Chris Ray, Author at Gigaom

The Quest for Extended Detection and Response (XDR): Unraveling Cybersecurity’s Next Generation

Chris Ray — Fri, 26 Apr 2024 18:19:55 +0000

Embarking on an exploration of the extended detection and response (XDR) sector wasn’t just another research project for me; it was a dive back into familiar waters with an eye on how the tide has turned. Having once been part of a team at a vendor that developed an early XDR prototype, my return to this evolving domain was both nostalgic and eye-opening. The concept we toyed with in its nascent stages has burgeoned into a cybersecurity imperative, promising to redefine threat detection and response across the digital landscape.

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.

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.

GigaOm Radar for Extended Detection and Response (XDR)

Chris Ray — Wed, 24 Apr 2024 15:00:16 +0000

Enterprise cybersecurity comprises multiple security solutions from various vendors. Solutions are typically combined with a security information and event management (SIEM) and/or a security orchestration automation and response (SOAR) tool to allow security analysts to correlate events across the network to better detect and respond to cyberattacks.

Although SIEM and SOAR tools originally came with out-of-the-box threat detection, the effectiveness of this capability relied heavily on human involvement to fine-tune the system for their environment. Systems were therefore limited by the expertise of the security staff and required extensive maintenance to keep up with the ever-changing threat landscape. This limitation led to less-than-intelligent detection and a crippling overabundance of alerts, resulting in real threats being drowned out by the noise—and remaining undetected.

In contrast, extended detection and response (XDR) solutions distribute detection and response across the security stack to provide ubiquitous coverage from endpoint to cloud by delivering unified visibility, control, and protection. XDR collects telemetry and leverages artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), or other statistical analysis methods to correlate event logs, and then evaluates them against intrusion response frameworks. Additionally, XDR systems integrate threat intelligence to enhance and improve threat detection capabilities. Although having the full security stack telemetry funnel through an analytics engine that’s enriched with up-to-date threat intel and measured against intrusion frameworks doesn’t provide a silver bullet for security, it’s as close to “security in a bag” as you can get at this time.

XDR attempts to address the security skills gap by reducing the need for experienced security analysts and instead using AI, ML, and statistical methods to provide threat intelligence-driven analysis. It identifies connections between seemingly unrelated network activities to uncover sophisticated attacks, and automated remediation procedures reduce the mean time to respond (MTTR) to a potential incident.

This is our third year evaluating the XDR space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This report builds on our previous analysis and considers how the market has evolved over the last year.

This GigaOm Radar report examines 19 of the top XDR solutions in the market, 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 XDR offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

The GigaOm Key Criteria report provides a detailed decision framework for IT and executive leadership assessing enterprise technologies. Each report defines relevant functional and nonfunctional aspects of solutions in a sector. The Key Criteria report informs the GigaOm Radar report, which provides a forward-looking assessment of vendor solutions in the sector.

The post GigaOm Radar for Extended Detection and Response (XDR) appeared first on Gigaom.

GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Solutions

Chris Ray — Fri, 05 Apr 2024 15:26:50 +0000

Enterprise cybersecurity is composed of multiple security solutions from various vendors combined with a security information and event management (SIEM) and/or security orchestration, automation, and response (SOAR) product that allows security analysts to correlate events across the network in an effort to detect and respond to cyberattacks.

Traditionally, most SIEM/SOAR solutions came with out-of-the-box threat detection capabilities; however, their effectiveness relied heavily on a human in the loop to fine-tune these systems for their environment. Because of this, any such solution was limited by the expertise of the security staff and required extensive maintenance to keep up with the ever-changing threat landscape. This limitation resulted in less-than-intelligent detection and a crippling oversupply of alerts. Ultimately, when a solution is dependent on human knowledge, real threats are drowned out by the noise and remain undetected, and this problem can be exacerbated if there are multiple detection and response solutions working independently.

In contrast, XDR distributes detection and response across the IT architecture to provide ubiquitous coverage from endpoint to cloud by delivering unified visibility, control, and protection. XDR collects telemetry and leverages artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning (ML), or other statistical analysis methods to correlate event logs, enabling evaluation against intrusion response frameworks. Additionally, XDR systems integrate threat intelligence to enhance and improve threat detection capabilities. While not quite a “silver bullet” for security, XDR is as close to “security in a bag” as you can get at this time.

XDR aims to mitigate the security skills gap by reducing the need for experienced security analysts and instead using AI, ML, and statistical methods to provide threat intelligence-driven analysis. It identifies connections among seemingly unrelated network activities to uncover sophisticated attacks. Additionally, automated remediation responses reduce the mean time to respond (MTTR) to a potential incident.

Business Imperative
Organizations today face immense pressure to enable secure digital transformation, even as evolving cyberthreats erode confidence and darken outlook. Siloed security tools fail to provide comprehensive breach prevention, forcing CISOs to grapple with reduced visibility, manual alert triaging, and delayed incident response. XDR promises to alleviate these issues by unifying historically disjointed control points with AI-driven automation to expose advanced attacks across hybrid networks quickly and effectively.

