i want to know, is it safe to create different networks at a work place? where the business has it own network and the workers have a separate network they can log in when they come to work to avoid attacks ?
Hi Frank, I’m not certain what you mean by the business and workers have seperate networks? Segregating the networks would work if you’re referencing a place where workers can leverage internet for personal matters i.e. a guest wifi. That is totally possible. Most companies, however, will only implement guest wifi for customers.
So long as proper network segregation is used, it is entirely possible and safe to have many networks at a workplace. For example, I work with a lot of manufacturing systems at my job and most large manufacturers will have multiple, separate networks to separate the various parts of the manufacturing process. Known as the Purdue model, which specifies isolates the various manufacturing segments from each other and from the the office and business systems. This is effective and useful because many industrial systems are designed to run in isolation while at the same time often have very long lifespans and limited long term security support. It is not uncommon to find industrial automation running on 20 year old Windows servers that haven’t or can’t be upgraded or patched. In those situations, highly segregated networks are vital to keep a malicious attacker or malware from spreading throughout the system. If one network of systems goes down, it is bad, but not nearly as bad as every piece of equipment in the facility at once.
The four severity levels of incidents are false alarm, minor, major, and disaster. False alarm also known as false positive is least severe, while disaster is most severe and needs to be addressed immediately.
The incidents can be divided into false alarms, minor incidents, major incidents, and disasters according to the severity of threats and losses caused to the company. Too many false alarms may cause real attacks to go unnoticed. Minor incidents do not have a broad impact on the company and can be dealt with by staff on-duty. In case of a major incident, computer security incident response teams (CSIRTs) should be reported immediately to deal with the incident quickly, efficiently, and effectively to control the loss. Business continuity plans are developed in the event of disasters.
The most common, and possibly most dangerous type of incident is the false alarm. They are the most common because the vast majority of events that seem potentially threatening turn out not to be. I call them the possibly most dangerous because too many false alarms cause Alert Fatigue – where people stop paying attention to alarms because they assume it is “just another false alarm” – or lull people into a false sense of security – “we’ve had 1000 alerts and none of them were a threat, clearly we have nothing to worry about”
Commonly used severity ranking is from SEV 1 (severity 1) to SEV 3 (severity 3), where SEV 1 is a critical incident and SEV 3 is a minor incident. SEV 1 incidents can occur when a service is unavailable to all users or clients, when there has been a significant security breech, or when client data is lost. A major occurrence with a significant negative impact on the business is known as a SEV 1..
SEV 2 incidents can occur when a sizable portion of a service’s essential functionality is broken or when a service is inaccessible to all users or customers. A major occurrence that has a sizable impact on the business is referred to as a SEV 2.
An SEV 3 event could occur when a system flaw slightly annoys users or customers but has no significant impact on key system operations. A minor incident with little effect on the business is referred to as a SEV 3.
What are some of the challenges that organizations face when implementing an incident and disaster response plan, and how can these challenges be addressed?
Implementing an incident and disaster response plan can be a complex and challenging process for organizations due to limited resources, lack of organization’s preparedness or the complexity of the incident and disaster response plan. Addressing the same along with resource trainings and periodic reviews will help organizations overcome these challenges.
Some challenges that organizations face when implementing an incident and disaster response plan are leadership challenges and ineffective communication. These challenges can be overcome by walkthrough the plan and performing tabletop exercises with the people/team that will be involved in the response plan, along with leadership to get their approval of the plan. Also perform the walkthrough on a periodic basis to adjust for changes and staffing changes.
Some of the challenges are making sure that you have the right team and that there is effective communication. Without proper communication the plan that is in place will not be played out properly. Additionally, lack of preparation can lead to failure in the execution of the disaster response plan.
It is important to avoid overly rigid plans and procedures for crisis recovery because the response team will be moving quickly and under pressure to get have the recovery plan up and working. If plans and procedures are too complicated or rigid it is a good possibility that things will get missed and not get recovered.
There are several variations on the truism that plans never work out they way they were planned.
“I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”
– Dwight D. Eisenhower
“No plan of operations can with any certainty reach beyond the first encounter with the enemy.”
– Helmuth von Moltke the Elder
“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”
– Mike Tyson
The point that they are all making is that plans are made based on hypothetical situations. They will never fully represent reality and the event that happens is quite likely not to be one that has a plan laid out for it.
That is not to say that planning is not worthwhile. The very act of getting a group together to create the plans requires them to think through situations and work together, the key actions of a good response team.
