SecOps | Breaking Cybersecurity News | The Hacker News

With breaches making the headlines on an almost weekly basis, the cybersecurity challenges we face are becoming visible not only to large enterprises, who have built security capabilities over the years, but also to small to medium businesses and the broader public. While this is creating greater awareness among smaller businesses of the need to improve their security posture, SMBs are often left facing a gap in the market, unable to find security tooling that is both easy for them to use and which they can afford. When we consider the needs of SMBs, we need to focus both on the development of threat intelligence, which is necessary to understand and identify the threats being faced, as well  as the tools used to provide protection . NTTSH has built a pedigree of over 20 years' experience in the research and curation of threat intelligence as well as the development of capabilities and products which leverage its threat intelligence to protect customers. After many years of focus on

Cybersecurity is an infinite journey in a digital landscape that never ceases to change. According to Ponemon Institute 1 , "only 59% of organizations say their cybersecurity strategy has changed over the past two years." This stagnation in strategy adaptation can be traced back to several key issues. Talent Retention Challenges:  The cybersecurity field is rapidly advancing, requiring a skilled and knowledgeable workforce. However, organizations face a critical shortage of such talent, making it difficult to keep strategies agile and relevant. Leadership Focus : Often, the attention of leadership teams is divided across various priorities, and cybersecurity may not be at the forefront. This can result in strategies becoming outdated and less effective. Board Engagement:  Adequate board support is essential for strategy evolution. A lack of comprehensive understanding of cybersecurity issues at the board level can lead to insufficient resources and support for strategic updates.

It comes as no surprise that today's cyber threats are orders of magnitude more complex than those of the past. And the ever-evolving tactics that attackers use demand the adoption of better, more holistic and consolidated ways to meet this non-stop challenge. Security teams constantly look for ways to reduce risk while improving security posture, but many approaches offer piecemeal solutions – zeroing in on one particular element of the evolving threat landscape challenge – missing the forest for the trees.  In the last few years, Exposure Management has become known as a comprehensive way of reigning in the chaos, giving organizations a true fighting chance to reduce risk and improve posture. In this article I'll cover what Exposure Management is, how it stacks up against some alternative approaches and why building an Exposure Management program should be on  your 2024 to-do list. What is Exposure Management?  Exposure Management is the systematic identification, evaluation,

There is a seemingly never-ending quest to find the right security tools that offer the right capabilities for your organization. SOC teams tend to spend about a  third of their day  on events that don't pose any threat to their organization, and this has accelerated the adoption of automated solutions to take the place of (or augment) inefficient and cumbersome SIEMs. With an estimated  80% of these threats  being common across most organizations, today's SOCs are able to confidently rely on automation to cover this large percentage of threat signals.  But, while it is true that automation can greatly improve the efficiency and effectiveness of security teams, it will never be able to cover all detection and response use cases infallibly.  In the recently released  GigaOm Radar for Autonomous Security Operations Center (SOC) , they accurately state that "the SOC will not—and should not—be fully autonomous."  As more vendors attempt to challenge the dominant players in the SIEM c

In an ideal world, security and development teams would be working together in perfect harmony. But we live in a world of competing priorities, where DevOps and security departments often butt heads with each other. Agility and security  are often at odds with each other— if a new feature is  delivered quickly but  contains security vulnerabilities, the SecOps team will need to scramble the release and patch the vulnerabilities, which can take days or weeks. On the other hand, if the SecOps team takes too long to review and approve a new feature, the development team will get frustrated with the slow pace of delivery. Security needs to move slowly and cautiously, while development wants to "move fast and break things" and release new features quickly. DevOps teams can view security as an impediment to their work instead of an important part of the process. With each team pulling in opposite directions, there is often tension and conflict between the two teams, slowing deve