Though initial deployment of XDR demands deep planning and phased execution, the long-term efficiency gains, risk reduction, and security uplift have become essential ingredients in building and maintaining continuous operations and trust in the digital economy. Leadership must provide proper support and resources for such a sweeping initiative.

Sector Adoption Score
To help executives and decision-makers assess the potential impact and value of an XDR 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 XDR solution, we provide an overall Sector Adoption Score (Figure 1) of 3.8 out of 5, with 5 indicating the strongest possible recommendation to adopt. This indicates that an XDR solution is a credible candidate for deployment and worthy of thoughtful consideration.

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

Key Criteria for Evaluating XDR Solutions

Sector Adoption Score

Deters
Adoption

Discourages
Adoption

Merits
Consideration

Encourages
Adoption

Compels
Adoption

Figure 1. Sector Adoption Score for XDR

This is the third year that GigaOm has reported on the XDR space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This report builds on our previous analysis and considers how the market has evolved over the last year.

This GigaOm Key Criteria report highlights the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and nonfunctional requirements (business criteria) for selecting an effective XDR solution. The companion GigaOm Radar report identifies vendors and products that excel in those decision criteria. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading XDR offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

The post GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Solutions appeared first on Gigaom.

Springing the Trap: Snagging Rogue Insiders with Deceptive Tactics

Chris Ray — Fri, 22 Mar 2024 19:49:38 +0000

Insider threats pose a serious cybersecurity challenge for organizations across all industries. When trusted employees, contractors, or partners abuse their privileges and access to carry out malicious acts, the damage can be severe. Unlike external attackers, malicious insiders have intimate knowledge that they can exploit to breach critical information or sabotage operations. Detecting illicit activity from an insider is also vastly more difficult than finding perimeter threats. Their legitimate credentials and access allow them to fly under the radar of traditional security controls.

Deception technology has emerged as a new and innovative approach to safeguard against insider threats. Deception platforms set up decoys and traps that attract insider attention by masquerading as real sensitive company resources. When an insider attempts to access the deceptive assets, alerts are generated to cue incident response teams. By providing fake systems and data that appear credible to insiders, deception technology can shine a spotlight on unauthorized insider actions that point to a potential compromise. Evaluating this new form of defensive technology is critical for organizations seeking improved safeguards against the insider threat challenge.

Challenges of Detecting Insider Threats

Malicious insiders often undertake stealthy approaches to unauthorized activity that enable them to fly under the radar. Because they have legitimate access and credentials, insiders don’t need to hack systems and often access sensitive resources as part of their regular job duties. These factors make distinguishing innocent actions from illicit insider activities extremely tricky for security teams.

Additionally, malicious insiders are adept at understanding their organizations from the inside out, as they possess intricate knowledge of systems, data stores, security processes, and potential loopholes. This arms them with the blueprints to undertake surgical, stealthy attacks that easily evade traditional safeguards. They can slowly siphon small amounts of data over time, camouflaging their tracks along the way, or they may lay low for months or years before acting, all while maintaining a flawless job performance.

Many security tools and policies are designed to guard against outside attackers but fall short when applied to insider threats. Firewalls, network monitoring, access controls and other perimeter defenses can be neatly circumvented by insiders since they don’t flag authorized account activity. New approaches are sorely needed to account for the particular challenges posed by the insider threat. Deception technology has risen to fill this critical security gap, providing alerts and visibility where other controls fail blind.

Deception Technology Capabilities

Deception technology platforms provide specially designed traps and decoys that ensnare malicious insider activity. The systems create fake digital assets, including documents, emails, servers, databases, and even entire networks that appear credible to insiders but contain no real production data. When an insider takes the bait and attempts to access these decoys, alerts are triggered automatically.

Well-constructed deception environments emulate the actual IT infrastructure and include decoys that very closely mirror the type of sensitive or regulated data an insider might target. For example, a healthcare company could deploy deceptive personal health information (PHI) records with bogus patient data that is formatted identically to real electronic health records. The goal is to make the lures attractive enough for malicious actors to fully engage.

Advanced deception solutions don’t just generate alerts; they also provide monitoring around deceptions to capture evidence for investigations. Detailed forensics reveal exactly what the insider looked at, downloaded, manipulated, or destroyed, documenting their footsteps throughout the attack sequence. Some solutions will even feed this threat intel back into other security systems like SIEMs to accelerate incident response.

Deception tech therefore delivers immense value to insider threat programs through early detection, detailed visibility, and low false positives. By employing deception, organizations gain an additional line of defense against malicious insiders that traditional tools miss. What sets deception apart is the ability to convert authorized users into threats when they take unprecedented action on deceptive assets.

Use Cases and Deployment Strategies

Implementing deception technology for effective insider threat detection requires planning and strategy. The systems provide maximum value when decoys closely resemble the true confidential data insiders have access to and integrate with other key security tools.

