Posts

Beyond “Move Fast and Fail Fast”: Balancing Speed, Security, and … Sanity in Software Development (with Podcast)

/in

Move fast and fail fast

In software development, the mantra “move fast and fail fast” has become both a rallying cry and a source of considerable debate.

It champions rapid iteration, prioritizing speed and output, often at the perceived expense of meticulous planning and architectural foresight. This approach, deeply intertwined with the principles of agile development, presents a stark contrast to the traditional model of lengthy planning cycles, rigorous architecture design, and a focus on minimizing risk through exhaustive preparation.

Fail fast

The allure of “fast” is undeniable. In today’s competitive market, speed to market can be the difference between success and failure. Rapid prototyping allows for early user feedback, facilitating continuous improvement and ensuring the product aligns with real-world needs. In essence, it’s about validating hypotheses quickly and pivoting when necessary. This iterative approach, inherent in agile methodologies, fosters a culture of adaptability and responsiveness, crucial in environments where change is the only constant.

So, “fail fast” refers mostly to a fast validation of the MVP (minimum viable product) and drop it if the results are unsatisfactory. This is, in general, very good because it is an optimal usage of resources.

Speed vs. Integrity

However, the emphasis on speed can raise legitimate concerns, particularly regarding security and long-term architectural integrity.

The fear is that a “move fast” mentality might lead to shortcuts, neglecting essential security considerations and creating a foundation prone to technical debt.

This is where the misconception often lies: “fast” in this context does not necessitate “insecure” or “bad.” Rather, it implies a prioritization of development output, which can, and should, be balanced with robust security practices and a forward-thinking architectural vision.

But, how can this forward-thinking be achieved, when the team is focused mostly on delivering value to validate with customers the assumptions made?

The key lies in understanding that agile development, when implemented effectively, incorporates security and architecture as an integral part of the process.

Concepts like “shift left security” emphasize integrating security considerations early in the development lifecycle, rather than as an afterthought.

Automated security testing, continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines with security gates, and regular security audits can be woven into the fabric of rapid development, ensuring that speed does not compromise security.

Validating early in the process means also that the not only the product is proven to meet the expectations, but also the architecture it is built upon.

The traditional approach

On the other hand, the traditional approach, with its emphasis on extensive planning and architecture, offers the perceived stability of a well-defined blueprint.

However, this approach carries its own risks. The extended planning phase can lead to delays, rendering the final product obsolete by the time it reaches the market. Moreover, the rigid nature of pre-defined architectures can hinder adaptability, making it difficult to respond to unexpected changes in user needs or market dynamics. The risk of “failing due to delays and lack of adaptation” is a real threat in fast-paced environments.

The modern software developer must navigate this tension, finding a balance between speed and stability. This involves adopting a pragmatic approach, leveraging the benefits of agile methodologies while mitigating the associated risks.

This can involve:

  • Establishing clear security guidelines and incorporating them into the development process. Having a SSDLC is mandatory when having to deliver fast.
  • Prioritizing a modular and adaptable architecture that can evolve with changing requirements. Modules should be possible to be implemented quickly and dropped without a lot of pain if they prove to be unsuccessful.
  • Implementing robust testing and monitoring to identify and address issues early on. A CI/CD pipeline will allow the team to focus more on delivering new features than testing and integrating all the time.
  • Fostering a culture of continuous learning and improvement, where developers are encouraged to experiment and innovate, while also being accountable for security and quality.
  • Utilizing threat modeling and risk assessment early in the design process. Threat modeling contains a risk assessment, which when done properly will prevent major issues later.

Instead of Conclusions:  my experience

Ultimately, the most effective approach is not about choosing between “fast” and “slow,” but about finding the right cadence of delivering value for each specific project .

The goal is to deliver constantly small pieces of code that bring value while avoiding failure altogether. If deliverables are constantly validated, a failure can only be of a small deliverable increment, which can be either quickly improved, completely removed or entirely replaced with something else.

Important is to learn from it quickly and adapt, ensuring that software development remains a dynamic and evolving process.

When I run a project, I define the goal and the high level path to achieve that goal. Sometimes this path is clear, sometimes many experiments are needed, and some will fail, some will succeed.

The post Beyond “Move Fast and Fail Fast”: Balancing Speed, Security, and … Sanity in Software Development (with Podcast) first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

Project management with Scrum (with Podcast)

/in


They can’t mix, can they?

Seems like a contradiction to talk about classical project management and the best agile software development methodology ?

But let me ask you this: ever feel like traditional project management is great for mapping out the big picture but falls short when it comes to the nitty-gritty of execution?

And conversely, while Scrum is fantastic for rapid iteration and delivering value quickly, it sometimes lacks that long-term strategic view?

If you feel this, then you’re not alone!

Yes, they can mix

Let’s talk about how to get the best of both worlds when managing projects: having a solid long-term plan and the flexibility to adapt and deliver quickly.

Sometimes it feels like traditional project management is great for the big picture but not so hot on the details, right?

And Scrum is awesome for getting stuff done in short bursts, but can sometimes lose sight of the overall direction.

Turns out, a lot of teams are finding a sweet spot by mixing these two. Think of it like having a good map for your road trip and a sturdy vehicle to handle any bumps along the way.

So, what does each approach bring to the party?

Classical Project Management: The Grand Plan

Imagine classical project management as your strategic guide. It’s all about figuring out the project’s scope, setting those long-term goals, marking important milestones, and creating a project plan.

We’re talking budget, resources, timeline – the whole thing.

It’s about answering the big questions:

  • What are we trying to do?
  • When does it need to be finished?
  • How much will it cost?
  • Who’s in charge of what?

This is great for having a clear vision and a roadmap. It helps everyone stay on the same page and lets you track progress.

The tricky part? Sometimes those detailed plans can go out of date pretty fast. Because things change, right?

 

Scrum: Getting Things Done

Now, Scrum is your agile friend. It’s built for doing things in short bursts, perfect for navigating the twists and turns of, well, pretty much any project.

You break the project into smaller chunks – sprints – usually 2 weeks long. Each sprint has specific goals, and the team works together to deliver something useful by the end.

Scrum is all about talking to each other a lot, having quick daily meetings, and checking in regularly. It’s about being flexible and delivering value bit by bit.

Scrum is great at handling feedback, adding new stuff, and showing real results quickly.

The thing is, on its own, Scrum might need that long-term direction that classical project management provides.

The Perfect Mix: Working Together, Delivering Fast

The magic happens when you put these two together:

  • You use classical project management to set the long-term vision, make the initial plan, and decide where you’re going. This gives you a good map.
  • Use Scrum to actually get there, one sprint at a time. Scrum becomes your engine for delivering value along the route laid out by classical project management.

Here’s a simple way to think about it:

  1. Big Picture: Classical project management sets the overall project scope, goals, and timeline. Everyone knows what the target is.

  2. Breaking it Down: The project gets broken down into smaller pieces, often using the classical project management approach. This makes the work manageable.

  3. Sprint Time: The Scrum team takes a chunk of work and plans it out for a sprint. They figure out what they can realistically do in that time.

  4. Daily Check-ins: The team has quick daily meetings to talk about progress, any problems, and adjust as needed. Keeps everyone in sync.

  5. Show and Tell: At the end of each sprint, the team shows what they’ve built and gets feedback. This feedback helps plan future sprints.

