Transcript Real Life Information Security Bringing cost-benefit analysis into risk management OWASP Copyright © The OWASP Foundation Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under.

Real Life
Information Security
Bringing cost-benefit analysis into risk
management
OWASP
Copyright © The OWASP Foundation
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document
under the terms of the OWASP License.
The OWASP Foundation
http://www.owasp.org
Hewitt Associates
Human Resources Outsourcing
~25’000 employees worldwide
Highly sensitive clients’ data
OWASP
2
HRO Market
Not purely financial
Mostly B2B
Highly competitive
 Stay competitive
 Stay flexible
OWASP
3
Shepherds or policemen?
Very high pressure from business
No „one size fits all” approach
Lessons learnt
 Talk to business
 Have real arguments
 Talk business
Where do all these numbers come from?
OWASP
4
From the past
Source: DatalossDB.org
OWASP
5
From market analytics
~$100 USD per record
No actual abuse required
„Losing control” is the bad word
How much to spend and where to stop?
Source: Ponemon Institute, „2008 Annual Study: Cost of Data Breach”
OWASP
6
From others’ fines
Source: FSA, 22 July 2009
OWASP
7
From Risk Analysis
Risk = Potential Loss * Threat
Probability
Potential Loss ~ Asset Cost, Brand
Value...
OWASP
8
When Risk Analysis makes sense?
Control Cost << Asset Cost
Source: Flickr
(edouаrd)
OWASP
9
What makes Control cost?
Roll-out cost
 Obvious
Change cost
 Not so obvious
Management
cost
 Not so obvious
End-user usage
cost
 Largely ignored
 Especially if outside
Source: Flickr (dаveme)
OWASP
10
Potential loss → Control → Real loss

OWASP
11
Case studies
OWASP
12
Qualified Certificate in ZUS*
ZUS costs
 Roll-out = ?
 Administration = ?
Taxpayer costs (245’000 QC’s)
 100-140 million PLN – one-time
 ~40 million PLN – annual QC renewal
Future costs
 Attribute certificates (ZUS & taxpayers) = ?
 „e-PUAP trusted profiles” (ZUS) = ?
* ZUS = Polish public pensions provider
Source: Money.pl, ZUS
OWASP
13
Invoicing
What’s the cost of invoicing?
People, paper, printing, postal, processing
Average €1,4 per paper invoice
Ultimate solution
Give up VAT 
When e-invoicing makes sense?
» Electronic invoice TCO << Paper invoice TCO
» Theory: €0,4 versus €1,4
» Key word: TCO
Sources: EU MEMO/00/85
OWASP
14
E-Invoicing in Europe
Denmark
Poland
OCES & others allowed
Only QES & EDI
allowed
 OCES: Quite simple origin
& integrity authentication
 OCES: Proportional to einvoicing risks
Around 66% of all
invoices are e-invoices
 EDI: supermarkets only
 QES: Not designed for
automatic signature
 QES: More legal that real
security
Around 5% of
companies use einvoicing
Sources: EEI 2007, ITST, OECD; GUS 2008
OWASP
15
Risk Management in e-banking
Auth
method
Num
ber
SMS
15
Token
11
Individual
Millions of
clients
↑Usable, ↓Big
cost
↓Big cost
Corporate
High nonrepudiation needs
↓Repudiation
↓Repudiation
TAN
7
↓Low security, ↓Repudiation
↑ Low cost
Smartc
ard
2
↓Not usable,
↓Big cost
↑ Nonrepudiation
Source: Bankier.pl report, October 2009 (selected data only)
OWASP
16
Laffer’s curve in security
Source: Wikipedia
OWASP
17
Mayfield’s Paradox
Source: ISACA, „Mathematical Proofs of Mayfield's Paradox”, 2001
OWASP
18
How to?
OWASP
19
Pitfall of „One-size fits all” approach
80
70
60
50
A
B
C
40
30
20
10
0
Risk
Cost
OWASP
20
Source: Willem Duiff, GE (SASMA
2009)
OWASP
21
Control questions
Before deploying a new solution
Do my controls help, instead of breaking
process?
How do my controls help business do its work?
Before asking for new funding
What we earned on last project?
OWASP
22
Is security a cost?
Security is an investment to prevent losses
Spend $100k to prevent losing $1m = 10x benefit
NOT: „Security again spent $100k”
YES: „Security helped save $1M for just $100k”
OWASP
23
How FDE saves money
Office break-in
Four laptops stolen
All with full-disk encryption
Cost of incident – zero
 Hardware – insurance
 Data confidentality – able to prove to client
 Data availability – backups & network drives
Where’s ROI of FDE?
 No $$$ in fines
 No $$ in breach notification
 No $? in brand damage
OWASP
24
Building a consistent security policy #1
Should people
should take their
laptops home?
 Isn’t that increasing risk
of theft?
Laptop theft
 Lose laptop ($)
 Lose data ($$$)
Source: Flickr (аresnick)
OWASP
25
Building a consistent security policy #2
Laptop at home
Work from home
 Disaster recovery,
business continuity
 Examples: UK snow
(2009), London flood
(2009), Hemel Hempstead
explosion (2005)
Need to prevent the
other risks
Source: Wikipedia
OWASP
26
Building a consistent security policy #3
End-user message
 „Always take your laptop home”
FDE is standard, non-optional proces
OWASP
27
Things we learned when talking to bussiness
Avoid „weasel talk” and buzzwords
„Some attacks exist that might pose a significant risk...”
Use as much facts and numbers as possible
Do use industry reports
Be careful with vendor reports
 „How spam filtering helps preventing global warming”
Filter them through your company’s reality check
Learn from historic incidents in your organisation
Perform periodic review of your controls
Make sure at the old threat is still there
Make sure no new threats appeared
OWASP
28
Questions?
Questions, comments
[email protected]
http://www.linkedin.com/in/pawelkrawczyk
OWASP
29