Risk & Innovation in Cybersecurity Investments Sponsored by Lockheed Martin Independently conducted by Ponemon Institute LLC Publication Date: April 2015 Ponemon Institute© Research Report Risk & Innovation in Cybersecurity Investments Ponemon Institute, April 2015 Part 1. Introduction Ponemon Institute is pleased to present the results of Risk & Innovation in Cybersecurity Investments, an industry survey sponsored by Lockheed Martin. The purpose of this research is to understand how people, processes and the desire to be innovative affect cybersecurity technology investment decisions. We surveyed 618 U.S.-based information technology (IT) and security practitioners involved in determining investments in cybersecurity technologies. As shown in Figure 1, business objectives are most influential in deciding on a specific technology (73 percent of respondents) with security risk a close second (68 percent of respondents). Compliance with regulations is least influential. In the context of this research, we define security innovation as “the use of enabling technologies and personnel in new ways to create a more secure and efficient organization and improve alignment between security initiatives and business goals”. We asked respondents to rate their organizations’ level of security innovation. Only 32 percent of respondents felt their company is achieving a high level of innovation. Key findings Relying solely on Return on Investment (ROI) and Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) metrics can lead to poor investment decisions. Seventy percent of respondents believe ROI and TCO are important metrics for investment and measuring a technology’s economic benefits. However, the same percentage say it is difficult to calculate an accurate ROI for a given security solution or technology. TCO is also difficult to determine, according to 61 percent of respondents. Incorporating other metrics into the decision process could result in smarter investments. Fifteen percent of respondents say their organizations do not use ROI or TCO at all. These organizations are most likely to look instead at improvements in the efficiency of security operations (56 percent of respondents) or reduction in downtime (50 percent of respondents) as ways to determine a technology’s viability. Security investments are driven by cost. Sixty-four percent of respondents say cost and 56 percent of respondents say performance and vendor support are the most important factors when investing in security technologies. Features such as interoperability, proven risk reduction and lack of complexity are not considered as important (39 percent, 11 percent and 8 percent, respectively). Shelfware is every organization’s problem. Ninety percent of respondents say their organization has invested in a security technology that was ultimately discontinued or scrapped before or soon after deployment. On average, 31 percent of security technologies purchased by organizations represented in this research over the past 24 months were never fully deployed Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 1 Part 2. Key findings In this section, we provide an analysis of the key findings. The complete audited findings are presented in the appendix of this report. We have organized the report according to the following topics? § § § The use of ROI and TCO to determine cybersecurity investments When investments go wrong: the problem of shelfware How risk and innovation affects security investments The Use of ROI and TCO to Determine Cybersecurity Investments Organizations are making investment decisions based on inaccurate and unreliable numbers. As shown in Figure 2, 70 percent of respondents believe ROI and TCO are important metrics for investment and measuring a technology’s economic benefits. Figure 2. The importance of ROI and TCO in making a technology investment 40% 35% 35% 30% 25% 20% 26% 25% 19% 19% 16% 15% 15% 15% 15% Not important We do not use ROI/TCO 15% 10% 5% 0% Essential Very important Important Importance of ROI Ponemon Institute© Research Report Importance of TCO Page 2 However, according to Figure 3, 70 percent of respondents say it is very difficult (26 percent) or difficult (44 percent) to calculate an accurate ROI for a given security solution or technology. Similarly, it is difficult to calculate an accurate TCO, according to 61 percent of respondents. More than half of respondents say it is difficult to be precise when calculating ROI for each investment decision made (59 percent of respondents) and calculating a precise TCO (55 percent of respondents) for each investment decision made. Figure 3. How difficult is it to calculate a precise ROI and TCO for a security technology? 