  6. Getting Better: Regular team meetings let everyone think about how they’re working and find ways to improve.

So, by mixing classical project management and Scrum, you get the best of both worlds. You have a clear long-term plan and the flexibility to adapt and deliver quickly. It’s a great way to work together, deliver fast, and make sure projects stay on track while being able to handle whatever comes up.

The post Project management with Scrum (with Podcast) first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

Comparing “Records of Processing Activities” (ROPA) and “Data Protection Impact Assessments” (DPIA) (with Podcast)

/in

Understanding ROPA and DPIA: Key GDPR Concepts for Tech Companies

Podcast of this article:


 

 

 

Let’s explore two essential components of GDPR compliance: Records of Processing Activities (ROPA) and Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIA).

ROPA provides a comprehensive overview of your data handling, while DPIA focuses on assessing and mitigating risks for specific, higher-risk activities.

Records of Processing Activities (ROPA): Your Company’s Data Map

Think of ROPA as your company’s data map. It documents every step of the data journey, from collection to deletion.

It’s about what data you collect, including why, how, and with whom you share it.

A well-maintained ROPA is crucial for demonstrating GDPR compliance and building trust with your users.

What ROPA Covers

  • Purposes of Processing: Be specific! Instead of “marketing,” say “personalized email marketing based on user browsing history” or “improving product recommendations based on user purchase data.”
  • Categories of Data Subjects: Identify who the data relates to (e.g., customers, employees, website visitors, app users).
  • Categories of Personal Data: List the types of data you process (e.g., name, email address, IP address, location data, browsing history, biometric data).
  • Recipients of Personal Data: Specify who you share data with (e.g., cloud storage providers, marketing agencies, analytics platforms, law enforcement). Include both internal and external recipients.
  • Transfers to Third Countries: If you transfer data outside the EU, document the safeguards in place (e.g., adequacy decisions, standard contractual clauses).
  • Data Retention Periods: Specify how long you keep different types of data. This should be based on legal requirements and business needs.
  • Technical and Organizational Security Measures: Briefly describe the security measures you have in place to protect the data (e.g., encryption, access controls, data masking).

ROPA Examples for Tech Companies

  • Social Media Platform: A social media platform’s ROPA would detail processing activities related to user profiles, posts, photos, friend connections, messaging, targeted advertising, and data analytics. It would specify data categories (e.g., profile information, IP address, location data, browsing history), purposes (e.g., personalized content delivery, targeted advertising, platform improvement), and recipients (e.g., advertising partners, analytics providers).
  • SaaS Provider: A SaaS provider’s ROPA would document processing related to user account management, data storage, application usage tracking, customer support interactions, and billing. It would include details about data categories (e.g., user credentials, company data, usage logs), purposes (e.g., providing the service, improving performance, customer support), and recipients (e.g., cloud hosting providers, payment processors).
  • Mobile App Developer: A mobile app developer’s ROPA would cover data processing within the app, such as collecting user location data for personalized recommendations, accessing contacts for social features, or tracking in-app purchases. It would detail the data categories (e.g., location, contacts, purchase history), purposes (e.g., personalized recommendations, social features, in-app advertising), and recipients (e.g., location services providers, advertising networks).

Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIA): Proactive Risk Management

A DPIA is a more in-depth analysis triggered by specific processing activities that pose a high risk to individuals.

With the DPIA you’re identifying risks, and also finding ways to mitigate them and demonstrating that you’ve considered data protection all the way.

What DPIA Covers

  • Description of the Processing Operations: Clearly explain the planned processing, including the purposes, data categories, and processing methods.
  • Necessity and Proportionality: Justify why the processing is necessary and proportionate to the intended purpose. Are there less intrusive ways to achieve the same goal?
  • Assessment of Risks to Individuals: Identify potential risks to individuals’ rights and freedoms, such as identity theft, discrimination, loss of control over their data, or reputational damage. Consider the likelihood and severity of these risks.
  • Measures to Address the Risks: Describe the measures you will implement to mitigate the identified risks. This might include technical measures (e.g., encryption, anonymization), organizational measures (e.g., access controls, data minimization policies), and legal measures (e.g., data processing agreements).
  • Consultation with Data Protection Authorities (DPA): In some cases, you may need to consult with your local DPA before carrying out high-risk processing.

DPIA Examples for Tech Companies

  • Facial Recognition Software: A company developing facial recognition software for security purposes would need a DPIA. The DPIA would assess risks related to accuracy, bias, potential for misuse, and impact on individuals’ privacy and freedom of movement. Mitigation measures might include strict access controls, data anonymization techniques, and clear guidelines for use.
  • AI-Powered Recommendation Engine: A company launching a new AI-powered personalized recommendation engine that analyzes large volumes of user data would require a DPIA. The DPIA would analyze the risks of profiling, discrimination, and loss of privacy. Mitigation measures could include data minimization, differential privacy techniques, and user consent mechanisms.
  • Biometric Authentication: A company implementing large-scale biometric authentication for access control would need a DPIA. The DPIA would evaluate the risks of data breaches, identity theft, and potential misuse of biometric data. Mitigation measures could include secure storage of biometric data, multi-factor authentication, and strict access controls.

ROPA and DPIA: Similarities and Differences

ROPA and DPIA are like two sides of the same coin – both essential for responsible data handling under GDPR. They work together to ensure your data processing is transparent, accountable, and respects individuals’ privacy.

Similarities

  • GDPR Compliance:
    • Both ROPA and DPIA are mandated by the GDPR (Articles 30 and 35, respectively).
    • They’re not optional; they’re legal requirements for many organizations.   
  • Focus on Data Protection:
    • At their core, both aim to protect individuals’ rights and freedoms related to their personal data.
    • They promote a privacy-first approach to data processing.
  • Documentation is Key:
    • Both require thorough documentation.
    • ROPA is the documented record of your processing activities, and DPIA results in a documented risk assessment report.
    • Good record-keeping is crucial for demonstrating compliance.   
  • Accountability:
    • Both contribute to demonstrating accountability.
    • By maintaining a ROPA and conducting DPIAs, you show that you’re taking data protection seriously and actively managing risks. 

Differences

  • Scope:
    • ROPA covers all your data processing activities,
    • DPIA focuses on specific, high-risk processing activities.
    • Think of ROPA as the big picture and DPIA as a focused close-up.
  • Purpose:
    • ROPA’s primary purpose is to document and provide transparency about all your data processing.
    • DPIA’s main goal is to assess and mitigate the risks of particular processing activities that are likely to be high-risk.  
  • Requirement:
    • ROPA is a general requirement for most organizations (especially those with over 250 employees or those processing sensitive data).
    • DPIA is only required when processing activities are likely to result in a high risk to individuals’ rights and freedoms. It’s triggered by specific circumstances.
  • Outcome:
    • ROPA produces a comprehensive record of your processing activities.
    • DPIA results in a risk assessment report outlining potential risks and the measures you’ll take to mitigate them.
    • One is a detailed inventory, the other a focused risk analysis.  
  • Timing:
    • ROPA is an ongoing requirement – you need to keep it updated as your processing activities change.
    • DPIA is conducted for specific projects or plans before they are implemented. It is a point-in-time assessment. 

In a nutshell:

  • ROPA is your ongoing data processing inventory, demonstrating your overall approach to data protection.
  • DPIA is a targeted risk assessment for specific, potentially high-risk projects, ensuring you’ve considered and addressed privacy concerns before they become a problem.
  • Both are essential tools in your GDPR compliance toolkit.