Hi Shepherd,
Effective emergency management requires flexibility. Because emergency managers have to adapt plans to circumstances, innovate, and improvise when necessary, rigid plans and organizational structures are to be avoided. The plan is a starting place rather than an immutable guide to action. In a healthy emergency management environment, officials have the discretion to interpret plans and responds to circumstances.
The situation might always be different that what you think. It is important to have steps to follow however, it is also crucial to be adaptable. As you being your recovery plan, you will notice things that you didn’t expect so there has to be room for flexibility.
I think there is no way to eliminate security incidents without shutting down the information system. However, good planning and protection are vital steps in minimizing security incidents and disrupting services.
There is no way a company can be 100 percent secured but good planning and protection can not completely eliminate security incidents but reduce the risk
Security incidents cannot be completely eliminated. System updates and iterations are always accompanied by new bugs. Companies need to react accurately and quickly in the face of an attack to make sure the damage is manageable. In order to reduce losses, the company should also rehearse the steps and measures in the face of major events and disasters before the event happens.
As my fellow classmates have all eluded to, it’s impossible to “eliminate” security incidents purely on good planning and protection. Nishant brings up an interesting point by stating “there is no way to eliminate security incidents without shutting down the information system”. However, even with it shutdown. The hard drives could be stolen. That would still fall under the category of a security incident even with it powered off.
Yes! A well-organized incident response team with a detailed plan can mitigate the potential effects of unplanned events. An incident response plan can speed up forensic analysis, minimizing the duration of a security event and shortening recovery time.
In an effort to completely eradicate security issues, there are certain limitations. You might have to accept and put up with some of the security issues. Your assets will be somewhat protected if you have the right countermeasures in place. Therefore, it is hard to completely eradicate security occurrences from its entity.
Security incidents cannot be entirely avoided. New bugs are always introduced with system updates and iterations. Companies must respond accurately and quickly in the face of an attack in order to limit the damage. To reduce losses, the company should also practice the steps and measures to be taken in the event of a major event or disaster before the event occurs.
It is important not to make plans and processes for crisis recovery too rigid because crises are inherently unpredictable, and no two crises are exactly alike. When a crisis occurs, it can create a rapidly evolving and complex situation, and a rigid response plan may not be able to accommodate the unique circumstances of the crisis.
If plans and processes for crisis recovery are too rigid, it can lead to a number of problems. For example, it may create a false sense of security that the plan will work in any situation, which can lead to complacency and a lack of preparation for unexpected scenarios. It can also result in a slow response to the crisis, as teams may be hesitant to deviate from the plan or may waste time trying to fit the unique circumstances into the predetermined framework.
Instead, it is important to develop plans and processes that are flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances. This means building a response plan that includes contingencies for a range of possible scenarios, and providing teams with the training and resources they need to think on their feet and make quick decisions in a crisis.
By adopting a flexible approach to crisis recovery, organizations can respond more quickly and effectively to unexpected situations, minimize the impact of the crisis, and increase their chances of a successful recovery.
Incident response rehearsal, also known as a “mock incident” or “tabletop exercise,” is a proactive measure that organizations can take to prepare for potential cybersecurity incidents or other types of emergencies. The significance of incident response rehearsal lies in its ability to help organizations identify and mitigate vulnerabilities in their incident response plans before a real incident occurs.
By simulating different scenarios and testing the response plan, organizations can identify weaknesses in their processes, systems, and personnel, and take corrective actions to improve their response capabilities. Incident response rehearsals can also help organizations to assess their readiness, evaluate the effectiveness of their incident response plan, and identify any gaps in their training or resources.
In addition, incident response rehearsals can help organizations to promote a culture of preparedness, increase awareness of potential threats, and foster collaboration and communication among different teams and stakeholders. Ultimately, incident response rehearsal is a critical component of any effective incident response strategy, as it helps organizations to proactively prepare for and respond to potential incidents.
The significance of incident response rehearsal lies in its ability to identify gaps in an organization’s incident response capabilities before a real incident occurs. This allows the organization to refine its response plan, improve its procedures, and train its staff to better handle security incidents.
A business continuity plan ensures the restoration of core business operations after disasters. Not having a business continuity plan negatively impacts every business. It results in losses ranging from financial loss to reduced and/or lost productivity, reputational loss, injuries, and in severe situations even death.