50% 44% 45% 38% 40% 35% 30% 25% 26% 25% 23% 18% 20% 15% 9% 10% 11% 3% 5% 3% 0% Very difficult Difficult Not difficult Calculate a precise ROI Easy Unsure Calculate a precise TCO What ROI reveals about technologies frequently purchased. According to respondents, the average threshold ROI necessary to achieve a favorable investment decision in a given security solution or technology is 13.7 percent. As shown in Figure 4, the security technologies with the highest ROI are identity & access management (31 percent ROI), SIEM and security technology (29 percent ROI) and encryption for data at rest and in motion (both 25 percent ROI). Figure 4. Security technologies with the highest ROI Identity & access management 31% SIEM and security intelligence 29% Encryption for data at rest 25% Encryption for data in motion 25% Anti-virus & anti-malware 25% 0% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Page 3 According to Figure 5, access governance systems (9 percent), IT & credentialing system (8 percent), automated policy generation (8 percent), traditional firewalls (7 percent), and perimeter or location surveillance (6 percent) are technologies with the lowest ROI. Figure 5. Security technologies with the lowest ROI Access governance systems 9% ID & credentialing system 8% Automated policy generation 8% Firewalls (traditional) 7% Perimeter or location surveillance 6% 0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% As a means of evaluating the success of specific investments, 54 percent of respondents say their organization reconciles the historic (original) ROI with actual ROI for most or some investments, according to Figure 6. Actual ROI tends to be lower than the historic ROI (46 percent of respondents) or actual and historic ROI tend to be very close (accurate), according to 34 percent of respondents. Forty-eight percent of respondents say their organization reconciles the historic (original) TCO with actual TCO for most or some investments. In contrast to ROI, actual TCO tends be higher than historic TCO, according to 44 percent of respondents. Thirty-six percent of respondents say actual and historic TCO tend to be close or accurate Figure 6. Do you reconcile actual ROI and TCO with historic ROI and TCO? 60% 48% 50% 42% 36% 40% 33% 30% 20% 18% 15% 10% 4% 4% 0% Yes, for most investments Yes, for some investments Actual ROI is reconciled with historic ROI Ponemon Institute© Research Report No Unsure Actual TCO is reconciled with historic TCO Page 4 Inaccurate TCO and ROI metrics are used to reject technologies that could potentially be successful. Despite the difficulty in determining an accurate TCO, 56 percent of respondents say over the past 24 months one or more proposed investments in a particular solution or technology was rejected because of unfavorable TCOs, as shown in Figure 7. Over the past 24 months, one or more proposed investments was rejected because of unfavorable ROIs, according to 50 percent of respondents. Figure 7. Have proposed investments in a particular security or technology been rejected because of unfavorable ROIs or TCOs? 56% 60% 50% 50% 45% 41% 40% 30% 20% 10% 5% 3% 0% Yes No Unfavorable ROIs Unsure Unfavorable TCOs Other metrics could be useful in evaluating technology’s economic viability. Fifteen percent of respondents say their organizations do not use ROI or TCO in their decision making. Figure 8 shows these organizations are most likely to use improvements in the efficiency of security operations (56 percent of respondents) or reduction in downtime (50 percent of respondents as ways to determine a technology’s viability. Figure 8. Other metrics used to make investment decisions More than one response permitted Improvement in the efficiency of security operations 56% Reduction in system downtime 50% Reduction in data breach costs 47% 38% Reduction in time to contain security incidents Reduction is non-compliance costs including fines, penalties and lawsuits 23% Reduction in time to detect security incidents 12% 6% Return on prevention 2% Other 16% None of the above 0% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 5 The Information Technology (IT) professional and IT security functions have similar influence over cybersecurity investments. As shown in Figure 9, those with the most influence in the purchase of security technologies are business unit leaders (59 percent), CIOs (53 percent) and the CISO (45 percent). However, the chief information officer (CIO) and chief information security officer (30 percent and 20 percent, respectively) hold the purse strings and are the final authority on how cybersecurity dollars should be spent. Figure 9. The main influencers and final authority on cybersecurity investment LOB or business unit leader 59% 19% Chief information officer 53% 30% Chief information security officer 45% 20% 19% 19% Chief technology officer Chief security officer 2% Chief risk officer 2% Chief compliance officer 1% 6% 6% 5% 4% 4% Chief financial officer 3% 3% CEO/COO 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Who influences what security technologies to purchase? Who is the final authority what security technologies to purchase? Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 6 When Investments Go Wrong: The Problem of Shelfware Security investments are driven by cost. As shown in Figure 10, 64 percent of respondents say cost and 56 percent of respondents say performance and vendor support are the most important factors when investing in security technologies. Surprisingly, important features such as interoperability, proven risk reduction and lack of complexity are not considered to be as influential (39 percent, 11 percent and 8 percent, respectively). Figure 10. Most important factors when investing in security technologies Four responses permitted Cost 64% Vendor support 56% Performance 56% 45% Vendor reputation Efficiency 44% 40% Time to deploy 39% Interoperability Scalability 28% Proven risk reduction 11% Redundancy 8% Lack of complexity 8% Other 1% 0% 10% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Page 7 Shelfware is every organization’s problem. Ninety percent of respondents say their organization has invested in a security technology that was ultimately discontinued or scrapped before or soon after deployment. As shown in Figure 11, on average, 31 percent of security technologies purchased by organizations represented in this research over the past 24 months were never fully deployed. Figure 11. The percentage of security technologies purchased over the past 24 months but never fully deployed Extrapolated value = 31 percent 40% 36% 35% 28% 30% 25% 21% 20% 15% 12% 10% 3% 5% 0% Less than 10% 10% to 25% 26% to 50% 51% to 75% 76% to 100% According to Figure 12, the technologies most often shelved are data loss prevention (55 percent), identity & access management (51 percent), SIEM and security intelligence (49 percent), Web application firewalls (46 percent) and intrusion & detection management (44 percent). Figure 12. Security technologies most often “shelved” before or soon after deployment More than one response permitted Data loss prevention (DLP) 55% Identity & access management 51% SIEM and security intelligence 49% Web application firewalls (WAF) 46% Intrusion & detection management 44% Configuration & log management 40% Endpoint security solutions 39% Access governance systems 36% Mobile device management 35% Automated policy generation 35% 0% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 8 According to Figure 13, technologies least often shelved are tokenization tools (10 percent), perimeter or location surveillance (9 percent), encryption for data at rest (8 percent) and traditional firewalls (5 percent), according to Figure 13. Figure 13. Security technologies least often “shelved” before or soon after deployment More than one response permitted ID & credentialing system 14% Database scanning and monitoring 14% URL or content filtering 13% Encryption for data in motion 12% Anti-virus & anti-malware 12% Virtual private network (VPN) 11% Tokenization tools 10% Perimeter or location surveillance 9% Encryption for data at rest 8% Firewalls (traditional) 5% 0% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% Page 9 Complexity and difficulty in operating was the main reason the security technologies were scrapped before or soon after deployment (77 percent of respondents). This is followed by a lack of in-house expertise to deploy and operate the technology (55 percent of respondents). It is interesting that the primary reasons for purchasing a particular technology are cost and performance, when complexity of a system is most to blame for creating shelfware. Thus, level of complexity should become a more important factor in the purchasing decision. Figure 14. Why security technologies are scrapped before or soon after deployment More than one response permitted The technology was overly complex and too difficult to operate 77% Lack of in-house expertise to deploy and operate the technology 55% The technology was too expensive to maintain 41% 27% Lack of vendor support and service The technology did not meet the needs of our cybersecurity strategy 16% The technology diminished the performance of our systems 12% The technology diminished the productivity of our employees Other 10% 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 10 How did the shelfware experience change cybersecurity investments? Sixty-five percent of respondents say their organizations expanded the effort to evaluate vendors’ customer service and support. Organizations are also insisting on contracts (SLAs) that hold vendors’ accountable to their commitments (59 percent of