Privileged account management can be defined as managing and auditing account and data access by privileged users. A privileged user is someone who has administrative access to critical systems.
Implementing a policy of least privilege minimizes unnecessary privilege allocation to ensure access to sensitive data is available only to those users who really need it.
Today, our CTO, Gabriel Buades, talk about how Soffid helps companies to secure their priviledge users.
Privileged Account Management is considered by many analysts and technologists as one of the most important security projects for reducing cyber risk and achieving high security ROI.
Based on recent threat activity, privileged accounts, not corporate data, might be the most valuable items within enterprise networks.
The domain of priviledge management is generally accepted as falling within the broader scope of identity and access management (IAM). Together, PAM and IAM help to provide fined-grained control, visibility, and auditability over all credentials and privileges.
While IAM controls provide authentication of identities to ensure that the right user has the right access as the right time, PAM layers on more granular visibility, control, and auditing over privileged identities and activities.
In a Tuesday session, titled “Security Leader’s Guide to Privileged Access Management,” Gartner research director Felix Gaehtgens said privileged access management is a crucial component of any security program because of the increasingly large scope of IT environments, privileged users, administrative tools, and IAM data such as passwords, encryption keys and certificates. Gaehtgens recommended organizations implement strict controls on privileged access such as limiting the total number of personal privileged accounts, creating more shared accounts and reducing the times and durations during which privileged access is granted.
It is a pleasure to invite you to our new webinar we are celebrating today, 23rd June.
During the webinar we will discuss about how PAM is emerging as one of the hottest topics in cybersecurity and why it must be a part of your overall IAM strategy.
According to a study based on an online survey of over 500 IT decision makers released by IDSA, over the last year, the shift to remote work has led to an increase in the number of identities, an increased focus on identity security, but a decrease in confidence in the ability to secure employee identities. The report examines the impact that the pandemic and increase in remote work had on Identity and Access Management (IAM) in the enterprise, as well as the implementation of identity-focused security strategies.
Four out of five participants believe that while identity management used to just be about access, it’s now mostly about security. In accordance, the majority of organizations have made changes to better align security and identity functions, with one of those changes being increasing CISO ownership of IAM.
Most organizations experienced an identity-related breach within the past two years
Despite additional security challenges introduced in 2020 with more identities, exponential remote access, and more personal devices, the number of identity-related breaches remains flat. 79% of organizations experienced an identity-related breach within the past two years, the same as reported in a previous study conducted by the IDSA in April 2020.
Increased attention also appears to be correlating with increased investment, as nearly all organizations will be investing in identity-related security outcomes in the next two years.
Remote work has significantly impacted identity security
83% report that remote work due to COVID-19 increased the number of identities
80% say the shift to remote work increased focus on identity security
Confidence in the ability to secure employee identities dropped from 49% to 32% in the past year
Breaches still prevalent, but investments in targeted prevention are accelerating
Identity breaches are not increasing, but they are having an impact on organizations
At least 70% report they began implementation or planning of identity-related security outcomes in the past two years
97% will make investments in identity-related security outcomes over the next two years
93% believe they might have prevented or minimized security breaches by using identity-related security outcomes
Security taking a broader role in identity management, with positive effects
64% report that they have made changes to better align security and identity functions within the last two years
87% report the CISO has a leadership role when it comes to IAM a dramatic contrast to 53% that said the same about the security team in 2019
Organizations where the CISO has ownership of IAM are more likely to say the security team has an excellent understanding of their identity strategy and implement identity-related security outcomes
Identity Defined Security Alliance Resources
An Identity Defined Security Outcome is a desired result that improves an organization’s security posture and reduces the risk of an identity-related breach or failed audit. According to the report, 93% of organizations believe that the IDSA’s Identity Defined Security Outcomes may have prevented or minimized the impact of the breaches they suffered. Included with each Identity Defined Security Outcome are vendor-neutral implementation approaches, which are well-defined patterns that combine identity and security capabilities.
