RSA Research Reveals Blind Spots in Threat Detection
March 2016 by RSA
Today, RSA, The Security Division of EMC, released the results of a new Threat Detection Effectiveness Survey that compiled insight from more than 160 respondents globally. The survey was designed to allow participants to self-assess how effective their organizations are at detecting and investigating cyber threats. The research provides valuable global insight into what technologies organizations use, what data they gather to support this effort, and their satisfaction with their current toolsets. Additionally respondents were asked what new technologies they plan to invest in and how they plan to evolve their strategies going forward.
A key insight from the survey was that respondents expressed deep dissatisfaction with their current threat detection and investigation capabilities. Only 24% percent of organizations surveyed indicated that they were satisfied with their ability to detect and investigate threats. . Only 8% of those organizations feel they can detect threats very quickly with only 11% that can investigate threats very quickly. Speed in threat detection and investigation is a critical factor in reducing attacker dwell time and subsequently minimizing damage and loss from cyber attacks
There is a staggering imbalance between organizations that collect perimeter data (88%), and data from modern IT infrastructures (Cloud-based infrastructure 27%, Network Packet 49%, Identity Management 55%, and Endpoint 59%). Yet, organizations who have incorporated these data sources into their detection strategies find them extremely valuable: organizations collecting network packet data ascribed 66% more value to that data for detecting and investigating threats than those that didn’t, and those collecting endpoint data ascribed 57% more value to that data than those that didn’t.
Data integration is also an issue. A quarter of respondents aren’t integrating any data, and only 21% make all their data accessible from a single source. The prevalence of siloed data prevents correlation across data sources, slows investigations, and limits visibility into the full scope of an attack. Only 10% of respondents rated their ability to connect attacker activity across the data sources they collect as “very well”.
Respondents didn’t consider any of their current detection and investigation technologies particularly effective, giving them an average rating of “somewhat effective.” While SIEM is deployed by more than two-thirds of respondents, more effective tools like network packet capture, endpoint forensics, and user behavioral analytics lack the necessary adoption
Finally, an encouraging finding was the increasing importance of identity data to aid detection and investigation. While only slightly more than half of organizations collect data from identity and access systems currently, those that do ascribed 77% more value to that data for detection than those that do not. Further, user behavioral analytics, which can help organizations simplify detection based on spotting patterns of anomalous activity, is the most popular planned technology investment, with 33% of respondents planning to adopt this technology within the next 12 months.
“This survey reinforces our greatest fear that organizations are not currently taking, and in many cases are not planning to take, the necessary steps to protect themselves from advanced threats. They are not collecting the right data, not integrating the data they collect, and focusing on old-school prevention technologies. Today’s reality dictates that they need to plug gaps in visibility, take a more consistent approach to deploying the technologies that matter most, and accelerate the shift away from preventative strategies.” Amit Yoran, President, RSA
RSA’s quantitative global survey was conducted online in December 2015 through February 2016. All qualified respondents self-reported all data. There were more than160 respondents who participated from organizations with 44 percent being under 1,000 employees, 31 percent had 1-10,000 employees and 25 percent over 10,000 employees. The respondents represented 22 different industry sectors with 58 percent from the Americas, 26 percent from Europe and the Middle East, and 15 percent from Asia Pacific and Japan.