For example, a decoy document labeled “ACME Merger Strategy” will carry more weight if positioned among other documents that a financial analyst would normally review for their job duties. Similarly, bogus engineering diagrams of forthcoming products can trap insider threats within an R&D department when mixed alongside real confidential schemas stored on the network.

Insider threat programs will often conduct assessments to map sensitive data and identify which systems legitimately house this information across the organization. Deception technology can then mirror real assets and place lures accordingly. Since insiders are authorized to access parts of the corporate network, logging into a system alone should not trigger alerts. Instead, alerts should activate only when deceptive content is touched.

Thoughtful deployment strategies maximize the likelihood that insider threats interact with lures and spring deception traps. Network architects may advise on critical network sites for trap insertion while cloud security teams advise on risky SaaS apps prime for deception across business units. Properly integrated, deception solutions reinforce the entire security ecosystem.

Thwarting Insider Threats

Insider threats present an undeniably tricky challenge for organizations to overcome. Malicious insiders operate behind the lines, often able to circumvent traditional perimeter defenses like firewalls, IDS, and access controls. Their intimate knowledge, authorized credentials, and internal vantage point equip insiders to undertake stealthy, tactical strikes against sensitive systems and data.

By proactively baiting malicious actors and generating alerts when they interact with fakes, deception technology delivers a robust new capability for protecting an organization’s crown jewels against compromise. As part of a defense-in-depth approach, deception solutions reinforce the security stack, serving as the innermost layer of protection against lurking insider danger.

Deception technology provides a uniquely potent counter to these threats by laying traps internally behind perimeter defenses. Well-positioned decoys and lures offer tremendous value for insider threat programs seeking early detection, enhanced visibility, and rapid response to unauthorized activity. As the cybersecurity industry wakes up to the rising danger of insider attacks, deception platforms offer a rapidly maturing solution to this menacing threat.

Next Steps

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s deception technology 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.

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

The post Springing the Trap: Snagging Rogue Insiders with Deceptive Tactics appeared first on Gigaom.

Best Practices for Implementing an ASM Solution

Chris Ray — Mon, 18 Mar 2024 16:12:28 +0000

In the ever-changing realm of digital technology, organizations are witnessing an unprecedented expansion of their digital footprints. This expansion is not unique to large enterprises; small and medium-sized businesses SMBs are equally part of this rapid digital transformation. The challenge for all lies in managing and securing their sprawling digital ecosystem.

The proliferation of cloud services, the explosion of internet of things (IoT) devices, and the ever-growing complexity of IT infrastructure have created a vast and dynamic digital landscape. As assets multiply and diversify, they become harder to monitor and protect, leaving organizations vulnerable to cyberthreats and attacks. Attack surface management (ASM) solutions provide cyber defense through the continuous discovery of and insight into an organization’s attack surface.

In this blog, we’ll guide you through the essentials of implementing an ASM solution, offering insights applicable to a wide range of organizations. We’ll delve into how to prepare for a successful adoption, how to choose the right solution for your organization’s needs, and we’ll highlight common pitfalls and misconceptions to help you avoid potential complications. This comprehensive approach can streamline your journey towards effective ASM implementation, ensuring a smoother and more secure integration into your cybersecurity strategy.

How to Prepare for ASM Adoption

1. Conduct A Thorough Inventory of Digital Assets

ASM solutions provide an in-depth discovery of digital assets, including IPs, hostnames, domains, and social media profiles. However, prior to investing in an ASM tool, it’s valuable to conduct a more general pre-ASM inventory. This preliminary step will uncover gaps in your security framework and establish a baseline for comparison. It’s an essential exercise for understanding the current state of your digital asset management.

In doing this, you not only highlight the areas needing immediate attention, but you also set a reference point to gauge the impact and value of ASM later. This initial evaluation is crucial when it comes time to decide on whether to renew your current ASM services or look for a different solution, as it offers clear insights into whether the current ASM tool is delivering tangible benefits in terms of security enhancement and resource allocation.

2. Set Clear Objectives for ASM Implementation

Implementing an ASM solution should be guided by well-defined objectives. It’s essential to establish what you aim to achieve with an ASM solution, whether it’s enhancing visibility over the attack surface, reducing the number of vulnerabilities, or improving the response time to security incidents.

These objectives must align with the broader goals of the organization’s cybersecurity strategy. Clear objectives help in prioritizing tasks and allocating resources efficiently. They also provide a framework for evaluating the success of the ASM solution implementation, allowing for adjustments and improvements in the strategy over time.

3. Engage Stakeholders Across Departments

Successful adoption of an ASM solution requires engaging and collaborating with stakeholders across various departments. This includes IT and security teams as well as operations, human resources, and legal—departments that interact with IT systems and influence the organization’s security posture.