The 2020 Global State of Least Privilege Report shows that two-thirds of organizations now consider the implementation of least privilege a top priority in achieving a zero-trust security model.
Below, we take a look at some of the critical drivers for the adoption of least privilege. We also explore the failure of traditional systems and how modern solutions such as Software-Defined Perimeter, Secure Web Gateway and Risk-Based Authentication, among others, engender greater enterprise network security.
Access is Responsibility
According to an Identity Defined Security Alliance (IDSA) study published last year, 79% of enterprises experienced an identity-related security breach in the previous two years. Last year, just as the COVID-19 pandemic gathered momentum, another report revealed a rise in attacker access to privileged accounts, which puts businesses at a greater risk.
It is important to note that in this age where data is everything, access is equal to responsibility. Therefore, the greater access a person has at a given moment, the greater responsibility they have to protect the data that they have access to. According to the State of Security blog, author Anastasios Arampatzis states that the central goal of privilege access management, which he admits covers many strategies, is the enforcement of least privilege.
Privileged accounts are a liability precisely because the data they have access to makes them attractive targets to cyber attackers. The greater the level of access an account has, the more significant the impact of an attack would be. More so, the greater the number of privileged accounts on a network, the more catastrophic an account compromise could be. Basically, every additional privileged account multiplies the risks on a network. Therefore, it is crucial to keep the circle of privilege small in order to limit unnecessary data exposure.
Legacy Systems: The Failure of VPNs to Adequately Secure
Amidst the current challenges in privileged access management, organizations are beginning to explore alternative solutions to traditional VPN technology and other legacy security solutions which have failed in actively securing privileged accounts. One notable problem is the lack of remote user security on many VPN products, and they neither integrate well with identity providers nor properly implement user policies on identity access and authorization. The weakness of VPNs are made more apparent in this age of remote work.
At the turn of the pandemic, companies had to allow their employees to work from home. This led to a surge in VPN adoption. According to the Global VPN Adoption Index report, VPN downloads reached 277 million in 2020 based on data collected from 85 selected countries.
The cybersecurity landscape can be described as a kind of cat-and-mouse race. In response to this trend, cyber attackers shifted their focus to exploiting VPNs, amongst other techniques such as phishing. However, being a legacy technology that has somehow due to its ubiquity made its way to more modern times, VPNs have become quite weak. Based on the assertion that “VPNs are designed to secure data in transit, not necessarily to secure the endpoints,” it is easy to see why the ‘new normal’ in cybersecurity is the protection of endpoints in an age where data is gold.
Least Privilege Solutions and Technologies
The current overhauling of our approaches to access management and authentication has given birth to the rising adoption of the cybersecurity of least privilege. This principle is connected to another swelling trend in cybersecurity: the zero-trust model.
Zero trust cybersecurity entails the withholding of access to a protected network until legitimate authorization is established. Access control and identity management are part of the components of a zero trust security architecture.
True zero trust technologies adopt the principle of least privilege by default.
The need for privileged accounts is common to most information systems. These accounts are necessary to perform scheduled configuration and maintenance tasks, as well as supervening tasks such as the recovery of a hardware or software failure or the restoration of a backup. Due precisely to the need to use these accounts in an unplanned manner, their management must combine security, procedures and flexibility.
In order to effectively manage these accounts, the Soffid product has the necessary logic to Identify accounts, classify them according to the level of risk and its scheme of use, distribution and assignment to responsible users, automatic and planned password change process, passwords delivery process to authorized users and automatic injection of passwords, when this injection applies and makes sense.
Conclusion
The principle of least privilege in cybersecurity is not just an exciting fad that would go away soon. Rather, it is becoming a standard model and best practice for network protection in the new normal of cybersecurity.
Implementing least privilege works like buying insurance; the strength and impact of an attack can be measured by the level of privilege a compromised account has. This can put things into perspective in fighting data breaches.
