“Secure” is not a binary, black-and-white thing.

“Secure” is not a binary, black-and-white thing. Instead, it’s about risk management. Instead of asking whether something is secure, it’s better to ask whether it is “secure enough for such-and-such purpose”. – Quote from Crypto Stack Exchange, August 2013

I seem to be talking a lot about security these days.  Not only in my professional life, but in my personal day to day.

I am considering shifting my family from Windows phone over to Android, despite the personal pains supporting this ecosystem that worked flawlessly for me for many years.  The security conversation in this context is rife is opinion and observation from friends and colleagues.  Everything from Android’ inherent security challenges to hackers leveraging Google Play to distribute bad wares.  Admittedly, I will lose some sleep knowing my family’s desire to load hundreds of apps.

Getting the Microsoft ecosystem connected onto an Android phone requires passwords and access to applications that will not be understood as to why.  Just going through the motions.  For example, the password vault we’ve been using in my family worked only on Windows phone.  We need to consider what tool works well in the Android space, ease of transference, and retraining my family members to use this tool.  Further, vaults need access and will prompt if it can obtain rights to reach or access areas of the operating system.  Another situation rife with chance of malfeasance.

When I researched a deck on security back at Santander, I found the above quote and it immediately returns to mind when I talk security in both spaces today.  Many organizations take a harder line to reach the goal of “secure”, damn productivity and usability.  Compliance works for larger organizations under audit scrutiny.  But many companies do not operate in those industries.  Neither do families.

Nevertheless, when I look at technologies, you have to look at the people at the helm.  Combined, risks can be pondered and formulated. And after thoughtful interaction and use cases, discussion with the people using the technologies, making the arguments pro and con, can you make the right decision for those users.  As often times, technologies are often secure enough when powered by security conscious people.

My recent thoughts on the matter.

\\ JMM

Rob England IS the IT Skeptic

“You don’t change culture team by team or app by app. You don’t get to pick and choose where you DevOps. You can do it for a while – operating bi-modally – in order to experiment, to allow new ways of working to incubate, but it is essential to converge quickly. DevOps is not a piecemeal tool, it is an organisational transformation.” – The IT Skeptic Blog, July 22, 2017

This blog isn’t about DevOps.  There are now thousands to choose from with authors off all walks.  This blog is about Rob England and his blog, The IT Skeptic.

If you haven’t read this blog, start.  It’s a must read.  In fact, I’ve spent evenings rolling through his old content to follow his train of thought in the hottest topics all IT shops struggle with:  How to do IT service delivery, effectively.  It’s an art.  It’s not simple.  And done poorly, costs organizations dearly.

I do not have a recommendation where to start.  If you read his last blog, currently on December 5, 2017, it’s titled, “Project Management was the worst thing that ever happened to IT“… Wow.  And right on target.  Do organizations think this way?  Most can not.

\\ JMM

SMB and ITSM: Framework

Everybody says they want to be free. Take the train off the tracks and it’s free, but it can’t go anywhere.”

Zig Ziglar

Organizations require structure to operate, but most often end up creating silo towers with no connecting switch-track to communicate or change direction. Following a framework in exactness is limiting — but adapting a framework is not. There is no one-size-fits-all; that it’s a framework means you have the ability to lay the tracks any way you like. If, in the future, you decide to make an offshoot to a new destination, then you have the ability to do so with the guidance the framework provides.

ITSM is a continuous journey, not a project that ends on the ‘go live’ date. And if truth be known, there is no end to a project until all the chickens come home to roost (but that’s another blog). Count on this: There will always be other destinations to visit that will require you to lay tracks to get there.

From:  http://www.bmc.com/blogs/itsm-best-practices-quoting-itsm-isnt-enough/

Re-posting as we shift focus to ITSM.  I found this article on BMC’s website and felt it’s right on.

\\JMM

Companies Expect Updated Information Security Documents

“Below is a list of documents that is requested by a vendor management company.   Information Technology needs to be able to provide these documents on demand:

-Information Security Policies (Current)

-Cyber/Network Security Policies with Testing Requirements and Results (i.e. Vulnerability and/or Penetration Testing) (Current)

-Incident Response Policies with client notification protocols (Current)

-Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity Plan(s) (Current)

-Disaster Recovery Testing Results (Current)

Whether it is a partnership, vendor relationship, or just being a customer, it’s no longer unusual to get asked how companies treat security.  Risk Management survey’s include questions like, “Has your company been hacked in the last 12 months” and “What was your incident response plan to the breach”.

Where to go to get this stuff?  Where do you keep it?  How to manage?  Many larger companies hire the talent to write it.  Alternately, resources exist that can help with what is needed to cover.  Here are a couple of resources:

I have used all three in my career with success.  Managing these documents should be no different than other IT policies.  In other words, manage collectively with yearly reviews and periodic changes as the organization matures.

What tools or resources have you used to help write security documentation?  Drop me a link to add to the list!

\\ JMM