Effective communication and collaboration among these teams can foster a culture of cybersecurity awareness throughout the organization. Engaging stakeholders early in the process helps in understanding their needs, addressing their concerns, and ensuring their cooperation in implementing and maintaining ASM practices. This holistic approach is key to ensuring that ASM is viewed not just as a “techy solution to a technical problem,” but as an integral part of the organization’s overall risk management strategy.

By addressing these key areas in the preparatory phase, organizations can lay a strong foundation for a successful ASM solution adoption. This process ensures that the implementation aligns with the organization’s cybersecurity strategy and involves all relevant stakeholders, leading to a more resilient and secure digital environment.

Key Considerations for SMBs vs. Large Enterprises

When considering the adoption of any technology, it’s important to recognize that an organization’s needs and available resources vary significantly based on its size of business. SMBs and large enterprises have distinct challenges and priorities that influence their approach to ASM.

SMBs

Look for cost-effective, scalable solutions: SMBs operate with limited budgets, particularly for cybersecurity. Therefore, when adopting an ASM solution, it’s essential for SMBs to focus on solutions that are cost-effective. This means looking for solutions that offer essential features without unnecessary extras that inflate costs. Additionally, the ideal ASM tool for an SMB should meet its current needs and also be capable of scaling as the business grows. Scalability should be seamless, allowing the business to expand its ASM capabilities without significant overhauls or investments.
Prioritize ease of use and minimal maintenance: SMBs typically have smaller IT teams, sometimes with limited specialized cybersecurity expertise. Hence, ease of use becomes a crucial factor in ASM adoption. Tools that are user-friendly and require minimal technical skill to operate can be highly beneficial. Moreover, solutions that demand minimal maintenance are preferable, as they reduce the strain on the IT staff. Automated updates, straightforward integrations, and user-friendly interfaces can significantly enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of an ASM strategy for an SMB environment.

Large Enterprises

Look for scalable, flexible solutions that provide comprehensive coverage: For large enterprises, scalability is also a key consideration. These organizations are large to begin with and often grow continuously, so the ASM solution must be able to scale accordingly, handling an increasing number of assets without degradation in performance. Solutions should also be flexible and provide comprehensive coverage. Large enterprises should look for ASM solutions that offer extensive coverage across various domains, including on-premises, cloud, and mobile environments. The ability to cover the entire spectrum of digital assets ensures that the enterprise can effectively identify and manage vulnerabilities and threats across its vast and diverse attack surface.
Prioritize products that offer robust integration capabilities: Large enterprises often have complex IT environments with various legacy systems, cloud services, and other technologies. For effective ASM in such environments, it’s crucial to seek solutions that offer robust integration capabilities. These solutions must be able to integrate seamlessly with a wide range of existing systems and tools. This integration ensures that the ASM tool can provide comprehensive visibility and management of the attack surface, capturing the nuances and complexities of a large enterprise’s digital environment.

Common Challenges and Missteps to Avoid

Adopting an ASM solution comes with its own set of challenges and potential missteps, some of which are commonly overlooked. Understanding these pitfalls is crucial for a successful ASM implementation.

1. Underestimating the Complexity of the Organization’s Digital Assets

One of the most frequent mistakes is underestimating the complexity and diversity of the organization’s digital assets. This includes websites, APIs, cloud services, and remote devices. Organizations often fail to fully comprehend the scale and intricacy of their digital footprint, leading to gaps in their ASM strategy. A comprehensive understanding of these assets is critical for effective monitoring and protection. Without it, significant vulnerabilities may remain undetected and unaddressed.

2. Overlooking the Need for Continuous Updates and Maintenance

Another common oversight is neglecting the fluid nature of ASM. Attack surfaces are not static; they evolve constantly as new technologies are adopted and as existing systems are updated or decommissioned. Consequently, ASM is not a one-time activity but requires ongoing updates and maintenance. Organizations sometimes overlook this need for continual vigilance, leading to outdated security postures and increased risk exposure.

3. Failing to Align ASM Strategies with Business Objectives

Perhaps the most serious strategic misstep is the failure to align ASM efforts with broader business objectives. ASM solutions should not operate in a vacuum but rather be an integral part of the organization’s overall risk management and business strategy. This means ASM initiatives should support and be informed by the organization’s goals, level of risk tolerance, and operational requirements. A misalignment here can result in wasted resources, efforts that do not effectively mitigate risk, or even initiatives that inadvertently hinder business operations.

Recognizing and addressing these common challenges and missteps can significantly enhance the effectiveness of an organization’s ASM strategy, ensuring that it protects against threats and aligns with and supports the organization’s broader business goals.

Next Steps

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s ASM 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.

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

The post Best Practices for Implementing an ASM Solution appeared first on Gigaom.

GigaOm Radar for Deception Technology

Chris Ray — Mon, 11 Mar 2024 15:00:26 +0000

Cybersecurity technology, and more specifically deception technology, has become increasingly important in today’s digital landscape. Deception solutions, including baits, lures, and traps, primarily focus on tricking threat actors into interacting with a decoy in order to provide early threat detection and robust intelligence that helps in responding to cyberattacks. Their significance is paramount considering the continuous rise in advanced persistent threats, spear-phishing attacks, and insider threats.