A constantly changing regulatory environment has become the “new normal” for data privacy. Consumers are demanding more protection and accountability. And with the flood of all the new and changing privacy regulations, data has become the newest regulated asset class.
Today, risk, security and data protection officers are responsible for planning, deploying and managing enterprise-wide data privacy and security programs. However, without buy-in from executive management — as well as participation from multi-departmental data stakeholders — the security program will probably not be able to effectively preserve and secure private and sensitive data, inevitably leading to an organization in regulatory non-compliance or falling victim to a data breach.
A Good Data Policy Offers Protection And Assurance An effective security policy is put into practice throughout the organization. The policy defines the standards to which the organization will adhere and strive to follow. Data privacy and security policies must denote clarity, inclusiveness and well-defined procedures, rules and methods for regulating access to corporate systems and applications. A good policy protects customer, employee and third-party data. These policies are also testimony to investors, business stakeholders and the public at large about the organization’s commitment to data protection and privacy.
There are two operational approaches to data privacy and security. The first builds policies for various types of data and then determines access-level permissions. With this method, you would then look for any data that fits that criterion. Conversely, the other approach looks at all data, analyzes and identifies the different types, classifies and makes policy decisions on what to do with the data.
1. The Policy-FirstApproach
Addressing regulatory and compliance requirements is straightforward and often easily conquered with a robust policy. The policy will genuinely address the key areas and define the controls to put in place. These controls are built to target the areas defined by the requirements.
The limitation of building a policy-first data privacy approach is that it can impede the organization’s ability to discover data that doesn’t match predefined policy. Creating policies before you know what data exists is like a doctor prescribing medicine to a patient they’ve not diagnosed. To compensate, policies may be overly broad and less accurate. Ultimately, it could require more time and money to build additional guidance for data that you didn’t know you had.
2. The Data-First Approach
A data-first privacy and security program will have detailed and documented knowledge of all the elements that comprise the organization’s data ecosystem. It also features an acute understanding of the who, what, why, where and how of data collection and security measures and when it’s appropriate to delete data.
Private consumer data and sensitive corporate secrets are captured and used by various stakeholders throughout an organization — from human resources, product development and engineering to sales and marketing. Unfortunately, because of the many data-flows, changing formats and ways data is applied and stored, most organizations have a far from a complete picture of the data they hold.
Finding all the personal and sensitive corporate data stored in myriad places within a large enterprise can be an overwhelming challenge. Efficiently gathering data within corporate systems spread across multiple divisions, departments, and on-premises and cloud locations requires an approach capable of examining all types of unstructured and structured data and diverse systems, no matter where they’re located.
Bringing It All Together
A much more effective and comprehensive result can be achieved by examining the data first, then building policy criteria based upon all the data. Cataloging and securing all data will make it easier to satisfy compliance requirements. Whereas, if you just fulfill privacy mandates, you still need to secure sensitive data that doesn’t fall under privacy regulations. This includes intellectual property, copyrights, patents, trademarks, trade secrets, sales and marketing plans, product plans, patentable inventions, competitive information, financial data and more.
The key to protecting data is understanding the information about your data. Identity management systems provide IT teams with tools and technologies to control access to customer and employee data, and corporate secrets. Identity is a meta-foundational layer for data. Knowing who created it, who has access to it and what people do with it can all be tied back into identity. Think of it this way: I trust company A with my data because I know the company, and they agreed to use my data in a certain way. However, I may not trust company B to that same degree. It’s the same data, but a different and lesser-known company is using it.
Lastly, finding and deleting sensitive data that is no longer needed is an essential form of business protection. Removing data that has become stale and aged beyond its retention period will help effectively avoid any audit or compliance violations.
Please accept cookies to allow us to provide you with the best browsing experience across our website. Find out more on how we use cookies and how you can change your settings.OkCookies Policy