respondents) and performance of additional risk assessments (47 percent of respondents). Figure 15. How did the shelfware experience change the organization’s approach to purchasing cybersecurity technologies? Expanded the effort to evaluate vendors’ customer service and support 65% Insisted on contracts (SLAs) that hold vendors’ accountable to their commitments 59% 47% Performed additional risk assessments Conducted extensive testing of the technology prior to purchase 33% Implemented pilot or "beta" tests before investing in the solution 25% No change 8% Other 2% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% How Risk and Innovation Affects Security Investments Are organizations innovative in their use of security technologies? In the context of this research we define security innovation as “the use of enabling technologies and personnel in new ways to create a more secure and efficient organization and improve alignment between security initiatives and business goals”. Figure 16 reveals that almost half (49 percent) believe innovation is essential or very important to achieving a strong security posture. Figure 16. How important is innovation to achieving a strong security posture 40% 34% 35% 30% 26% 25% 20% 15% 15% 13% 12% Not important Irrelevant 10% 5% 0% Essential Very important Ponemon Institute© Research Report Important Page 11 Only 32 percent of respondents say their organizations achieve a high level of innovation. Figure 17 shows how differently respondents define innovation. Seventy-five percent of respondents say the reason they believe their organizations are innovative is because they use existing technologies in ways that are more efficient and cost effective. Sixty-seven percent of respondents say they use these technologies to create a more secure and efficient organizations. Figure 17. What makes an organization innovative? More than one response permitted Uses existing technologies in ways that are more efficient and cost effective 75% Uses enabling technologies to create a more secure and efficient organization 67% Is not dependent upon any one vendor or solution to achieve a strong security posture 60% Uses technologies to improve alignment between security initiatives and business goals 55% Creative in using existing technologies to address new threats 46% Other 4% 0% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Page 12 Those who believe their organizations are not innovative, cite several reasons. More than half (56 percent) feel their organization is overly dependent upon vendors to make technology decisions, 53 percent of respondents believe their organizational culture inhibits innovation and 40 percent say they do not have the right in-house expertise, as shown in Figure 18. Only 34 percent say their level of investment in security innovation has changed over the past 24 months. Figure 18. What keeps an organization from being innovative? More than one response permitted Overly dependent upon vendors to make technology decisions 56% 53% Organizational culture inhibits innovation 40% Lack of in-house expertise 37% Lack of resources Belief that innovation increases security risk 28% Overly dependent upon what industry peers are doing 16% 2% Other 0% Ponemon Institute© Research Report 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Page 13 Part 3. Conclusion In this study, we explore how organizations are making decisions that will have a significant impact on their ability to prevent and detect cyber threats. Our findings reveal how organizations can avoid the problem of shelfware and invest instead in technologies that will pay dividends by reducing cybersecurity risks. § Reduce dependency on ROI and TCO to make investment decisions. Instead, consider such metrics as improvements in the efficiency of security operations, reduction in time to detect security incidents and return on prevention. § Cost should not be the most important factor when investing in a security technology. Companies find themselves investing heavily in technologies that are never deployed because they are overly complex. Yet, only eight percent of respondents say their organizations consider a lack of complexity in the investment decision. Shelfware would become less pervasive a problem if companies prioritized level of complexity, interoperability and proven risk reduction in their decision making § Innovation is important to a strong cybersecurity posture. The most innovative organizations have found ways to use existing technologies that are more efficient and cost effective and to create a more secure and efficient organization. We believe these recommendations can be easily incorporated into an organization’s strategy to improve the allocation of resources and achieve a strong cybersecurity posture. Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 14 Part 4. Methods The sampling frame is composed of 17,228 IT management and IT security practitioners who are located in the United States. All respondents are familiar with and responsible for determining their organizations’ investments in cybersecurity technologies. As shown in Table 1, 17,228 respondents completed the survey. Screening removed 73 surveys. The final sample was 618 surveys (or a 3.6 percent response rate). All survey responses were captured February 18 to March 13, 2015. Table 1. Sample response Total sampling frame Total returns Rejected or screened surveys Final sample Freq Pct% 17,228 691 73 618 100.0% 4.0% 0.4% 3.6% We calculated a margin of error for all statistical survey questions that yielded a proportional or percentage result. Most questions utilized the full sample size of n = 618 qualified respondents. Assuming a confidence level at the 95 percent level, the margin of error for survey questions ranted from ± 1.0 percent to ± 5.6 percent, with an overall average of ± 3.6. Pie Chart 1 reports the current position or organizational level of the respondents. More than half of respondents (57 percent) reported their current position as supervisory or above. Pie Chart 1. Current position or organizational level 3% 4% 2% 1% 2% 16% Senior Executive Vice President Director Manager Supervisor 34% Technician 23% Staff Consultant Contractor 15% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 15 Pie Chart 2 identifies the primary role the respondent has within the organization. Fifty-six percent of respondents identified the chief information officer as the primary person they report to. Another 21 percent indicated they report to the chief information security officer. Pie Chart 2. Primary person you or your IT leader reports to within the organization 3% 3% 2% 2% Chief Information Officer 6% Chief Information Security Officer Chief Risk Officer 7% Data Center Management 56% Other Compliance Officer 21% Chief Financial Officer Chief Security Officer Pie Chart 3 reports the primary industry classification of respondents’ organizations. This chart identifies financial services (18 percent) as the largest segment, followed by federal government (17 percent), healthcare (15 percent) and hi tech (11 percent). Pie Chart 3. Primary industry focus 8% 4% 18% 8% 9% 17% 10% 11% Financial services Federal government Healthcare Hi Tech Utilities Energy, oil & gas Pharmaceuticals Telecom All others 15% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 16 According to Pie Chart 4, more than half of the respondents (64 percent) are from organizations with a global headcount of more than 1,000 employees. Pie Chart 4. Worldwide headcount of the organization 8% 8% 9% 11% < 100 100 to 500 501 to 1,000 1,001 to 5,000 19% 17% 5,001 to 25,000 25,001 to 75,000 > 75,000 28% Table 2 reveals that in addition to the United States, 70 percent of respondents indicated their organization has employees in Canada and sixty-nice percent responded Europe. Table 2. Where are your employees located? United States Canada Europe Asia-Pacific Latin America (including Mexico) Middle East & Africa Ponemon Institute© Research Report Pct% 100% 70% 69% 49% 43% 39% Page 17 Part 4. Caveats There are inherent limitations to survey research that need to be carefully considered before drawing inferences from findings. The following items are specific limitations that are germane to most web-based surveys. Non-response bias: The current findings are based on a sample of survey returns. We sent surveys to a representative sample of individuals, resulting in a large number of usable returned responses. Despite non-response tests, it is always possible that individuals who did not participate are substantially different in terms of underlying beliefs from those who completed the instrument. Sampling frame bias: The accuracy is based on contact information and the degree to which the list is representative of individuals who are IT or IT security practitioners in various organizations in the United States. We also acknowledge that the results may be biased by external events such as media coverage. We also acknowledge bias caused by compensating subjects to complete this research within a specified time period. Self-reported results: The quality of survey research is based on the integrity of confidential responses received from subjects. While certain checks and balances can be incorporated into the survey process, there is always the possibility that a subject did not provide accurate responses. Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 18 Appendix: Detailed Survey Results The following tables provide the frequency or percentage frequency of responses to all survey questions contained in this study. All survey responses were captured February 18 to March 13, 2015. Survey response Total sampling frame Total returns Rejected or screened surveys Final sample Freq 17228 691 73 618 Part 1. Screening questions S1. How familiar are you with your organization’s investments in cybersecurity technologies? Very familiar Familiar Somewhat familiar No knowledge (Stop) Total Pct% 33% 36% 31% 0% 100% S2. Do you have any responsibility for determining investments in cyber security technologies? Yes, full responsibility Yes, some responsibility Yes, minimum responsibility No responsibility (Stop) Total Pct% 25% 59% 16% 0% 100% Part 2. Attributions Q1a. My organization believes a strong cybersecurity posture is a competitive advantage. Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree Total Pct% 12% 18% 23% 25% 22% 100% Q1b. My organization’s senior leadership understands the cybersecurity risks it faces. Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree Total Pct% 15% 19% 32% 22% 12% 100% Q1c. My organization is effective in using cybersecurity technologies to reduce the risk. Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree Total Pct% 25% 24% 25% 16% 10% 100% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Pct% 100.0% 4.0% 0.4% 3.6% Page 19 Q1d. My organization is innovative in how it invests and deploys cybersecurity technologies Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree Total Pct% 16% 31% 25% 18% 10% 100% Q1e. My organization’s senior leadership does not view investment in cybersecurity technologies as a strategic priority. Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree Total Pct% 26% 38% 16% 12% 8% 100% Q1f. My organization had made investments in security technologies that did not improve its cybersecurity posture. Strongly agree Agree Unsure Disagree Strongly disagree Total Pct% 29% 29% 16% 16% 10% 100% Part 3. The measurement of security technology investment Q2a. How important is Return on Investment (ROI) in making a decision to invest in a given security solution or technology? Essential Very important Important Not important We do not use ROI to evaluate investments in security solutions or technologies [skip to Q3a] Total Pct% 19% 25% 26% 15% 15% 100% Q2b. How difficult is it to calculate a precise (accurate) ROI for a given security solution or technology? Very difficult Difficult Not difficult Easy Unsure Total Pct% 26% 44% 18% 9% 3% 100% Q2c Were you able to determine a precise ROI for each investment decision made? Yes No Total Pct% 41% 59% 100% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 20 Q2d. Over the past 24 months, were one or more proposed investments in a particular security solution or technology rejected because of unfavorable ROIs? Yes No Unsure Total Pct% 50% 45% 5% 100% Q2e-1. Does your organization reconcile the historic (original) ROI with actual ROI for investments in security solutions or technologies? Yes, for most investments Yes, for some investments No Unsure Total Pct% 18% 36% 42% 4% 100% Q2e-2. If yes, what best describes your organization’s experience? Actual ROI tends to be lower than the historic ROI Actual ROI tends to be higher than the historic ROI Actual and historic ROI tend to be very close (accurate) Unsure Total Pct% 46% 15% 34% 5% 100% Q2f. Approximately, what is the threshold ROI necessary to achieve a favorable investment decision in a given security solution or technology within your organization? Less than 5% 5% to 10% 11% to 15% 16% to 20% 21% to 25% 26% to 30% More than 30% Total Pct% 11% 21% 34% 18% 11% 4% 1% 100% Q3a. How important is Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) in making a decision to invest in a given security solution or technology? Essential Very important Important Not important We do not use TCO to evaluate investments in security solutions or technologies [skip to Q4] Total Q3b. How difficult is it to calculate a precise (accurate) TCO for a given security solution or technology? Very difficult Difficult Not difficult Easy Unsure Total Ponemon Institute© Research Report Pct% 16% 19% 35% 15% 15% 100% Pct% 23% 38% 25% 11% 3% 100% Page 21 Q3c. Were you able to determine a precise TCO for each investment decision made? Yes No Total Pct% 45% 55% 100% Q3d. Over the past 24 months, were one or more proposed investments in a particular security solution or technology rejected because of unfavorable TCOs? Yes No Unsure Total Pct% 56% 41% 3% 100% Q3e-1. Does your organization reconcile the historic (original) TCO with actual TCO for investments in security solutions or technologies? Yes, for most investments Yes, for some investments No Unsure Total Pct% 15% 33% 48% 4% 100% Q3e-2. If yes, what best describes your organization’s experience? Actual TCO tends to be lower than the historic TCO Actual TCO tends to be higher than