The post Comparing “Records of Processing Activities” (ROPA) and “Data Protection Impact Assessments” (DPIA) (with Podcast) first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

AI vs. (secure) software developers

/in

I think the entire software development world saw NVIDIA’s CEO saying that the world will stop needing software developers, because they will be replaced by AI.

Well, considering that this comes from the guy who sells the core on which AI is built, is understandable.

But is there any truth to this? Let’s look at some Strengths and Weaknesses of AI in the field of software development, with focus on secure software development.

 

The Strengths of AI in Software Development

AI excels in automating repetitive tasks and processing vast amounts of data quickly. For example, AI-driven tools can:

  • Identify common vulnerabilities such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting (XSS) using pattern recognition.
  • Suggest code refactoring for improved efficiency or readability.
  • Provide automated testing and validation for specific use cases.
  • Generate code snippets that can speed up development, allowing developers to focus on complex, high-level tasks instead of repetitive tasks.
  • Perform static and dynamic code analysis faster than manual reviews, identifying potential issues across large codebases in a fraction of the time.
  • Offer predictive insights by analyzing historical data to anticipate possible security breaches or performance bottlenecks.
  • Facilitate compliance checks by mapping code against security standards and regulatory requirements.

These capabilities make AI invaluable for enhancing productivity and reducing the burden of mundane tasks. However, AI has limitations that highlight the irreplaceable role of skilled developers.

The Weaknesses of AI in Secure Software Development

  1. Lack of context understanding
    AI tools often struggle to grasp the context of a software system. Security vulnerabilities often stem from contextual issues, such as improper assumptions about user behavior or architectural flaws.
    Developers use their domain knowledge and intuition to identify these issues—something AI cannot replicate.
  2. Overreliance on patterns
    AI relies heavily on training data and pattern recognition. This approach can lead to false positives (flagging issues that aren’t real) and false negatives (missing actual vulnerabilities).
    Developers, on the other hand, use critical thinking to assess risks and prioritize fixes.
  3. Lack of creative problem-solving
    Secure software development often requires innovative solutions to unique problems.
    AI lacks the creativity and adaptability of humans, limiting its ability to design custom security measures.
  4. Ethical and legal implications
    AI cannot make ethical decisions or assess the broader implications of its suggestions.
    Developers with security expertise consider regulatory compliance, ethical concerns, and long-term impact when designing secure systems.
  5. Lack of continuous growth
    Unlike developers, whose experience grows continuously through exposure to new challenges, AI systems remain static unless explicitly retrained.
    Developers improve their skills, adapt to emerging threats, and learn from past experiences, ensuring they stay ahead of evolving security risks.
  6. Limited problem-solving scope
    AI knows only what it was trained with. This limitation means it struggles to address new or unconventional problems that fall outside its training data.
    Developers, by contrast, use their ingenuity and evolving expertise to find innovative solutions to emerging threats and challenges.

 

Examples of AI Mistakes

Here are some scenarios where AI is not mature enough, and developers with security skills excel:

  • Misidentifying Threats: An AI tool might flag a harmless API endpoint as a potential security risk due to pattern similarity, while missing a nuanced logic flaw that allows privilege escalation.
  • Overlooking Complex Dependencies: AI might fail to account for security risks in intricate dependency chains or third-party integrations, where a developer’s experience would highlight potential issues.
  • Generic Recommendations: AI might suggest generic fixes that do not align with the specific architecture or threat model of the application, whereas developers tailor solutions to the system’s needs.
  • Failing to Detect Zero-Day Vulnerabilities: AI cannot identify vulnerabilities that do not have a pre-existing pattern in its training data. Developers’ intuition and expertise are critical for detecting these novel threats.
  • Incorrectly Prioritizing Vulnerabilities: AI might prioritize fixing minor issues over addressing critical risks, leading to inefficient resource allocation. Developers can apply risk-based decision-making to prioritize effectively.
  • Overlooking Business Logic Flaws: AI often fails to detect flaws in the business logic that attackers can exploit. These vulnerabilities require a deep understanding of the application’s purpose and workflows, which developers possess.
  • Inappropriate Code Suggestions: AI-generated code snippets may inadvertently introduce vulnerabilities or fail to comply with specific security policies. Developers review and adapt these snippets to ensure secure integration.
  • Old or obsolete training data: AI recommends very often snippets of code based on old APIs, which might no longer exist by the time it is asked to generate some code. Developers will look always at the latest documentation of the API they need.

 

Instead of conclusions

AI is a powerful tool that enhances the capabilities of developers but, as can be seen above, it does not replace them. At least for a long while … 🙂

The ideal approach is a collaborative one, where AI handles repetitive tasks and provides data-driven insights, allowing developers to focus on high-level problem-solving and decision-making.

Organizations should invest in both AI tools and the continuous development of their teams’ security skills.

This balanced approach ensures that the software remains secure, reliable, and resilient against threats.

 

The post AI vs. (secure) software developers first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

Accelerating feature delivery in software development

/in

My company develops security products for all major operating systems. We work with startups and with big companies, all striving to develop features (functional and non-functional) as fast and as good as possible.

While on the first view this seems like a contradiction, there are actually ways of implementing exactly this.

For security software development teams aiming to deliver features more frequently, streamlined processes and efficient workflows are essential.

You guessed, the keywords are agile methods with the related activities such as automated testing, strategic prioritization, agile delivery, efficient workflows, regular and early feedback.

Below are several approaches that emphasize frequent and reliable delivery.

Define requirements with speed in mind

Clear, concise requirements set a strong foundation for quick delivery. Ensuring each feature has straightforward objectives and well-defined acceptance criteria reduces delays caused by back-and-forth clarifications. For security-focused teams, requirements should include key security considerations without overloading the development process. By clarifying expectations from the start, developers can stay on track, avoiding unnecessary revisions and accelerating overall delivery. This being said, also do not change the direction too often (called Pivoting). If you don’t allow feature to “sit”, the product will never reach maturity.

Setup incremental, agile delivery

Breaking down feature development into small, manageable increments supports faster delivery. Rather than waiting for a full release, an incremental approach allows developers to deliver small updates frequently. This Agile-inspired method brings quick wins, shortens feedback cycles, and lets teams adjust direction as needed based on real-world usage. Incremental delivery ensures that new functionality reaches users sooner, making the product more responsive to changing needs.

Optimize for efficiency

Security doesn’t have to slow down delivery. By embedding secure coding practices into the team’s daily workflows, developers can build security right into each feature rather than adding it at the end. Code reviews focused on security can be streamlined with checklists or automated tools, keeping the process efficient. This “security-first” mindset ensures that features remain secure while minimizing delays, as there’s no need for last-minute security fixes.

Invest in CI/CD

Automated testing is key to quick, reliable feature deployment. Automated tests that cover basic functionality and security requirements provide instant feedback, allowing developers to identify and address issues faster. Implementing continuous integration (CI) tools that automatically trigger these tests during development helps the team validate new features on the go. By automating tests, the team gains more time for development and can release updates with minimal manual intervention.

Integrating DevSecOps practices into the development pipeline enables seamless security without slowing down delivery. Automated security checks within the CI/CD pipeline provide fast, reliable security validations, allowing developers to address issues before deployment. This approach keeps the pipeline moving smoothly, as security checks become an integrated part of the process, rather than an additional step that slows down delivery.