This technology is essential to all individuals and businesses operating digitally, especially to large corporations, government institutions, and industries like finance, healthcare, and retail, that are popular targets of cybercriminals. As systems become interconnected and more complex, with the expansion of cloud services and internet of things (IoT) devices, so does the growing surface for potential attacks. It is at this critical juncture that the role of cybersecurity technology becomes pivotal.

From a business perspective, strategic deployment of deception technology significantly reduces the risks of data breaches, system intrusions, and resulting downtime. It can also provide comprehensive insights into adversaries’ tactics and an organization’s vulnerabilities, enabling the sculpting of a more resilient defense system.

Yet, for company executives, deception technology’s importance goes beyond securing business infrastructure. In a world where a company’s reputation significantly hinges on its ability to safeguard customers’ data, executives are under increased pressure to ensure its security. With harsher data protection regulations and hefty penalties for data breaches, this is no longer a contingency plan, but a business imperative. Organizations without robust cybersecurity measures risk financial losses, legal repercussions, and may erode customer trust and negatively impact their business reputation.

Deception technology has been evolving, moving beyond basic decoy systems to offer multilayered, adaptive deception techniques across different environments—on-premises, cloud, hybrid, IoT, and operational technology (OT). Driven by AI and machine learning (ML) methodologies, the latest vendors entering the market signify a promising shift towards proactive security instances, with a strong capability to deceive, detect, and defer sophisticated cyberattackers. Thus, for businesses striving to stay ahead in the cybersecurity realm, understanding and implementing these evolving cybersecurity technologies is a strategic and inevitable mandate.

This is our third year evaluating the deception technology space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This report builds on our previous analysis and considers how the market has evolved over the last year.

This GigaOm Radar report examines 12 of the top deception technology 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 deception technology offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

The post GigaOm Radar for Deception Technology appeared first on Gigaom.

GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology Solutions

Chris Ray — Thu, 29 Feb 2024 17:11:28 +0000

Attacker techniques and behaviors are constantly evolving. As cybersecurity vendors zig, attackers zag. This creates an environment where what worked in the past to detect malicious actions may not work today and almost certainly won’t work in the future. Organizations, therefore, need security tools that can evolve as quickly as attackers do, and perhaps even anticipate some malicious behavior and take proactive measures. Deception technology (DT) tackles this challenge head on and enables defenders to set traps for attackers, providing defenders with valuable information about attacker behavior so they can make more informed decisions.

Early examples of DT were emulations of a Linux or Windows host. These were called honeypots, and although they are still deployed with good practical results today, they have quite different capabilities than when they were first launched 30 years ago. With infrastructure as a service (IaaS) and DevOps practices using infrastructure as code (IaC), organizations have had to evolve their use of DT to meet the demands of modern enterprises.

Today, DT is more comprehensive. No longer do organizations rely solely on physical data centers and perimeters to protect their networks. Cloud computing, software-defined networking (SDN), remote workers, and on-premises technologies are leveraged to create a robust defense system that emulates and tracks activity across different areas of real networks. By incorporating these advanced technologies with other security methods, such as zero-trust technologies, organizations can take advantage of the benefits DT tools bring without compromising the safety of their networks.

Modern DT is integrative in nature, bridging the gap between existing detection-focused technologies like endpoint detection and response (EDR) and the security information and event management (SIEM) solutions on which security teams base much of their workflows. Because SIEM detection capabilities are directly correlated with the quality of telemetry fed into the solution, SIEM solutions will always be limited by upstream telemetry sources. For organizations seeking the earliest possible detection, DT will be appealing.

Business Imperative
Incorporating enhanced DT should no longer be viewed as an optional component of an organization’s cybersecurity strategy—it is becoming a business imperative. From a CxO’s perspective, the organization needs to adopt advanced DT solutions to maintain operational integrity and protect corporate assets. CIOs and CTOs understand that a breach can result in significant financial loss, damage to customer trust, and long-term harm to the company’s reputation. CISOs in particular are aware that increasingly, traditional security measures are insufficient against sophisticated cyberthreats.

By implementing modern DT solutions, an organization can proactively defend its network by deceiving and engaging attackers, gaining critical time to respond, and learning from intrusions to fortify defenses. This is not simply about technology—it’s about safeguarding the company’s future. The insights gained from DT can guide strategic decisions, inform risk management, and drive security investments that align with the business’s vision and objectives. For CxOs, prioritizing DT integration reinforces a commitment to resilience and displays thought leadership in cybersecurity, positioning the company as a forward-thinking entity in a landscape plagued by ever-evolving dangers.

Sector Adoption Score
To help executives and decision-makers assess the potential impact and value of a DT 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 DT, 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 a DT solution is a credible candidate for deployment and worthy of thoughtful consideration.

