Blog

Exposure to validated threats present undeniable risk to the enterprise. Such actionable information improves cyber Threat intelligence (CTI), enables holistic Vulnerability Management (VM), minimizes impact, and maximizes the performance of Offensive Threat (OT) activities. Clients should consider adaption of emerging exposure Management (EM) technologies to migrate to a high-performance Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM) program.

Managing vulnerability and being aware of the threats is good enough – right? Unfortunately, not. There are too many siloed vulnerability assessment services and divergent threat intelligence sources. Over a year ago, Gartner raised the issue and loudly predicted a shift from mere Threat Management to Exposure Management. The new focus now shifts to Continuous Threat Exposure Management (CTEM)!

For years, the goal has been to act upon Cyber Threat Intelligence. Tools did evolve to serve the Operational and Technical stakeholders of CTI. Unfortunately, little actionable information has been available to Strategic and Tactical stakeholders. According to Gartner, CTEM sits at the
intersection of Threat Detection and Incident Response (TDIR) and Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC) – exactly where Strategic and Tactical stakeholders operate.

In our last article, we learnt that an IT Security Plan should consider Emerging technologies. Luckily Continuous Threat Exposure Management programs are evolving, and Exposure
Management (EM) tools have emerged. EM is one of only two tool categories viewed as TRANSFORMATIONAL to Security Operations! iv EM is also to be in the MAINSTREAM in 5-10 years.
Early adopters may gain significant benefit depending on where they are in terms of vulnerability and threat management. Consider EM technologies if your organization wants additional validation of its security posture, is looking for more automation in running attack scenarios, and/or wants to establish a red team with limited training or experience.

Hive Pro, a Continuous Threat Exposure Management solution, has been added to Cyber Buyer’s portfolio. Read their article to learn more about CTEM and advise if you want an introductory
meeting on their solution.

References:

1. Gartner – Predicts 2023: Enterprises Must Expand From Threat to Exposure Management – https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/4021605
2. SOCRadar – What is Tactical Cyber Threat Intelligence and How to Use it – https://socradar.io/what-is-tactical-cyber-threat-intelligence-and-how-to-use-it/
3. Gartner – Hype Cycle for Security Operations, 2023 – https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/4547399

Companies must prudently gather evidence of their control over Federal Contract Information (FCI) and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) in support of 2025 defense contracts. 

While the timeframe of applicability of CMMC to any given company varies sharply, there is NO REASON to wait.  Waiting will decrease your likelihood of demonstrating compliance!

Most security programs are born in reaction to compliance requirements.  The best programs evolve a culture proactively safeguarding protected information and processing facilities well beyond compliance.  The Military Industrial Base (MIB) has companies with security programs in the full spectrum of maturity.  Where each company falls is unknown.  The Department of Defense hasn’t measured program capabilities – but will do so shortly.  It is time to get prepared to demonstrate to required maturity levels.

Fifty years have passed waiting for an auditable framework.  In 1984, attestation started with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).  In 2019, the Department of Defense (DoD) added the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS).  In 2020, the DoD introduced the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) to replace DFARS.   Companies now need verified evidence of their controls.

According to a study performed by Merrill Research, “the majority of contractors do not have the people, processes and technologies in place to meet the minimum cybersecurity requirements for doing business with the DoD, but often assess their companies as compliant when conducting their self-assessments”.[i]  Up until now, the government has merely accepted the contracting organization’s attestations to controls.  Unvalidated attestations could be off by an order of magnitude.  Evidence backing up statements may not exist or might even contradict those assertions.  An independent review now would likely identify issues and enable proactive remediation.

Many in the MIB have fallen asleep waiting for CMMC to be implemented.  The first delay in CMMC was due to the design of the model itself.  The change was significant.  Version 1.0 was released in September 2020 and was almost immediately replaced with CMMC 2.0 in just over a year.  CMMC 1.0 had 5 performance tiers with 2.0 only having 3 – Foundational, Advanced, and Expert.  Contracted responsibilities dictate the required performance level. 

The biggest delay has been in the verification and enforcement of rules – what the DoD calls Rulemaking.  As of July 17, 2024, the DoD forecasted publishing of the final rule for the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0 program in the Federal Register by October 26, 2024.  That is just weeks away!  The DoD wants to apply the rule almost immediately – late Q3 or early Q4 2024. The rule, 32 CFR 170[ii], is considered a “Major” rule and will be subject to a Congressional review of up to 120 days before it can be published. Once published, the rule will not be effective for at least 60 days.   That puts applicability roughly six months out.  A gap assessment can identify the remediation needed to get to your desired level before CMMC is mandated.

Two options exist.  All companies in the Military Industrial Base should at least be performing a self-assessment.  Many are taking the added step to be independently certified. 

For decades, compliance was done manually using spreadsheets to capture attestations, evidence, findings, and action plans.  Companies managed their organization one way while reporting compliance another way.  This approach leads to more compliance issues and inefficiencies.  Consider choosing an audit firm that offers an AI-enabled platform to manage your controls and audit them.  Choosing an independent audit firm is a non-trivial exercise.  The 2024 Compliance Benchmark Report[iii] offers some considerations before proceeding.  Almost half (45%) of survey respondents have found their compliance process to be cumbersome and would switch audit providers for efficiency.  Many firms (44%) are using AI to optimize the compliance process.   Clients choose their auditor due to their experience (32%), report quality (19%), and ability to audit using tools and technologies (22).