Encourage collaborative and efficient workflow

Encourage open communication between developers, security teams, and testers to streamline workflows. Collaborative sessions for discussing roadblocks or coordinating on shared goals help prevent bottlenecks. An open environment where team members share updates and resolve issues collectively accelerates progress by addressing concerns in real time. By emphasizing collaboration, teams can work faster, catching potential blockers early and adapting quickly to new requirements.

Use regular retrospectives to identify and remove delivery obstacles

Post-release retrospectives focused on delivery efficiency help identify and eliminate roadblocks. By analyzing each release or sprint for delays and other issues, teams can identify specific pain points in the development or deployment process. These retrospective sessions allow the team to adjust practices and improve their ability to deliver quickly, refining the workflow with each iteration.

 

The post Accelerating feature delivery in software development first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

How-To create Security User Stories

/in

In the previous article, we explored how Scrum enables teams to add security to the backlog and prioritize it based on risk.

Incorporating security into the SDLC ensures that security is not an afterthought but an integral part of the development process.

Security User Stories are specific, actionable items that articulate the security needs of the software in the same way functional requirements are handled.

Writing Security User Stories complements this process by providing clear, actionable security requirements that can be integrated into each sprint.

By treating security stories with the same importance as functional stories, developers can ensure that the software they build is not only feature-complete but also secure.

 

What are Security User Stories?

Security User Stories are descriptions of security requirements written from the perspective of the user or the system. They focus on specific security needs, ensuring that the software not only meets functional requirements but also protects against potential vulnerabilities. Just like traditional user stories that describe a feature or function, security stories express how the system should behave securely.

A typical Security User Story follows the same format as a regular user story:

  • As a [role], I want [goal], so that [benefit].

For example, a Security User Story for web development might look like this:

  • “As a user, I want my session to expire after 15 minutes of inactivity, so that my account is protected from unauthorized access.”

Why are Security User Stories Needed?

Security is often treated as an afterthought, addressed late in the development process or after an incident occurs. This reactive approach leads to vulnerabilities, increased technical debt, and costly security fixes post-release. Security User Stories shift this paradigm by making security an integral part of the development process from the outset. They are necessary for several reasons:

  1. Proactive Security Integration: By incorporating security needs into the backlog from the start, you ensure that security considerations are addressed in each sprint, reducing the risk of vulnerabilities later on.
  2. Clear Requirements for Developers: Security User Stories provide clear, actionable security requirements, helping developers understand exactly what is expected to make the software secure.
  3. Accountability: Writing security stories holds the development team accountable for implementing security features and allows for better tracking of security tasks within the development cycle.
  4. Risk Mitigation: When security is considered early in the SDLC, potential security issues are identified and addressed before they become significant risks. This aligns with the concept of “Shift Left” security, where security is integrated into earlier stages of the development process.

How to Use Security User Stories

Security User Stories should be written as part of the Product Backlog and prioritized based on the level of risk or impact. Here’s how to use them effectively:

  1. Collaboration with Security Experts: Work with security professionals to identify potential threats and risks specific to the application or platform. They can help create and refine security user stories based on threat modeling and vulnerability assessments.
  2. Define Acceptance Criteria: Each Security User Story should have clear, testable acceptance criteria. These criteria define when the story is considered complete and what tests should be performed to verify the security requirement has been met.
  3. Prioritize Based on Risk: Security User Stories should be prioritized just like functional features, based on their importance. Stories that address high-risk vulnerabilities, such as authentication or encryption, should be prioritized early in the development cycle.
  4. Regular Review and Updates: Security is an evolving field. As new threats emerge, Security User Stories should be reviewed and updated to address the latest vulnerabilities. Regular threat assessments help ensure the backlog remains current.

Examples of Security User Stories Across Different Platforms

1. Web Application Development

Web applications face numerous security threats, from SQL injection to Cross-Site Scripting (XSS). Below are examples of Security User Stories that address common web application security issues:

  • “As a user, I want my password to be stored securely using a strong hashing algorithm like bcrypt, so that my account is protected from unauthorized access.”
  • “As a system, I want to validate all user inputs server-side to prevent injection attacks.”
  • “As a system, I must use HTTPS for all data transmitted between the client and the server, to ensure data confidentiality.”
  • “As a user, I want to be logged out after 15 minutes of inactivity, so that my session cannot be hijacked.”

2. Windows Software Development

Windows software may face risks such as privilege escalation or malicious code execution. Security User Stories for Windows development could include:

  • “As a user, I want my application to run with the minimum necessary privileges, so that the system is protected from privilege escalation attacks.”
  • “As a system administrator, I want all logs to be stored securely and be tamper-proof, so that I can audit user activities reliably.”
  • “As a developer, I want the application to verify all digital signatures before executing code, to ensure the code has not been tampered with.”
  • “As a system, I want to enforce Data Execution Prevention (DEP) to prevent malicious code from executing in the memory.”

3. Android App Development

Mobile applications, particularly Android apps, face unique security challenges, such as improper storage of sensitive information and unauthorized access to device features. Examples of Android-related Security User Stories include:

  • “As a user, I want my sensitive data (e.g., passwords, payment information) to be encrypted using the Android Keystore system, so that my data is safe even if the device is compromised.”
  • “As a developer, I want the app to request only the necessary permissions, so that the user’s privacy is respected.”
  • “As a user, I want to be required to authenticate using biometrics before making sensitive changes, such as resetting my password, to ensure the security of my account.”
  • “As a system, I want to securely store session tokens and prevent them from being accessible via insecure storage mechanisms (e.g., SharedPreferences).”

4. iOS App Development

iOS apps must adhere to strict privacy and security guidelines, and improper handling of user data can lead to severe breaches. Below are Security User Stories specific to iOS development:

  • “As a user, I want all sensitive information (e.g., authentication tokens) to be stored in the iOS Keychain, so that my data is protected from unauthorized access.”
  • “As a system, I want to ensure that network communication is secured using TLS 1.2 or above, to protect against man-in-the-middle attacks.”
  • “As a user, I want to enable Face ID for sensitive transactions (e.g., payments), to ensure that unauthorized users cannot perform critical actions.”
  • “As a developer, I want to implement App Transport Security (ATS) to ensure all connections are encrypted.”

Conclusion

Security User Stories are a powerful tool for developers to integrate security into their development process. By writing clear, actionable stories with defined acceptance criteria, development teams can proactively address security risks while ensuring that they meet functional requirements.

Whether you’re building a web app, Windows software, or mobile applications for Android or iOS, incorporating Security User Stories into the backlog ensures that security remains a priority throughout the SDLC.

With this approach, developers can create secure, reliable software that meets the needs of both the business and the users.

The post How-To create Security User Stories first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

Delivering secure software in an agile way

/in

 

Agile Software Development: Why It’s Better

Traditional development methodologies, such as the Waterfall model, struggle to keep up with the need for quick iterations, frequent releases, and adaptability to changing requirements.

Agile software development addresses these challenges by emphasizing flexibility, collaboration, and continuous delivery. Agile methodologies break down the development process into smaller, manageable chunks, allowing teams to rapidly deliver working software while remaining responsive to feedback and changes.

