"Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome" - Charlie Munger's words ring true in today's digital age where data sharing between companies is commonplace.
Companies want to signal to other companies their organization has achieved a certain measure of security and compliance. So, companies pour resources into achieving security standards, such as SOC 2, ISO 27001, FedRAMP, DoD IL5, and PCI-DSS, among others. This drives companies to strive for compliance.
So, the question is, can you slap a compliance sticker on a company’s service offering even if the service offering has subpar security?
If your organization's compliance is handled solely by one or a few people on the GRC team, with little input from other stakeholders, it may indicate that your focus is more on compliance than actual security.
A more effective approach is to involve all stakeholders in the security process, to ensure that security measures are designed appropriately.
If your organization has a large budget allocated to updating policy and procedure documentation, but only for the purpose of passing off something like the “**-1” NIST 800-53 controls, it may indicate that you are more concerned with compliance than actual security.
Effective security documentation should be living and breathing and should be simple, accessible, and aligned with security objectives.
If only the GRC or Audit team is logging into the GRC tool, it may indicate that your focus is on compliance over actual security.
The tools used for maintaining compliance documentation should be easily accessible to all stakeholders to ensure that everyone is aligned on security objectives.
If your GRC team recommends remediating every single vulnerability from the vulnerability scan result set, even when the vulnerabilities are not exploitable, it may indicate that your focus is more on compliance than actual security.
Collaboration between GRC teams and risk solution owners is essential to prioritize the impact of known vulnerabilities and make informed security decisions.
If your sales team, GRC team, security champions, and risk solution owners have different views on the security measures your organization implements, it may indicate a lack of alignment and focus on actual security. A centralized form of communication, as simple as a wiki or Google Workspace, can help ensure that everyone is on the same page.
It is crucial to recognize that compliance and security are not the same thing.
Centralizing compliance efforts without considering the input and ownership of security experts can result in significant risks to your organization.
By involving security experts and tying compliance objectives to organizational objectives, organizations can ensure that their compliance efforts are aligned with their real security needs and that they can effectively manage risk.
Don’t worry, if your organization is showing any of these signals, you are not alone. This is very common. I discussed a super simple way to enhance the collaboration around security and hence, enhance security capabilities in “Risk Solutions: A Step-by-Step Guide."
Any math problem that begins wrong will end wrong. The same goes for security. You need to start right to get truly great security results.
We always recommend starting with a Gap Assessment to see where you could improve.
If you’re interested in learning more about implementing a best-in-class security program while simplifying your compliance sign up for a free demo with the Paramify team.
If you'd prefer to do a self-guided video demo, request it below:
→ The Most Common Reasons Security Measures Fail