If a business does not have a continuity plan when an incident occurs, they will not be able to continue operations or will have to spend excessive money to do so. If a business has not thought out the BCP, they will not know what the critical equipment, data, and personnel are or how to best ensure they can continue to function. The most likely outcome of a business with that poor level of planning is that they will go out of business or at the least suffer major financial and reputational setbacks.
One of the biggest consequences of not having a business continuity plan would be financial loss to the company. In addition, the reputation and future of a firm can be severely harmed if it is not adequately prepared for and unable to handle a disruption that affects business continuity. Customers and clients want firms to have effective response plans in place in case of disruptions, even though they acknowledge that disasters are possible.
A business may eventually fail due to decreased production, decreased revenue, or reputational damage. If a company is unable to recognize and control these risks, it may not be able to recover from a serious catastrophe.
A business continuity plan guarantees that core business operations are restored following a disaster. Every business suffers from the lack of a business continuity plan. It causes losses ranging from financial to reduced and/or lost productivity, reputational damage, injuries, and, in extreme cases, death.
In my opinion, I think the analysis phase is the most important step in the incident response process. This is because it serves as the bridge between detection and escalation. If an incident is not effectively analyzed, necessary actions cannot be taken even if it is detected.
I believe that all steps in the IR process are equally important and each plays a vital role in ensuring effective response. If i had to choose one that will be initial assessment phase because in this phase IR team gathers all the information about incident to determine the scope, impact and severity. This information is crucial to execute appropriate response plan and to allocate resources effectively. Without thorough and accurate information gathering the IR team may not be able to respond to incident effectively that could lead to additional damage or data loss.
First, an incorrectly configured IDS may not effectively detect threats or may generate a large number of false positives or missed positives. To prevent this from happening, security operations centers should consider providing written documentation to ensure that configurations are correct and that settings are regularly reviewed and updated based on the organization’s security policy and threat landscape. In addition, IDSs need to rely on signatures and rules that are updated on time to accurately detect threats. The Security Operations Center regularly updates the IDS with the latest signatures and rules from trusted sources and subscribes to the latest security threat and vulnerability information sources.
The main purpose of a honeypot is to act as a decoy system designed to lure attackers away from real systems and applications, allowing security personnel to monitor and analyze their behavior.
Honeypot could be thought of as a decoy technology that aims to detect malicious attacks and intrusions. By setting up a “hope to be detected, attacked or even compromised” system, simulating a normal computer system or network environment, the attacker is lured into the honeypot, so as to discover or locate the intruder, the attack pattern and methods. Then, IS auditors would identify the vulnerabilities of the configuration system in order to improve security configuration management and eliminate security hazards.
A honeypot is intended to lure a malicious attacker toward a specific system. This system will appear to have something of value, but will not actually contain anything sensitive or damaging. If it is combined with an IDS system or other malicious event alerting, it can allow a security team to identify the malicious actor and shut them out before that individual or group can access more valuable or damaging data or systems
A honeypot’s primary function is to serve as a decoy system designed to divert attackers’ attention away from real systems and applications, allowing security personnel to monitor and analyze their behavior.
When planning incident and disaster response, how should IT security teams and business operations departments balance network security with the productivity of the deployed business systems?
Balancing network security with productivity requires collaboration between IT security teams and business operations departments. By conducting risk assessment, developing DRP, prioritizing system access, maintaining communication and testing the plan, they can ensure that they are able to respond to incidents and disasters efficiently and effectively.
It helps to ensure that the plan is effective and can be executed successfully in case of a crisis. It is important for identifying weaknesses, ensuring preparedness, improving response time, building confidence in their ability to respond to an emergency.
Plans for emergencies should be put to the test to ensure that each recovery step is accurate and that the plan as a whole works. Regular reviews and updates guarantee that new information is recorded and contingency plans are updated to keep the contingency plan in a prepared state.
Is there a level of incident or disaster that is too large to be planned for? Is there an event that you would consider so impactful or devastating that there is no level of planning that could allow a business to survive that event?
i want to know, is it safe to create different networks at a work place? where the business has it own network and the workers have a separate network they can log in when they come to work to avoid attacks ?
Hi Frank, I’m not certain what you mean by the business and workers have seperate networks? Segregating the networks would work if you’re referencing a place where workers can leverage internet for personal matters i.e. a guest wifi. That is totally possible. Most companies, however, will only implement guest wifi for customers.