Among the various Agile frameworks, Scrum stands out as one of the most widely adopted and effective methods for managing software development. It provides a simple, yet powerful framework, that helps teams continuously deliver high-quality products, adapt to dynamic customer needs.

Using Scrum for software development

Scrum is a lightweight agile framework designed to manage complex product development through iterative and incremental processes. It focuses on delivering working software in short cycles known as Sprints and emphasizes collaboration, accountability, and continuous improvement. This structure makes Scrum particularly well-suited for dynamic environments like software development, where requirements often change throughout the project lifecycle.

Scrum offers several key advantages that make it ideal for software development:

  1. Rapid Iteration and Feedback: Scrum’s short sprints allow teams to deliver working software frequently, which gives stakeholders the chance to review progress, provide feedback, and make necessary adjustments after each sprint.
  2. Adaptability to Change: In Scrum, the Product Backlog is continuously updated and reprioritized, enabling teams to adapt to changing business needs or customer demands without disrupting the overall workflow.
  3. Focus on Delivering Value: Scrum emphasizes delivering the highest business value early by prioritizing the most critical features. This ensures that the product development effort aligns with the business objectives.
  4. Cross-Functional Teams and Collaboration: Scrum fosters collaboration between cross-functional teams, which enables them to tackle complex problems and deliver complete product increments without relying on external resources.
  5. Simplicity and Structure: Scrum’s structured roles, artifacts, and ceremonies create a clear framework for managing work, making it easier for teams to stay organized, focused, and accountable.

With these features, Scrum empowers software development teams to build high-quality products faster and with greater alignment to customer needs. The framework’s flexibility and focus on delivering continuous value make it the ideal choice for modern software development.

Non-Functional features in Scrum

Non-functional features, or non-functional requirements (NFRs), refer to critical system attributes like security, usability, and resource consumption that ensure the software performs optimally and meets quality standards. Unlike functional features, which are visible to users, non-functional features define how the system behaves under specific conditions and are essential to the system’s overall success.

Examples of Non-Functional Features

  1. Security: Protecting the system from unauthorized access and vulnerabilities.
  2. Usability: Ensuring that the system is user-friendly and easy to navigate.
  3. Resource Consumption: Optimizing the system’s use of resources, such as memory, CPU, and bandwidth, to ensure efficient operation.

Though non-functional features are not always visible to users, they are crucial to the long-term stability and security of the product. Managing these features properly within the Scrum process is essential to ensure the product meets both user and business expectations.

Incorporating Non-Functional Features in the Scrum Backlog

Non-functional features can be added to the Product Backlog similarly to functional ones, ensuring that they are prioritized, addressed, and tested throughout the development cycle.

Here’s how:

  1. Create explicit user stories for non-functional features

Define clear user stories for non-functional aspects like security or performance. For instance:

    • “As a user, I want my personal data to be encrypted, ensuring my privacy and security.”
    • “As a system administrator, I want the application to scale seamlessly for up to 10,000 concurrent users.”
      For security in particular, these user stories are usually called “security user stories”.
  2. Prioritize based on business impact
    Work with stakeholders and the Product Owner to prioritize non-functional features that have the greatest impact on the system’s overall performance and security.
  3. Define Acceptance Criteria
    Ensure that non-functional user stories include measurable acceptance criteria, such as performance benchmarks or security requirements, so they can be properly tested.
  4. Integrate NFRs into the Definition of Done
    Non-functional features should be part of the team’s Definition of Done (DoD), ensuring that each sprint delivers not only functional but also secure, performant, and stable increments.
  5. Define a certain ratio between functional and non-functional requirements in the backlog
    Ensure that the non-functional user stories like security user stories have always a reserved space in the backlog. For example, you can have 60% functional u.s., 20% non-functional u.s., 20% bug fixes u.s.

Security in Software Development

Security is one of the most critical non-functional features in software development. It involves protecting systems, data, and users from potential cyber threats and vulnerabilities.

As software becomes more complex, the attack surface increases, making robust security measures essential.

Failing to integrate security into the development process can lead to severe consequences such as data breaches, loss of customer trust, and regulatory penalties.

The challenge of adding security user stories to the backlog

One of the main challenges of integrating security into the Scrum backlog is that security requirements are often non-functional and may not be directly tied to a specific feature.

Security is also a broad area, encompassing various elements (authentication, encryption, vulnerability management), which can make it difficult for the Product Owner to prioritize and create detailed security user stories.

Another challenge is balancing security tasks with feature development. Development teams (especially the product owner) may be tempted to focus on customer-facing features, leaving security tasks to the end, which increases the risk of vulnerabilities slipping through.

 

How to add security to the Scrum backlog

1. Create security user stories

Translate security requirements into actionable user stories that fit into the Scrum process. These stories should describe the security needs from a user’s perspective. Examples include:

  • “As a user, I want my password to be hashed and stored securely, ensuring the safety of my account.”
  • “As a system administrator, I want the application to implement multi-factor authentication for increased security.”

By creating security user stories, the development team can directly address specific security needs in each sprint.

2. Prioritize security based on risk

Work with security experts and stakeholders to prioritize security tasks based on the potential risk they mitigate. Security stories that address high-risk areas, such as vulnerabilities in authentication or data handling, should be prioritized over less critical tasks.

3. Define clear acceptance criteria for security stories

Ensure that each security user story has measurable acceptance criteria. These criteria should be specific and testable, such as:

  • “Passwords must be hashed using a minimum of SHA-256 encryption.”
  • “The system must reject any user input that contains SQL injection attempts.”

Clear acceptance criteria help the development team understand what is required to achieve “done” for a security story.

4. Integrate security into the Definition of Done

Security tasks should be part of the Definition of Done for every sprint. This ensures that security checks, such as code reviews and penetration testing, are performed before a feature is considered complete. By making security a core part of the development process, teams can prevent security from being treated as an afterthought.

5. Conduct Security Spikes

If security requirements are complex, consider using spikes to explore potential solutions or gather more information. For example, a spike could involve researching encryption libraries or conducting a security audit to identify vulnerabilities. Spikes help teams plan and implement security features more effectively in future sprints.

6. Regularly Review and Update Security Stories

As security threats evolve, new vulnerabilities may emerge that need to be addressed. Regularly review and update the backlog to ensure that the most current security threats are covered. This could involve adding new security stories or reprioritizing existing ones based on changing risk assessments.

7. Define a fixed ratio for security user stories

As mentioned above for non-functional requirements, it is usually a very good practice to have fixed percentages of non-functional user stories. Since security user stories are non-functional user stories, you can enforce this way that security topics don’t get forgotten.

 

Conclusions

Agile development provides the flexibility and adaptability needed to keep up with today’s dynamic software environments, and Scrum stands out as probably the best framework for delivering software quickly while ensuring continuous feedback and improvement.

By incorporating both functional and non-functional features into the Scrum backlog, teams can ensure that they are delivering a product that is not only feature-rich but also secure, performant, and user-friendly.

Security, in particular, is an essential non-functional requirement that must be treated as a priority throughout the development lifecycle. By integrating security user stories into the backlog, prioritizing based on risk, and ensuring security is part of the Definition of Done, software development teams can create resilient, secure systems without sacrificing agility or speed.

The post Delivering secure software in an agile way first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

Understanding Defense in Depth in IT Security

/in

The recent outage caused by Crowdstrike’s faulty update has create a lot of discussions. I wrote a post on LinkedIn where I asked the readers why are IT professionals using Crowdstrike on some systems that shouldn’t be in need of such protection in the first place.

