Report says 92% of US CISOs surveyed experienced a supply chain attack in the last year
- Oct 3, 2020 12:43 pm GMT
My longtime friend Jim Ball, CISO of the Western Area Power Authority, sent me an interesting article from SC Magazine this week. It described a report by the cybersecurity services company BlueVoyant. The report was based on a survey of CISOs in five countries, although this version of the report discussed mainly the US results. The CISOs were in a range of industries, including “utilities and energy”.
The article had some pretty striking findings, so being skeptical of them, I downloaded the report itself. I found it was based on a survey of over 300 CISOs in all industries, and it seems to be credible. Among the most interesting findings were (quoting from the article):
· “92 percent of U.S. organizations suffered a breach in the past 12 months as a result of weakness in their supply chain.” The report didn’t say exactly what form these supply chain breaches took, which was disappointing but doesn’t indicate the report shouldn’t be believed.
· “When four other countries (the U.K., Singapore, Switzerland and Mexico) are included in the research, 80 percent of the more than 1,500 CIOs, CISOs and CPOs suffered a third-party-related breach in the past 12 months.” So it seems the US isn’t alone in having this problem.
· “ ‘Time and again, as organizations investigate the sources and causes of malicious cyber attacks on their infrastructures, they discover that more often than not, the attack vector is within the infrastructure owned by third-party partners,’ said Debora Plunkett, who sits on the BlueVoyant board of directors and was formerly the NSA’s director of information assurance.”
· “A third of the survey respondents said they had no way of knowing if a risk emerged in a third-party’s operations, while only 31 percent said they monitor all vendors, and only 19 percent monitor just critical vendors. (According to the report, U.S. organizations use an average of 1,420 vendors.)”
· 31% of US survey respondents monitor all of their vendors. 19% monitor just the most critical vendors. 33% don’t monitor their vendors at all.
· Only 42% of respondents said they work with their vendors to fix problems they have identified, which is interesting. If you know an important vendor has security problems, why wouldn’t you at least follow up with them to see how they are coming on fixing them? That’s the best way to make sure they do something about the problems. Simply requesting that the vendor do something – whether in contract language or just by a phone call – doesn’t in itself mitigate any risk. The vendor has to do what they said they’d do. Maybe you won’t be able to get them to keep their promise, but you need to try (and BTW, not following up could result in a CIP-013 violation).
· On the other hand, 86% of respondents said their budgets for third party risk management were increasing. Which is good, of course.
Any opinions expressed in this blog post are strictly mine and are not necessarily shared by any of the clients of Tom Alrich LLC. If you would like to comment on what you have read here, I would love to hear from you. Please email me at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Get Published - Build a Following
The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.
If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.