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

Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology Solutions

Sector Adoption Score

Deters
Adoption

Discourages
Adoption

Merits
Consideration

Encourages
Adoption

Compels
Adoption

Figure 1. Sector Adoption Score for Deception Technology

This is the third year that GigaOm has reported on the deception technology space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This report builds on our previous analysis and considers how the market has evolved over the last year.

This GigaOm Key Criteria report highlights the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and nonfunctional requirements (business criteria) for selecting an effective deception technology solution. The companion GigaOm Radar report identifies vendors and products that excel in those decision criteria. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading deception technology offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

The post GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology Solutions appeared first on Gigaom.

GigaOm Radar for Attack Surface Management (ASM)

Chris Ray — Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:00:31 +0000

The difficulties and challenges presented by rapid digital growth, cloud adoption, and the sprawling public internet protocol (IP) space leave organizations unable to accurately identify their rapidly changing attack surface, creating a wealth of opportunities for online attackers. Compounding this problem is the lack of visibility into the risks resulting from the dynamic nature of the attack surface. In response, attack surface management (ASM) solutions provide value through the continuous discovery of and insight into an organization’s attack surface.

The attack surface encompasses all public-facing services, application programming interfaces (APIs), applications, IP addresses, and infrastructure, regardless of the host type (virtual machine, container, or bare metal) or location (on-premises or cloud). ASM starts with defining the attack surface and builds a proper management process around it. This includes automated asset discovery and tracking of asset details.

The attack surface is composed of some of the newest technologies, like containers, Kubernetes clusters, serverless functions, social media, static and dynamic HTML web content, and even internet of things (IoT) devices. This conglomeration creates an enormous amount of additional work for security teams attempting to properly manage all facets of their attack surface.

Moreover, the attack surface is dynamic; it can change daily, if not more often, and tracking these changes in an automated fashion is a key capability for an ASM solution. But simply knowing the entirety and composition of the attack surface is not sufficient. Delineating the types of assets in an organization’s attack surface, as well as the severity of related risks, rounds out an ASM solution’s value proposition.

ASM is a recent addition to the defender’s tool set, and like other new technologies, it is still evolving. As more vendors enter this space, they are compelled to innovate to differentiate themselves from one another. Decision-makers should keep this ongoing evolution in mind because this space has yet to realize its full potential.

In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, the expansion of an organization’s attack surface presents not just a technical challenge, but a critical business imperative. For CxOs, understanding and managing this attack surface is tantamount to no less than safeguarding the organization’s operational integrity, reputation, and financial stability. ASM solutions are a strategic necessity in this context. They offer continuous visibility into the organization’s digital exposure, transforming the reactive approach to digital security to a proactive one. This shift is essential for aligning security posture with business objectives and mitigating risks effectively.

The value of ASM for a CxO extends beyond mere asset tracking and management. It provides a comprehensive understanding of the organization’s digital ecosystem, enabling leadership to articulate and manage digital risks in terms of business impact. In a digital economy in which threats evolve as swiftly as the technologies they exploit, ASM is a crucial tool that empowers organizations to adapt quickly, ensuring sustainable business growth and operational resilience against constant digital threats. Adopting an ASM solution is a strategic decision that’s pivotal to maintaining a competitive edge and securing the organization’s digital future.

This is our third year evaluating the ASM space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This report builds on our previous analysis and considers how the market has evolved over the last year.

This GigaOm Radar report examines 22 of the top ASM solutions and compares offerings against the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and non-functional requirements (business criteria) outlined in the companion Key Criteria report. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading ASM offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

The GigaOm Key Criteria report provides a detailed decision framework for IT and executive leadership assessing enterprise technologies. Each report defines relevant functional and non-functional aspects of solutions in a sector. The Key Criteria report informs the GigaOm Radar report, which provides a forward-looking assessment of vendor solutions in the sector.

The post GigaOm Radar for Attack Surface Management (ASM) appeared first on Gigaom.

GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Attack Surface Management (ASM) Solutions

Chris Ray — Thu, 08 Feb 2024 20:31:55 +0000

The difficulties and challenges presented by rapid digital growth, cloud adoption, and the sprawling public IP space leave organizations unable to accurately identify their rapidly changing attack surface, creating a wealth of opportunities for online attackers. Compounding this problem is the lack of visibility into the risks resulting from the dynamic nature of the attack surface. In response, attack surface management (ASM) solutions provide value through the continuous discovery of and insight into an organization’s attack surface.

The attack surface encompasses all public-facing services, application programming interfaces (APIs), applications, IP addresses, and infrastructure, regardless of the host type (virtual machine, container, or bare metal) or location (on-premises or cloud). ASM starts with the attack surface and builds a proper management process around it. This includes automated asset discovery and tracking of asset details.

Attack surfaces today are composed of some of the newest technologies—containers, Kubernetes clusters, serverless functions, social media, static and dynamic HTML web content, and even internet of things (IoT) devices. This conglomeration creates an enormous amount of additional work for security teams to properly manage.