The answers in various groups were mostly related to:

  • protect everything against everyone
  • assume the worse
  • assume that you are compromised.

I do not agree with such a shallow answer. And this raises a question about Defense in Depth.

Defense in Depth

Defense in Depth is a cybersecurity strategy that employs multiple layers of security controls to protect an organization’s assets and information. This approach is based on the premise that no single security measure is foolproof. By implementing several layers of defense, even if one control fails, others are in place to mitigate risks. The concept is inspired by military defense strategies, where a series of defensive positions are used to delay or prevent an attack.

A common misconception about Defense in Depth is that it requires identical security measures across all layers of an IT environment. In reality, this is neither necessary nor practical. Different layers have different requirements based on their specific functions, vulnerabilities, and the types of threats they are exposed to. Applying the same controls universally can lead to inefficiencies, increased costs, and potential performance issues.

In my opinion, this is what happened in many cases during the Crowdstrike outage: admins installed the EDR solution simply on all available devices, without doing an analysis of the threats they are exposed to. This is called threat modeling, and the first step after identifying the assets to protect is to analyze their threat landscape: this is the set of threats they are potentially exposed to. Once the potential threats are identified, then the appropriate security controls can be defined. But, it is important that the right controls are used based on the risk level of the potential threat. The mistake here is that people try to protect against any potential risk, no matter how improbable it might be. So, it is not worth to protect against every potential risk.

But, this operation is, at least at first sight, expensive, time consuming and very few people know how to do it.

So, what happens in most cases is that people consider to be cheaper to buy additional licenses and accept easily a slight reduction in performance due to the tool monitoring everything (“throw” more hardware on it).

And this might be OK, if everything works perfect all the time. Well, it doesn’t !

If this sounds too theoretical, then let’s have a closer look at various layers where applications run.

  • Running at the Web Application Layer: This layer might need strong authentication mechanisms, input validation, and encryption to protect against web-based attacks such as SQL injection or cross-site scripting (XSS).
  • Running at the Network Layer: Here, firewalls, intrusion detection systems (IDS), and virtual private networks (VPNs) are more appropriate to guard against network-based threats like DDoS attacks or unauthorized access.
  • Running at the Endpoint Layer: Devices such as laptops and mobile phones might require antivirus software, device encryption, and endpoint detection and response (EDR) solutions to prevent malware infections and data breaches.

Each layer of security addresses different risks, and the controls should be tailored to the specific threats and the environment.

For instance, a high-value database containing sensitive customer information might warrant multiple layers of encryption, strict access controls, and regular auditing. In contrast, a low-value, non-critical application might only require basic security measures.

Of course, there are applications having parts that run on more than one layer. When this happens, then you must correctly create the threat model and identify the risks at each layer.

For example, if you have a computer which just displays flights schedules, without having an interaction with the exterior other than retrieving data from an internal webservice, you probably do not need a dedicated endpoint security product for it.

Why? Because you will not allow access to the machine other than the service account for patches and running the required software.

If you’re unsure, and the machine runs Windows, than the default Defender is more than enough.

Create a Threat Model for your endpoints

If you don’t know how to create a threat model for an endpoint (and not only Windows, MacOS and Linux are equally affected), here is a list of potential threats and their mitigations.

Important note:
If you apply correctly the principles of Defense in Depth, you will NEVER all all these potential risks applicable to your devices.

Even if you remotely consider that some or all these risks can occur, do not forget that the Risk is proportional to the Probability of occurrence and Impact effect:

  • Probability of occurrence – what are the chances that the risk actually occurs: Very probably, Probably, Sometimes, Unlikely, Never.
  • Impact effect: Catastrophic, Very high, High, Medium, Low.

Potential Risks on an Endpoint

  • Malware Infections

    • Risk: Viruses, Trojans, ransomware, spyware, and other malicious software can compromise the system.
    • Security Controls:
      • Antivirus/anti-malware software
      • Regular system scans and updates
      • Application whitelisting
      • Sandboxing suspicious files
      • Backup with versioning control (good for ransomware attacks)

  • Unpatched Software

    • Risk: Vulnerabilities in outdated software can be exploited by attackers.
    • Security Controls:
      • Automated patch management systems with rollback functionality
      • Regular software updates
      • Vulnerability scanning tools
      • Centralized patch distribution

  • Unauthorized Access

    • Risk: Unauthorized users may gain access to the endpoint, leading to data breaches or system compromise.
    • Security Controls:
      • Strong password policies
      • Multi-factor authentication (MFA)
      • User account control (UAC)
      • Role-based access controls (RBAC)

  • Data Theft

    • Risk: Sensitive data may be copied, transmitted, or stolen from the endpoint.
    • Security Controls:
      • Full disk encryption (e.g., BitLocker)
      • Data loss prevention (DLP) tools
      • USB port control and removable media encryption
      • Secure backup solutions

  • Physical Theft

    • Risk: The endpoint itself may be physically stolen, leading to loss of data and access to the network.
    • Security Controls:
      • Physical security measures (locks, secure storage)
      • Device tracking and remote wipe capabilities
      • Full disk encryption
      • BIOS/UEFI passwords

  • Drive-by Downloads

    • Risk: Malicious websites may automatically download and install malware without user consent.
    • Security Controls:
      • Web filtering and browser security plugins
      • Regular updates to browsers and plugins
      • Application whitelisting
      • Disabling automatic execution of scripts in browsers

  • Network-based Attacks

    • Risk: Attackers may exploit vulnerabilities in the network to compromise the endpoint.
    • Security Controls:
      • Personal firewall
      • Network segmentation
      • Secure VPN connections
      • Intrusion detection and prevention systems (IDPS)

  • Misconfigured Security Settings

    • Risk: Insecure configurations can leave the endpoint vulnerable to attacks.
    • Security Controls:
      • Regular security audits and compliance checks
      • Hardening guides and best practices (e.g., CIS benchmarks)
      • Group policies for centralized management
      • Security baselines and templates

Potential Human Risks

Phishing Attacks

  • Risk: Users may be tricked into divulging sensitive information or downloading malicious software through deceptive emails or websites.
  • Security Controls:
    • Email filtering with anti-phishing capabilities
    • User awareness training
    • Web filtering and reputation services
    • Multi-factor authentication (MFA)

Insider Threats

  • Risk: Malicious or negligent insiders may intentionally or unintentionally cause harm.
  • Security Controls:
    • User activity monitoring and logging
    • Least privilege principle
    • Endpoint detection and response (EDR)
    • Insider threat detection tools

Instead of conclusion: Balancing Security and Usability

The most critical aspect of Defense in Depth is balancing security and usability.

Over-securing can lead to decreased productivity, increased costs, and user dissatisfaction.

For instance, implementing multi-factor authentication (MFA) at every step might significantly slow down legitimate users, leading to frustration and potential workarounds that can undermine security.

A well-designed Defense in Depth strategy finds the right balance by applying strict controls where necessary and lighter measures where the risk is lower.

The goal is to create a robust security posture that protects against a wide range of threats without overburdening the system or its users.

