Risk Management and Business Context

This week I attended the RSA Security Analytics Summit in Washington D.C. and had the incredible opportunity to meet one of the smartest individuals to date. Nate Silver was the keynote and he covered a lot of ground including 1) an analogy of the proliferation of information via the printing press in 1440 and the most recently the world wide web in 1990; 2) The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Making the Scientific Method Obsolete; 3) The 538 method and lessons from the 2012 elections; 4) the influence of bias in big data 5) the “Signal-to-Noise” ratio which results in increased variables that occur along with the need for a true distribution model to enable trend effective trend analysis; 6) the limitation of technology in some cases where technology was deemed more powerful and a better predictor than the human brain and 7) the use of mathematics to help with predictive modeling. As you can see from the list of topics the presentation was truly engaging and thought provoking.

Signal To Noise Ratio_opt

Towards the end of the presentation Nate Silver provided a suggested approach that not only solidified his presentation but provided actionable guidance in how to better use data as a predictor. The suggested approach is as follows:

1) Think Probabilistically
2) Know Where You’re Coming From
3) Survey the Data Landscape
4) Try, and Err

When given the above guidance, which is clearly outlined in his book The Signal and the Noise, I instantly was able to relate to point number 2….”know where you are coming from” to risk management. The reason why it resonated with me so much is that I am a communications major and studied countless hours both in theory and practice on intra/inter personal relationships. As I work with organizations and listen to the different approaches to risk management using predictive analysis I find people in the risk management profession often overlook the power of knowing where people or in this case risks are coming from within the organization. Risks to financial data or healthcare records are different from risks to a conference room portal application. People must apply common sense to sophisticated models of risk analysis. The only way to get common sense is to drive context into the relationship of the risk to the expected results or impact to the business.

The need for context (common sense) has never been greater. As you look to drive your risk management or even security practices within our organization you must have all four elements in place not just 1, 3 and 4. Context of the risk will empower you to respond in a logical, appropriate, timely and effective manner. Context will also enable you to ensure the people, departments, divisions understand the impact to their world and can also enables the conversations you need to have executive leadership for relational visibility into the risks that truly impact the their world. Without context you will provide less meaningful data and increase the risk exposure to your organization.

In closing I recommend reading Nate Silver’s book The Signal and The Noise and look forward to seeing how all of you apply his astute suggested approach.

S2N Book

Advertisements

RSA Conference Talks Big Data

Image

I just came back from the RSA Conference in San Francisco where I couldn’t turn a corner without someone talking about how Big Data was revolutionizing the security industry. In fact, there was one session that stood out during the conference for me. It was titled “Managing Advanced Security Problems Using Advanced Security Analytics” where Eddie Schwartz, VP and CISO of RSA moderated a panel comprised of four industry analysts including Scott Crawford, Research Director of Enterprise Management Associates; John Kindervag, Senior Analyst at Forrester Research; Neil MacDonald, VP & Gartner Fellow of Gartner and; Jon Oltsik, Senior Principal Analyst from Enterprise Strategy Group.

The panel discussion covered quite a bit of ground including defining what Big Data actually means, the acceptance within security organizations of using big data analytic techniques as well as the prediction of when security professionals will embrace big data analytics and finally how big data can be the answer to the advanced threat problem with it’s incredible scalability and high speed analytics.

Discussion point that I agree with:

1)     Everyone from the moderator to the panel participants acknowledged that the current approach that companies are taking to manage the advanced threat problem fail due to lack of event context and constraints in traditional IT architecture. The panel also pointed out that there are many organizations that are not changing their ways from traditional perimeter based security, anti-virus, etc. due to “what we don’t know won’t hurt us” mentality which leaves the security teams with archaic technology that leaves them with no visibility into the threats that affect their business.

Discussion point that I did not agree with:

1)     Heat maps are a must to provide visualization. This is something I cannot agree with as the notion of a heat map is even to a risk professional becoming obsolete as they only provide a two dimensional view into the risks that could affect the business. They are not multidimensional and only provide areas of risks vs. different views into key risk issues with details.  I have seen organizations phase out heat maps and phase in multidimensional models that provide a way to view risk data from different dimensions so you get a risk portfolio vs. just pretty colors from a heat map. It also should result in creating risk intelligence so organizations can make informed decisions which can and should be enhanced by risk simulations from quantitative models. What was funny was in another meeting right after the session I was handed a “global threat” heat map of the world which showed different threat colors by country on the size of a business card…..which was of no use.

The conclusion to the session did send me away with a good feeling because what I heard was that by using Big Data it solves many things that GRC programs should do which is breakdown information silos, automate the capture of information, normalize/correlate data and organize the information to be able to respond to risks in an organized/prioritized fashion. Sound familiar? I just can’t wait to see the scale of information capture and speed of analytics better enable the “R” in GRC.