So long as proper network segregation is used, it is entirely possible and safe to have many networks at a workplace. For example, I work with a lot of manufacturing systems at my job and most large manufacturers will have multiple, separate networks to separate the various parts of the manufacturing process. Known as the Purdue model, which specifies isolates the various manufacturing segments from each other and from the the office and business systems. This is effective and useful because many industrial systems are designed to run in isolation while at the same time often have very long lifespans and limited long term security support. It is not uncommon to find industrial automation running on 20 year old Windows servers that haven’t or can’t be upgraded or patched. In those situations, highly segregated networks are vital to keep a malicious attacker or malware from spreading throughout the system. If one network of systems goes down, it is bad, but not nearly as bad as every piece of equipment in the facility at once.
Discuss about the four severity levels of incidents.
The four severity levels of incidents are false alarm, minor, major, and disaster. False alarm also known as false positive is least severe, while disaster is most severe and needs to be addressed immediately.
The incidents can be divided into false alarms, minor incidents, major incidents, and disasters according to the severity of threats and losses caused to the company. Too many false alarms may cause real attacks to go unnoticed. Minor incidents do not have a broad impact on the company and can be dealt with by staff on-duty. In case of a major incident, computer security incident response teams (CSIRTs) should be reported immediately to deal with the incident quickly, efficiently, and effectively to control the loss. Business continuity plans are developed in the event of disasters.
The most common, and possibly most dangerous type of incident is the false alarm. They are the most common because the vast majority of events that seem potentially threatening turn out not to be. I call them the possibly most dangerous because too many false alarms cause Alert Fatigue – where people stop paying attention to alarms because they assume it is “just another false alarm” – or lull people into a false sense of security – “we’ve had 1000 alerts and none of them were a threat, clearly we have nothing to worry about”
Commonly used severity ranking is from SEV 1 (severity 1) to SEV 3 (severity 3), where SEV 1 is a critical incident and SEV 3 is a minor incident. SEV 1 incidents can occur when a service is unavailable to all users or clients, when there has been a significant security breech, or when client data is lost. A major occurrence with a significant negative impact on the business is known as a SEV 1..
SEV 2 incidents can occur when a sizable portion of a service’s essential functionality is broken or when a service is inaccessible to all users or customers. A major occurrence that has a sizable impact on the business is referred to as a SEV 2.
An SEV 3 event could occur when a system flaw slightly annoys users or customers but has no significant impact on key system operations. A minor incident with little effect on the business is referred to as a SEV 3.
What are some of the challenges that organizations face when implementing an incident and disaster response plan, and how can these challenges be addressed?
Implementing an incident and disaster response plan can be a complex and challenging process for organizations due to limited resources, lack of organization’s preparedness or the complexity of the incident and disaster response plan. Addressing the same along with resource trainings and periodic reviews will help organizations overcome these challenges.
Some challenges that organizations face when implementing an incident and disaster response plan are leadership challenges and ineffective communication. These challenges can be overcome by walkthrough the plan and performing tabletop exercises with the people/team that will be involved in the response plan, along with leadership to get their approval of the plan. Also perform the walkthrough on a periodic basis to adjust for changes and staffing changes.
Some of the challenges are making sure that you have the right team and that there is effective communication. Without proper communication the plan that is in place will not be played out properly. Additionally, lack of preparation can lead to failure in the execution of the disaster response plan.
Why is it important to avoid overly rigid plans and procedures for crisis recovery?
It is important to avoid overly rigid plans and procedures for crisis recovery because the response team will be moving quickly and under pressure to get have the recovery plan up and working. If plans and procedures are too complicated or rigid it is a good possibility that things will get missed and not get recovered.
There are several variations on the truism that plans never work out they way they were planned.
“I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”
– Dwight D. Eisenhower
“No plan of operations can with any certainty reach beyond the first encounter with the enemy.”
– Helmuth von Moltke the Elder
“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.”
– Mike Tyson
The point that they are all making is that plans are made based on hypothetical situations. They will never fully represent reality and the event that happens is quite likely not to be one that has a plan laid out for it.
That is not to say that planning is not worthwhile. The very act of getting a group together to create the plans requires them to think through situations and work together, the key actions of a good response team.
Hi Shepherd,
Effective emergency management requires flexibility. Because emergency managers have to adapt plans to circumstances, innovate, and improvise when necessary, rigid plans and organizational structures are to be avoided. The plan is a starting place rather than an immutable guide to action. In a healthy emergency management environment, officials have the discretion to interpret plans and responds to circumstances.
The situation might always be different that what you think. It is important to have steps to follow however, it is also crucial to be adaptable. As you being your recovery plan, you will notice things that you didn’t expect so there has to be room for flexibility.
