When I was in the military, one of the things that I noticed was a massive reluctance to create new and unusual scenarios for war games. Instead, we always seemed to train for the last major combat theater. When going to the National Training Center the OpFor (opposing force) team would just run circles around the visiting units. This is because they were always looking at new strategies, tactics, and logistical methods to support them. The visitors would come in with ideas that things would be the same as last time and just get their asses handed to them. There were rare occasions when the visiting units won, but they were the exception and not the rule.

One of the most commonly asked questions in cybersecurity is “where do I start?” This common question shows just how overwhelmed many organizations are when faced with the reality of the threats that are out there. From ransomware to business email compromise, the threat actors certainly seem to be ahead of the implementations when it comes to securing the data that organizations are responsible for. So where should an organization start when it comes to building or optimizing their cybersecurity program?

IoT (Internet of Things) devices have long been a source of security concerns. Back in 2012-2014 we wrote a series of articles following the comedy of errors that is the IoT market. At the time I dubbed it the Internet of Fails simply because the companies making these internet connected devices were leaving them so open to compromise. Everything from a lack of encrypted communication with cloud services, to no passwords on administrative functions, to using images that had open files and folders in the firmware were found in popular connected products that were shipped to customers. Supply chain compromises were also found in generous quantities, making the mad rush to connect everything a serious concern.

Since Executive Order 14028 came out on May 12th from the Biden Administration there has been a lot of talk about what it means and what are the legal and regulatory ramifications of this order. While the larger conversation is one for a later (and much longer) article the overall tone of the EO is one that highlights a desire to centralize control over cybersecurity at the federal level, but not a lot of direct regulatory changes. Everything is recommendations, or guidelines. There is nothing in EO14038 that makes any real changes. Now that is both a good thing and a bad thing. On the one hand it means that organizations have time to adapt to the tone and general message of the EO and new cybersecurity requirements, and on the other hand, as we are already in an election cycle, many companies are likely to adopt a wait and see attitude towards any changes. One area is around SBOM, or Software Build of Materials.