattackers. Not surprisingly, attempts to steal them are becoming increasingly sophisticated, and trying to detect and stop sophisticated attacks is ever more difficult. This challenge has intensified in the cloud era; with more potential platforms to attack and gain access to, the attacker’s job has become easier, while the defender’s is more complex.

The complexity and frequency of attacks mean that a more proactive approach is required; one that can detect and mitigate potential threats autonomously, accurately, and more quickly than human security teams could. This need has led to the development of identity threat detection and response solutions (ITDR). These systems use broad telemetry, large-scale analytics, and intelligence to identify threats and automate the response to them to quickly and accurately reduce risk.

ITDR solutions use a combination of security tools, processes, and best practices to effectively detect and respond to identity-related threats, such as credential theft, privilege misuse, data breaches, and fraudulent activity. This capability can be a major component in significantly reducing the threat posed by identity security attacks. Any tool that improves identity security should be evaluated as a priority because identity breaches present attackers with the opportunity to engineer attempts to cause disruption and steal data, cash, or both, with obviously negative impacts on any business.

Business Imperative
Identity is a high-value target for the modern cyberattacker, and a breached identity has the potential to significantly impact a business, so finding ways to be effective in identifying threats and quickly reducing the risk they pose must be a priority in any diligent IT security leader’s cybersecurity strategy.

Dealing with the challenge has become more difficult as the sophistication and accuracy of identity threats have increased. As attackers begin to use tools such as generative AI and large learning models (LLMs) to develop even more sophisticated attack approaches, the risk grows.

A solution will require financial investment, and deployment and adoption will take time and may require an organization to rethink the way it manages identity, but the benefit of more secure identities is significant. Those who fail to address the challenge run a high risk of identity compromise, a significant breach, and business disruption.

Sector Adoption Score
To help executives and decision-makers assess the potential impact and value of an ITDR solution deployment to the business, this GigaOm Key Criteria report provides a structured assessment of the sector across five factors: benefit, maturity, urgency, impact, and effort. By scoring each factor based on how strongly it compels or deters adoption of an ITDR solution, we provide an overall Sector Adoption Score (Figure 1) of 3.6 out of 5, with 5 indicating the strongest possible recommendation to adopt. This indicates that an ITDR solution is a credible candidate for deployment and worthy of thoughtful consideration.

The factors contributing to the Sector Adoption Score for ITDR are explained in more detail in the Sector Brief section that follows.