Can good planning and protection eliminate security incidents?
I think there is no way to eliminate security incidents without shutting down the information system. However, good planning and protection are vital steps in minimizing security incidents and disrupting services.
There is no way a company can be 100 percent secured but good planning and protection can not completely eliminate security incidents but reduce the risk
Security incidents cannot be completely eliminated. System updates and iterations are always accompanied by new bugs. Companies need to react accurately and quickly in the face of an attack to make sure the damage is manageable. In order to reduce losses, the company should also rehearse the steps and measures in the face of major events and disasters before the event happens.
As my fellow classmates have all eluded to, it’s impossible to “eliminate” security incidents purely on good planning and protection. Nishant brings up an interesting point by stating “there is no way to eliminate security incidents without shutting down the information system”. However, even with it shutdown. The hard drives could be stolen. That would still fall under the category of a security incident even with it powered off.
Yes! A well-organized incident response team with a detailed plan can mitigate the potential effects of unplanned events. An incident response plan can speed up forensic analysis, minimizing the duration of a security event and shortening recovery time.
In an effort to completely eradicate security issues, there are certain limitations. You might have to accept and put up with some of the security issues. Your assets will be somewhat protected if you have the right countermeasures in place. Therefore, it is hard to completely eradicate security occurrences from its entity.
Security incidents cannot be entirely avoided. New bugs are always introduced with system updates and iterations. Companies must respond accurately and quickly in the face of an attack in order to limit the damage. To reduce losses, the company should also practice the steps and measures to be taken in the event of a major event or disaster before the event occurs.
Why is it necessary not to make plans and processes for crisis recovery too rigid?
It is important not to make plans and processes for crisis recovery too rigid because crises are inherently unpredictable, and no two crises are exactly alike. When a crisis occurs, it can create a rapidly evolving and complex situation, and a rigid response plan may not be able to accommodate the unique circumstances of the crisis.
If plans and processes for crisis recovery are too rigid, it can lead to a number of problems. For example, it may create a false sense of security that the plan will work in any situation, which can lead to complacency and a lack of preparation for unexpected scenarios. It can also result in a slow response to the crisis, as teams may be hesitant to deviate from the plan or may waste time trying to fit the unique circumstances into the predetermined framework.
Instead, it is important to develop plans and processes that are flexible and adaptable to changing circumstances. This means building a response plan that includes contingencies for a range of possible scenarios, and providing teams with the training and resources they need to think on their feet and make quick decisions in a crisis.
By adopting a flexible approach to crisis recovery, organizations can respond more quickly and effectively to unexpected situations, minimize the impact of the crisis, and increase their chances of a successful recovery.
What is the significance of incident response rehearsal?
Incident response rehearsal, also known as a “mock incident” or “tabletop exercise,” is a proactive measure that organizations can take to prepare for potential cybersecurity incidents or other types of emergencies. The significance of incident response rehearsal lies in its ability to help organizations identify and mitigate vulnerabilities in their incident response plans before a real incident occurs.
By simulating different scenarios and testing the response plan, organizations can identify weaknesses in their processes, systems, and personnel, and take corrective actions to improve their response capabilities. Incident response rehearsals can also help organizations to assess their readiness, evaluate the effectiveness of their incident response plan, and identify any gaps in their training or resources.
In addition, incident response rehearsals can help organizations to promote a culture of preparedness, increase awareness of potential threats, and foster collaboration and communication among different teams and stakeholders. Ultimately, incident response rehearsal is a critical component of any effective incident response strategy, as it helps organizations to proactively prepare for and respond to potential incidents.
The significance of incident response rehearsal lies in its ability to identify gaps in an organization’s incident response capabilities before a real incident occurs. This allows the organization to refine its response plan, improve its procedures, and train its staff to better handle security incidents.
What are the impacts of not having a Business Continuity plan?
A business continuity plan ensures the restoration of core business operations after disasters. Not having a business continuity plan negatively impacts every business. It results in losses ranging from financial loss to reduced and/or lost productivity, reputational loss, injuries, and in severe situations even death.
some impacts of not having a BCP are:
– Financial losses
– operational disruptions
– Legal and Regulatory consequences
– Delayed Recovery
Not having BCP can be costly and potentially catastrophic for an organization.
If a business does not have a continuity plan when an incident occurs, they will not be able to continue operations or will have to spend excessive money to do so. If a business has not thought out the BCP, they will not know what the critical equipment, data, and personnel are or how to best ensure they can continue to function. The most likely outcome of a business with that poor level of planning is that they will go out of business or at the least suffer major financial and reputational setbacks.