Moreover, the attack surface is dynamic; it can change daily, if not more often, and tracking these changes in an automated fashion is a key requirement for an ASM solution. But simply knowing the scope and composition of the attack surface is not sufficient. Delineating the types of assets in an organization’s attack surface as well as the severity of related risks rounds out an ASM solution’s value proposition.

ASM is a recent addition to the defender’s tool set, and like other new technologies, it is still evolving. As more vendors enter this space, they are compelled to innovate to differentiate from one another. Decision-makers should keep this ongoing evolution in mind because this space has yet to realize its full potential.

Business Imperative
In today’s rapidly evolving digital landscape, the expansion of an organization’s attack surface presents a technical challenge and a critical business imperative. For CxOs, understanding and managing this attack surface is vital to safeguarding the organization’s operational integrity, reputation, and financial stability. ASM solutions emerge as a strategic necessity in this context. They offer continuous visibility into the organization’s digital exposure, transforming the approach to digital security from reactive to proactive. This shift is essential for aligning security posture with business objectives and mitigating risks effectively.

The value of ASM for a CxO extends beyond mere asset tracking and management. It provides a comprehensive understanding of the organization’s digital ecosystem, enabling leadership to articulate and manage digital risks in terms of business impact. In a digital economy where threats evolve as swiftly as the technologies they exploit, ASM stands as a crucial tool. It empowers organizations to adapt quickly, ensuring sustainable business growth and operational resilience in an environment of constant digital threats. Adopting an ASM solution is a strategic decision, pivotal to maintaining a competitive edge and securing the organization’s digital future.

Sector Adoption Score
To help executives and decision-makers assess the potential impact and value of an ASM 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 ASM solution, we provide an overall Sector Adoption Score (Figure 1) of 4.4 out of 5, with 5 indicating the strongest possible recommendation to adopt. This indicates that an ASM solution is a strong candidate for deployment and must be considered.

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

Key Criteria for Evaluating ASM Solutions

Sector Adoption Score

Deters
Adoption

Discourages
Adoption

Merits
Consideration

Encourages
Adoption

Compels
Adoption

Figure 1. Sector Adoption Score for ASM

This is the third year that GigaOm has reported on the ASM space in the context of our Key Criteria and Radar reports. This report builds on our previous analysis and considers how the market has evolved over the last year.

This GigaOm Key Criteria report highlights the capabilities (table stakes, key features, and emerging features) and nonfunctional requirements (business criteria) for selecting an effective ASM solution. The companion GigaOm Radar report identifies vendors and products that excel in those decision criteria. Together, these reports provide an overview of the market, identify leading ASM offerings, and help decision-makers evaluate these solutions so they can make a more informed investment decision.

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

The GigaOm Key Criteria report provides a detailed decision framework for IT and executive leadership assessing enterprise technologies. Each report defines relevant functional and non-functional aspects of solutions in a sector. The Key Criteria report informs the GigaOm Radar report, which provides a forward-looking assessment of vendor solutions in the sector.

The post GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Attack Surface Management (ASM) Solutions appeared first on Gigaom.

Charting A Course Through Cloud Workload Security (CWS): An Enterprise Blueprint

Chris Ray — Tue, 30 Jan 2024 22:22:30 +0000

The landscape of cloud workload security (CWS) is rapidly evolving, offering new challenges and opportunities for businesses of all sizes. In this dynamic environment, it’s crucial for companies to make informed decisions about adopting and deploying CWS solutions. This blog post delves into key strategies and considerations to ensure the successful implementation of a CWS solution into your IT infrastructure.

Preparing for A Successful CWS Solution Implementation

Careful preparation is necessary when planning to implement a CWS solution. Prospective customers should take the following steps:

1. Assess Current IT Infrastructure
Begin with a comprehensive assessment of your current IT infrastructure. Identify the types of workloads (VMs, containers, serverless architectures) and their locations (on-premises, cloud, or hybrid). Understand your specific security needs, potential vulnerabilities, and compliance requirements.

2. Consider Integration Requirements
Evaluate how a CWS solution will integrate with your existing security tools and systems. Seamless integration is key to maintaining operational efficiency and a strong security posture.

3. Consider Potential Tool Displacement
CWS solutions might overlap or replace some existing security technologies, especially those focused on traditional on-premises environments. Evaluate the scope of your current tools and consider how a CWS solution can complement or enhance your existing security measures.

4. Review Open Source vs. Commercial Options
In the CWS market, there are several notable open source options like Falco, Kube-hunter, and Clair.

Falco specializes in detecting anomalous activity in cloud applications, particularly in Kubernetes environments.
Kube-hunter focuses on identifying security vulnerabilities in Kubernetes clusters.
Clair is adept at scanning container images for known vulnerabilities.