 

The post Understanding Defense in Depth in IT Security first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX: overlaps and differences

/in

Introduction

ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX VDA ISA 6.0 are two prominent standards in the realm of information security management, particularly within the automotive industry. While ISO 27001 provides a global framework for establishing, implementing, maintaining, and continually improving an information security management system (ISMS), TISAX (Trusted Information Security Assessment Exchange), based on the VDA ISA (Information Security Assessment) framework, is tailored to meet the specific needs of the automotive sector.

This article delves into the nuances of these two standards, highlighting their overlaps, the ways in which TISAX leverages ISO 27001, and the distinct features that set TISAX apart.

Overview of ISO 27001:2022

ISO 27001:2022 is the latest revision of the internationally recognized standard for information security management. It provides a comprehensive approach to managing sensitive company information so that it remains secure. This involves a risk management process, which includes people, processes, and IT systems by applying a risk management process.

Key Features of ISO 27001:2022

  • Risk-Based Approach: Emphasizes the identification and management of risks through a continuous improvement process.
  • Annex A Controls: Contains 93 controls categorized under four themes: Organizational, People, Physical, and Technological.
  • PDCA Cycle: The Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle is integral for continuous improvement.
  • Context of the Organization: Requires understanding of internal and external factors impacting information security.
  • Leadership Commitment: Highlights the importance of top management’s involvement in the ISMS.

Overview of TISAX VDA ISA 6.0

TISAX, a standard specific to the automotive industry, is based on the VDA ISA (Verband der Automobilindustrie Information Security Assessment) catalog. TISAX ensures that automotive manufacturers and suppliers meet strict information security requirements to protect sensitive information.

Key Features of TISAX VDA ISA 6.0

  • Sector-Specific: Tailored specifically for the automotive industry.
  • VDA ISA Catalog: Based on the VDA ISA framework, which is a detailed checklist of requirements and controls. It is split in several areas of interest:
    • Information security – containing everything that belongs to an ISMS
      • IS Policies and Organization
      • Information Security Policies
      • Organization of Information Security
      • Asset Management
      • IS Risk Management
      • Assessments
      • Incident and Crisis Management
      • Human Resources
      • Physical Security
      • Identity and Access Management
      • Identity Management
      • Access Management
      • IT Security / Cyber Security
      • Cryptography
      • Operations Security
      • System acquisitions, requirement management and development
      • Supplier Relationships
      • Compliance
    • Prototype Protection – focused on physical and cyber protection of prototypes
    • Data Protection – focused on policies for protecting privacy and secrets
  • Assessment Levels: Comprises different levels of assessment depending on the type of information and its criticality.
  • Labeling System: Provides a TISAX label indicating compliance, which can be shared with partners within the automotive ecosystem.
  • Focus on KPIs: VDA ISA provides a large set of examples on how to measure certain controls effectively.

Overlaps between ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX VDA ISA 6.0

While TISAX and ISO 27001 serve different purposes, they share several common elements. TISAX leverages the fundamental principles of ISO 27001, creating a robust framework that is both comprehensive and specific to the automotive sector.

In the VDA ISA 6.x (and previous) there are the columns “Reference to other standards” (column P) and “Reference to implementation guidance” (column Q) which point to known standards. Of course, there is no coincidence that the most reference standard is the ISO 27001 in both versions 2022 and 2013.

In the guidance we usually see reference to the Annex A of the ISO 27001 standard (both versions).

 

In the column W there is “Further information” containing explanations of what can be described by the respective control.

Risk Management

Both ISO 27001 and TISAX emphasize a risk-based approach to information security. ISO 27001 mandates a formal risk assessment process, while TISAX incorporates this through the VDA ISA requirements, ensuring that organizations identify and manage risks relevant to the automotive industry.

Control Objectives and Controls

ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX VDA ISA 6.0 share a common structure in terms of control objectives and specific controls. Many of the controls listed in Annex A of ISO 27001 are reflected in the VDA ISA catalog, ensuring a comprehensive approach to securing information.

While this is a common trait shared by the standards, the TISAX is making use of other standards than ISO 27001: NIST, BSI other ISO standards.

Continuous Improvement

Both standards advocate for continuous improvement. ISO 27001’s PDCA cycle and TISAX’s periodic reassessment and updating of security measures ensure that organizations continually enhance their security posture in response to evolving threats.

TISAX VDA ISA has a sheet called “Maturity Levels” containing descriptions of the Maturity Levels 0 to 5.

Documentation and Record-Keeping

ISO 27001 requires detailed documentation of the ISMS, including risk assessments, policies, and procedures. TISAX also mandates thorough documentation as part of its assessment criteria, ensuring that organizations maintain a clear record of their security practices.

Third-Party Management/Suppliers Relationships

Third-party risk management is a critical component in both standards. ISO 27001 includes controls for managing supplier relationships and ensuring their compliance with information security requirements. Similarly, TISAX places a strong emphasis on securing information exchanged with suppliers and partners, crucial for maintaining the integrity of the automotive supply chain.

Differences between ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX VDA ISA 6.0

Despite their overlaps, ISO 27001 and TISAX have several distinctions, reflecting their different scopes and target audiences.

Industry Focus

ISO 27001 is a generic standard applicable to any organization, regardless of its sector. TISAX, however, is designed specifically for the automotive industry, addressing unique challenges such as the secure exchange of data between manufacturers and suppliers.

Assessment Process

ISO 27001 involves a formal certification process conducted by accredited bodies, leading to ISO 27001 certification. TISAX, on the other hand, employs a mutual assessment model where organizations are assessed by ENX approved audit providers, and successful assessments result in a TISAX label. This label can then be shared with other automotive industry stakeholders, facilitating trust and compliance.

Control Specificity

While ISO 27001 provides a broad framework of controls applicable to various industries, TISAX’s controls are highly specific to the automotive sector. The VDA ISA catalog includes detailed requirements for protecting manufacturing data, ensuring compliance with industry-specific regulations, and safeguarding automotive intellectual property.

Levels of Assessment

TISAX introduces different levels of assessment (Basic(Must and Should), High, and Very High) depending on the sensitivity and criticality of the information being protected. ISO 27001 does not have a tiered assessment system but rather a uniform certification standard.

Focus Areas

TISAX places significant emphasis on physical security, secure development of automotive products, and compliance with industry-specific legal requirements. ISO 27001, while comprehensive, does not delve into sector-specific issues with the same level of detail.

Commercial vs Open standards

ISO 27001 is an open international standard governed by the Internation Standards Organisation (ISO). The TISAX trademark is owned by the organization ENX, formed by many OEMs in automotive sector.

 

Implementation of TISAX Using ISO 27001

TISAX leverages ISO 27001’s framework to build a robust and industry-specific information security system. Many organizations begin with ISO 27001 certification and then adapt their ISMS to meet the additional requirements of TISAX.

Integration of Standards

  1. Foundation in ISO 27001: Organizations often establish a basic ISMS in accordance with ISO 27001. This includes conducting risk assessments, implementing controls, and ensuring continuous improvement.
  2. Customization to TISAX Requirements: Once the foundational ISMS is in place, organizations tailor it to meet TISAX requirements, which may involve additional controls specific to automotive data security and third-party management.
  3. Assessment and Labeling: Organizations undergo a TISAX assessment conducted by an approved audit provider. Successful completion results in the issuance of a TISAX label, demonstrating compliance with industry-specific security requirements.