Hi Asha,
Some of the risk of not having a BCP includes.:
Reduced Productivity.
Financial Loss.
Reputational damage.
Injury and death
Business Failure.
One of the biggest consequences of not having a business continuity plan would be financial loss to the company. In addition, the reputation and future of a firm can be severely harmed if it is not adequately prepared for and unable to handle a disruption that affects business continuity. Customers and clients want firms to have effective response plans in place in case of disruptions, even though they acknowledge that disasters are possible.
A business may eventually fail due to decreased production, decreased revenue, or reputational damage. If a company is unable to recognize and control these risks, it may not be able to recover from a serious catastrophe.
A business continuity plan guarantees that core business operations are restored following a disaster. Every business suffers from the lack of a business continuity plan. It causes losses ranging from financial to reduced and/or lost productivity, reputational damage, injuries, and, in extreme cases, death.
What do you think is the most important step in the incident response process? Why?
In my opinion, I think the analysis phase is the most important step in the incident response process. This is because it serves as the bridge between detection and escalation. If an incident is not effectively analyzed, necessary actions cannot be taken even if it is detected.
I believe that all steps in the IR process are equally important and each plays a vital role in ensuring effective response. If i had to choose one that will be initial assessment phase because in this phase IR team gathers all the information about incident to determine the scope, impact and severity. This information is crucial to execute appropriate response plan and to allocate resources effectively. Without thorough and accurate information gathering the IR team may not be able to respond to incident effectively that could lead to additional damage or data loss.
Discuss the components/constituent members of a computer security incident response team (CSIRT) and their roles.
What are some ways that IDS may fail and what can we do to prevent that in the future?
First, an incorrectly configured IDS may not effectively detect threats or may generate a large number of false positives or missed positives. To prevent this from happening, security operations centers should consider providing written documentation to ensure that configurations are correct and that settings are regularly reviewed and updated based on the organization’s security policy and threat landscape. In addition, IDSs need to rely on signatures and rules that are updated on time to accurately detect threats. The Security Operations Center regularly updates the IDS with the latest signatures and rules from trusted sources and subscribes to the latest security threat and vulnerability information sources.
What is the main purpose of a honeypot?
The main purpose of a honeypot is to act as a decoy system designed to lure attackers away from real systems and applications, allowing security personnel to monitor and analyze their behavior.
Honeypot could be thought of as a decoy technology that aims to detect malicious attacks and intrusions. By setting up a “hope to be detected, attacked or even compromised” system, simulating a normal computer system or network environment, the attacker is lured into the honeypot, so as to discover or locate the intruder, the attack pattern and methods. Then, IS auditors would identify the vulnerabilities of the configuration system in order to improve security configuration management and eliminate security hazards.
A honeypot is intended to lure a malicious attacker toward a specific system. This system will appear to have something of value, but will not actually contain anything sensitive or damaging. If it is combined with an IDS system or other malicious event alerting, it can allow a security team to identify the malicious actor and shut them out before that individual or group can access more valuable or damaging data or systems
A honeypot’s primary function is to serve as a decoy system designed to divert attackers’ attention away from real systems and applications, allowing security personnel to monitor and analyze their behavior.
When planning incident and disaster response, how should IT security teams and business operations departments balance network security with the productivity of the deployed business systems?
Balancing network security with productivity requires collaboration between IT security teams and business operations departments. By conducting risk assessment, developing DRP, prioritizing system access, maintaining communication and testing the plan, they can ensure that they are able to respond to incidents and disasters efficiently and effectively.
What is the importance of testing to a contingency planning?
It helps to ensure that the plan is effective and can be executed successfully in case of a crisis. It is important for identifying weaknesses, ensuring preparedness, improving response time, building confidence in their ability to respond to an emergency.
Plans for emergencies should be put to the test to ensure that each recovery step is accurate and that the plan as a whole works. Regular reviews and updates guarantee that new information is recorded and contingency plans are updated to keep the contingency plan in a prepared state.
Is there a level of incident or disaster that is too large to be planned for? Is there an event that you would consider so impactful or devastating that there is no level of planning that could allow a business to survive that event?
In your opinion, what step would you say is the most crucial and impactful in the incident response process?
Why is it important to replace default passwords during configuration?
Natural disasters can strike at any time. What is the first step in the disaster management cycle?