While these open source tools provide valuable security capabilities, they often come with hidden costs related to support, maintenance, and integration. Additionally, open source tools may require significant internal resources for effective deployment and ongoing management.

Organizations considering open source solutions should carefully evaluate the total cost of ownership, including the investment in technical expertise and time required to maintain and integrate these solutions into their existing infrastructure.

5. Choose the Right Solution for Your Use Case and Business Requirements
Small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs) and large enterprises have different needs, and therefore a solution suited to a large organization may not be right for a smaller company.

SMBs should prioritize cost-effectiveness and ease of use and look for solutions with simple pricing models and intuitive interfaces.
Larger organizations should focus on scalability, comprehensive compliance checks, and advanced features like AI-driven security and zero-trust principles.

Additionally, look for vendors that offer solutions aligning with your infrastructure needs. For hybrid environments, consider vendors that offer support for Kubernetes or OpenShift. For cloud-centric organizations, focusing on the depth of capability for a specific cloud (or multiple clouds) is better.

Avoiding Common Challenges and Missteps

To ensure the effective deployment and implementation of a CWS solution, it’s important to avoid these common challenges and missteps:

Underestimating integration complexity: One of the common missteps is underestimating the complexity of integrating a CWS solution with existing infrastructure. It’s important that you evaluate vendor support for integration and know how much support is available when it comes to initial setup tasks.
Neglecting training and user adoption: Successful deployment also hinges on proper training and user adoption that can maximize the benefits of the new security system. You should prioritize and invest properly in training, as it will directly impact the value derived from the selected CWS.
Overlooking ongoing maintenance: Continuous monitoring and maintenance are vital. It’s important to consider roadmaps when evaluating vendors and to stay up to date with the latest features and releases from your chosen CWS provider.

The future of CWS is geared toward more AI-driven solutions, zero-trust security models, and comprehensive coverage across diverse and dynamic workloads. Stay informed about the latest trends and advancements in the CWS space to keep your security strategy agile and effective.

Next Steps

Adopting a CWS solution is not just about enhancing security; it’s about empowering your business to operate more confidently and efficiently in a digitally driven world. With the right approach and solution, you can safeguard your workloads and pave the way for innovation and growth.

To learn more, take a look at GigaOm’s CWS 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.

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

The post Charting A Course Through Cloud Workload Security (CWS): An Enterprise Blueprint appeared first on Gigaom.

Chris Ray, Author at Gigaom

The Quest for Extended Detection and Response (XDR): Unraveling Cybersecurity’s Next Generation

Discovering XDR: Past and Present

The Adoption Challenge: Beyond Integration

Surprises and Insights

Reflecting on the Evolution

Next Steps

GigaOm Radar for Extended Detection and Response (XDR)

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Extended Detection and Response (XDR) Solutions

Key Criteria for Evaluating XDR Solutions

Sector Adoption Score

DetersAdoption

DiscouragesAdoption

MeritsConsideration

EncouragesAdoption

CompelsAdoption

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

Springing the Trap: Snagging Rogue Insiders with Deceptive Tactics

Challenges of Detecting Insider Threats

Deception Technology Capabilities

Use Cases and Deployment Strategies

Thwarting Insider Threats

Next Steps

Best Practices for Implementing an ASM Solution

How to Prepare for ASM Adoption

1. Conduct A Thorough Inventory of Digital Assets

2. Set Clear Objectives for ASM Implementation

3. Engage Stakeholders Across Departments

Key Considerations for SMBs vs. Large Enterprises

SMBs

Large Enterprises

Common Challenges and Missteps to Avoid

1. Underestimating the Complexity of the Organization’s Digital Assets

2. Overlooking the Need for Continuous Updates and Maintenance

3. Failing to Align ASM Strategies with Business Objectives

Next Steps

GigaOm Radar for Deception Technology

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology Solutions

Key Criteria for Evaluating Deception Technology Solutions

Sector Adoption Score

DetersAdoption

DiscouragesAdoption

MeritsConsideration

EncouragesAdoption

CompelsAdoption

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

GigaOm Radar for Attack Surface Management (ASM)

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

GigaOm Key Criteria for Evaluating Attack Surface Management (ASM) Solutions

Key Criteria for Evaluating ASM Solutions

Sector Adoption Score

DetersAdoption

DiscouragesAdoption

MeritsConsideration

EncouragesAdoption

CompelsAdoption

GIGAOM KEY CRITERIA AND RADAR REPORTS

Charting A Course Through Cloud Workload Security (CWS): An Enterprise Blueprint

Preparing for A Successful CWS Solution Implementation

Avoiding Common Challenges and Missteps

Next Steps

Deters
Adoption

Discourages
Adoption

Merits
Consideration

Encourages
Adoption

Compels
Adoption

Deters
Adoption

Discourages
Adoption

Merits
Consideration

Encourages
Adoption

Compels
Adoption

Deters
Adoption

Discourages
Adoption

Merits
Consideration

Encourages
Adoption

Compels
Adoption