Benefits of Integration

Integrating ISO 27001 with TISAX offers several benefits:

  • Streamlined Compliance: Simplifies the process of meeting both generic and sector-specific security requirements.
  • Enhanced Trust: The TISAX label, backed by ISO 27001’s rigorous framework, enhances trust among automotive industry partners.
  • Cost Efficiency: Leveraging ISO 27001 as a foundation reduces duplication of effort and resources in implementing security measures.

Conclusion

ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX VDA ISA 6.0 represent critical standards for information security, particularly within the automotive sector. While they share common principles such as risk management and continuous improvement, TISAX’s industry-specific focus and detailed requirements for automotive set it apart. By leveraging the robust framework of ISO 27001, organizations can start to effectively implement TISAX, ensuring comprehensive protection of sensitive automotive data and fostering trust within the industry.

Understanding the connections between these standards and their unique requirements is very important for organizations aiming to achieve a high level of information security and compliance.

The post ISO 27001:2022 and TISAX: overlaps and differences first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.

Understanding the SOC 2 Certification

/in

Introduction

SOC 2 (Service Organization Control 2) certification is a framework designed by the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) to help organizations manage customer data based on five Trust Service Criteria: , confidentiality,processing integrity, availability, security and privacy. This certification is crucial for service organizations that store or process customer data in the cloud.

Comparison of Various SOC Certification Versions

SOC 1 (Service Organization Control 1)

  • Focus: SOC 1 is centered around internal control over financial reporting. It is particularly relevant for service organizations that impact their clients’ financial statements.
  • Users: Primarily used by financial auditors and companies that outsource services impacting financial operations.
  • Types: There are two types of SOC 1 reports:
    • Type I: Assesses the suitability of the design of controls at a specific point in time.
    • Type II: Examines the effectiveness of controls over a defined period.

SOC 2 (Service Organization Control 2)

  • Focus: SOC 2 addresses controls relevant to security, availability, processing integrity, confidentiality, or privacy, based on the AICPA’s Trust Services Criteria.
  • Users: Useful for management, customers, regulators, and other stakeholders concerned with information security and privacy.
  • Types: Like SOC 1, SOC 2 also offers Type I and Type II reports, focusing either on the design of controls at a point in time or their effectiveness over time.

Note: There is also SOC 3, but it is out of scope of this article.

 

Who Should Certify?

SOC 2 certification is essential for any organization that handles customer data, particularly cloud service providers, SaaS companies, and data centers.

It’s also relevant for companies in healthcare, finance, and other sectors where data security is paramount.

Why Certify?

Organizations pursue SOC 2 certification to demonstrate their commitment to data security, build customer trust, and comply with industry regulations. It also helps them stand out in competitive markets and avoid the financial and reputational damage associated with data breaches.

What Is Certified?

SOC 2 certification verifies that an organization adheres to robust information security policies and procedures. The certification evaluates five trust service criteria:

  1. Security: Protection of system resources against unauthorized access.
  2. Availability: Accessibility of the system as agreed upon.
  3. Processing Integrity: System processing is complete, valid, accurate, timely, and authorized.
  4. Confidentiality: Protection of confidential information.
  5. Privacy: Collection, use, retention, and disposal of personal information is in line with the organization’s privacy notice.

While some security frameworks like ISO 27001, PCI DSS, TISAX, HIPAA  have rigid requirements, SOC 2 considers that controls are unique to every organization.

Each company designs its own controls to comply with its Trust Services Criteria.

An independent auditor is then brought in to verify whether the company’s controls satisfy SOC 2 requirements.

After the audit, the auditor writes a report about how well the company’s systems and processes comply with SOC 2.

Every organization that completes a SOC 2 audit receives a report, regardless of whether they passed the audit.

There are two types of SOC 2 reports:

  • SOC 2 Type I reports evaluate a company’s controls at a single point in time. It answers the question: are the security controls designed properly?
  • SOC 2 Type II reports assess how those controls function over a period of time, generally 3-12 months. It answers the question: do the security controls a company has in place function as intended?

To choose between the two, consider your goals, cost, and timeline constraints.

A Type I report can be faster to achieve, but a Type II report offers greater assurance to your customers.

 

 

Topics Verified in SOC 2 Certification

1. Security

The Security Criteria are also known as the Common Criteria. They prove that a service organization’s systems and control environment are protected against unauthorized access and other risks.

Security is the only Trust Services Criteria required for every SOC 2 audit. The other criteria can be added to your report scope if your organization chooses, but they are not required to achieve SOC 2 compliance.

These are the security criteria needed for SOC 2:

  • CC1 — Control environment
    Does the organization value integrity and security?
  • CC2 — Communication and Information
    Are policies and procedures in place to ensure security? Are they communicated well to both internal and external partners?
  • CC3 — Risk Assessment
    Does the organization analyze risk and monitor how changes impact that risk?
  • CC4 — Monitoring Controls
    Does the organization monitor, evaluate, and communicate the effectiveness of its controls?
  • CC5 — Control Activities
    Are the proper controls, processes, and technologies in place to reduce risk?
  • CC6 – Logical and Physical Access Controls
    Does the organization encrypt data? Does it control who can access data and restrict physical access to servers?
  • CC7 – System Operations
    Are systems monitored to ensure they function properly? Are incident response and disaster recovery plans in place?
  • CC8 – Change Management
    Are material changes to systems properly tested and approved beforehand?
  • CC9 – Risk Mitigation
    Does the organization mitigate risk through proper business processes and vendor management?

Implementation: Organizations must establish and maintain a set of security controls to protect against unauthorized access. This includes firewalls, encryption, access controls, and intrusion detection systems.

Audit: Auditors examine security policies, test the effectiveness of security controls, and review incident response plans.

Responsibility: Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs) and IT security teams are typically responsible for implementing and maintaining these controls.

2. Availability

Implementation: Ensuring systems are available involves implementing redundancy, disaster recovery plans, and maintaining system performance monitoring.

Audit: Auditors assess the organization’s ability to meet service level agreements (SLAs) and review backup and recovery procedures.

Responsibility: IT operations teams and service managers oversee availability aspects.

3. Processing Integrity

Implementation: Organizations must ensure that data processing is accurate and complete. This includes validating input data, processing logic, and output accuracy.

Audit: Auditors review data processing controls, check for errors, and validate processing integrity.

Responsibility: Data quality teams and IT personnel are responsible for maintaining processing integrity.

4. Confidentiality

Implementation: Protecting confidential information involves data encryption, access controls, and secure storage solutions.

Audit: Auditors evaluate the measures in place to protect confidential data and check compliance with confidentiality agreements.

Responsibility: Data protection officers (DPOs) and compliance teams handle confidentiality matters.

5. Privacy

Implementation: Organizations must adhere to privacy policies that govern the collection, use, and disposal of personal data. This involves data anonymization and consent management.

Audit: Auditors examine privacy policies, consent forms, and data handling procedures to ensure compliance with relevant privacy laws.

Responsibility: Privacy officers and legal teams are responsible for privacy compliance.

Conclusion

SOC 2 certification is a comprehensive framework that ensures organizations adhere to best practices in data security and management.

By certifying under SOC 2, organizations can demonstrate their commitment to protecting customer data, comply with regulatory requirements, and gain a competitive edge in the market.

Implementing and maintaining SOC 2 controls requires collaboration across various teams, including IT, security, operations, and legal departments, to ensure continuous compliance and security.

The post Understanding the SOC 2 Certification first appeared on Sorin Mustaca on Cybersecurity.