Our moto is to Trust But Verify.  The DoD will adopt that motto soon.  Let us help you efficiently create verifiable security now in preparation for CMMC!

---

[i] BREAKING: Few Companies Ready for CMMC Compliance, Study Finds – https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2024/10/1/few-companies-ready-for-cmmc-compliance-study-finds

[ii] Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Program – https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/12/26/2023-27280/cybersecurity-maturity-model-certification-cmmc-program

[iii] The A-LIGN 2024 Compliance Benchmark Report – https://go.a-lign.com/Benchmark-Report-2024?_ga=2.264079822.310205026.1724775344-1179027787.1724289118&_gac=1.22166217.1724775344.CjwKCAjw8rW2BhAgEiwAoRO5rEAeqLSA1sELyTey0JBOfYQFqCrKl7pVKDNFSXQHQ2MzoM2D-iX7tBoC1d8QAvD_BwE

Few drivers utilize an outdated, paper-based map when driving long distances.  Too many real-time conditions impact driving options.  Choosing what security technologies to implement and when to implement them has similar complexity.    Utilize your Value-Added Reseller to help define your annual security technologies roadmap.  Let your IT Security Roadmap put you in the driver’s seat to the best return-on-investment.

Keeping up with the change in technology can be overwhelming, from increased business usage to the rapid advancements in the cybersecurity market.  What often took 5-10 years to adopt a couple of decades ago, is in production in just a few years.  This article establishes some simple next steps to address the issue.  A Commonsense approach to Security Improvement is needed. 

Just 2 decades ago, Gartner’s vision for Information Security program adoption captured three unique perspectives – organizational, data-centric, and technical.  One leg of the program needs a view of the current security technologies and the ones being considered soon.  A bit later, ISACA came to a similar conclusion.  Their blueprint for The Business Model for Information Security[i] included a Technology component to address Human Factors of People, Enabling and Support of Process, and the Architecture of the Technology to be used.  Without factoring all three areas, IT Security decisions end up the square peg to the round hole.

Few organizations can resource the planning of security technologies, however.  Enterprises often have architecture teams and subscription services to firms like Gartner or Forester.  Small-to-midsized organizations need other options.  One commonsense approach leverages Value Added Resellers (VARs) to establish and maintain the client’s roadmap of security technologies. 

One view of the Cybersecurity Ecosystem[ii] has eight areas supporting Cybersecurity, Privacy, and Trust: Security Operations; Data Security; Application Security; Physical Security; Infrastructure Security; Governance, Risk, and Compliance; Fraud and Transaction Security; Identity Security, and (general) Services.  One or more of these perspectives best aligned to client priorities should be included in the roadmap.

The roadmap simplifies decision-making, and highlights when tasks are needed within that calendar year.  A given technology may need to be in one of four states:

1. CONTAIN: Further investment in a previous mainstream product may be contained.
2. RETIRE: Some contained technologies may be end-of-life and need to be retired. 
3. EMERGING – Emerging technologies may be researched in support of future planning. 
4. MAINSTREAM – A green light may be given to previously defined emerging technologies.

Several factors go into the performance of a given technology.  For example, Gartner demystifies the market hype in the Gartner Hype Cycle[iii].  Products may be On the Rise, At the Peak, Sliding into the Trough, Climbing the Slope, or Entering the Plateau.  The annual update to the roadmap should highlight where the technologies are.  Return on investment will vary based on the product’s maturity and market acceptance. 

Let’s look at an example using the Governance, Risk, and Compliance part of the Cybersecurity Ecosystem and the Gartner Hype Cycle for Cyber Risk Management.[iv]  Depending on client input, the roadmap might include up to 6 product categories to be Mainstream in less than 2 years or 13 to be Mainstream in 2-5 years.  Business impact will also be highlighted for each category selected.  Adoption prior to Mainstream has value when Transformational benefits could be realized!

While the cybersecurity market dictates the Emerging and Mainstream technologies, other factors determine what is placed in Contain or Retire.  Input is solicited from the client and their cybersecurity vendors to make these determinations.  Product categories become Contained when newer approaches are being adopted and dependencies still exist.  Contained categories are moved to Retire when dependencies have been eliminated and/or the product is end of life. 

As a result of applying this Commonsense Planning of Security Technologies, your current and near-term cybersecurity technologies in your Cybersecurity Ecosystem are defined, benefits highlighted, and next step actions are easily identified.  Let Securitybeat Advisors assist with your IT Security Roadmap!

---

[i] The Value of BMIS ISACA – https://www.isaca.org/isaca-digital-videos/archive/the-value-of-bmis–isaca

[ii] Strategy of Security, The Ecosystem Explained – https://strategyofsecurity.com/cybersecurity-ecosystem/

[iii] Gartner Hype Cycle – https://www.gartner.com/en/research/methodologies/gartner-hype-cycle

[iv] Gartner Hype Cycle for Cyber Risk Management, 2023 – https://www.gartner.com/en/documents/4564900