the historic TCO Actual and historic TCO tend to be very close (accurate) Unsure Total Pct% 15% 44% 36% 5% 100% Q4. If ROI or TCO is not used by your organization, what else is used to evaluate the economic viability of a particular security solution or technology? Please select all that apply. Improvement in the efficiency of security operations Reduction in system downtime Reduction in data breach costs Reduction in time to contain security incidents Reduction is non-compliance costs including fines, penalties and lawsuits Reduction in time to detect security incidents Return on prevention Other (please specify) None of the above Pct% 56% 50% 47% 38% 23% 12% 6% 2% 16% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 22 Part 4. The security technology investment process Q5. What are the most important factors when investing in security technologies? Please select the top four. Cost Performance Vendor support Vendor reputation Efficiency Time to deploy Interoperability Scalability Proved risk reduction Lack of complexity Redundancy Other (please specify) Total Pct% 64% 56% 56% 45% 44% 40% 39% 28% 11% 8% 8% 1% 400% Q6. In your organization, who is the final authority on what security technologies to purchase? Chief information officer Chief information security officer Chief technology officer LOB or business unit leader Chief financial officer CEO/COO Chief security officer Chief risk officer Chief compliance officer Other (please specify) Total Pct% 30% 20% 19% 19% 4% 3% 2% 2% 1% 0% 100% Q7. In your organization, who influences what security technologies to purchase? Please select the top two choices. LOB or business unit leader Chief information officer Chief information security officer Chief technology officer Chief security officer Chief risk officer Chief compliance officer Chief financial officer CEO/COO Other (please specify) Total Pct% 59% 53% 45% 19% 6% 6% 5% 4% 3% 0% 200% Q8. What best describes the investment process for security technologies? A structured approach that is applied consistently throughout the organization A structured approach that is not applied consistently throughout the organization An unstructured approach that applied consistently throughout the organization An unstructured approach that is not applied consistently throughout the organization An “ad hoc” approach Total Ponemon Institute© Research Report Pct% 31% 18% 4% 28% 19% 100% Page 23 Q9. Which of the following security technologies has the highest ROI? Please estimate the ROI for each technology using the percentage range in the adjacent scale. Identity & access management SIEM and security intelligence Encryption for data at rest Encryption for data in motion Anti-virus & anti-malware Web application firewalls (WAF) Tokenization tools Endpoint security solutions Intrusion & detection management Mobile device management URL or content filtering Next generation firewalls (NGFW) Data loss prevention (DLP) Sandboxing or isolation tools Virtual private network (VPN) Configuration & log management Big data analytics Database scanning and monitoring Device anti-theft solutions Access governance systems ID & credentialing system Automated policy generation Firewalls (traditional) Perimeter or location surveillance Average ROI 31% 29% 25% 25% 25% 24% 23% 23% 21% 20% 18% 18% 17% 15% 14% 12% 12% 12% 11% 9% 8% 8% 7% 6% 17% Q10. Has your organization ever invested in a security technology that was ultimately discontinued or scrapped before or soon after deployment (i.e. shelfware)? Yes No or unsure (skip to Q15) Total Pct% 90% 10% 100% Q11. Approximately, what is the percentage of security technologies purchased over the past 24 months but never fully deployed? Less than 10% 10% to 25% 26% to 50% 51% to 75% 76% to 100% Total Pct% 21% 28% 36% 12% 3% 100% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Average 31% Page 24 Q12. Which of the following security technologies were “shelved” before or soon after deployment? Data loss prevention (DLP) Identity & access management SIEM and security intelligence Web application firewalls (WAF) Intrusion & detection management Configuration & log management Endpoint security solutions Access governance systems Automated policy generation Mobile device management Big data analytics Device anti-theft solutions Sandboxing or isolation tools Next generation firewalls (NGFW) Database scanning and monitoring ID & credentialing system URL or content filtering Anti-virus & anti-malware Encryption for data in motion Virtual private network (VPN) Tokenization tools Perimeter or location surveillance Encryption for data at rest Firewalls (traditional) Average Pct% 55% 51% 49% 46% 44% 40% 39% 36% 35% 35% 27% 27% 21% 16% 14% 14% 13% 12% 12% 11% 10% 9% 8% 5% 26% Q13. What are the main reasons these security technologies were scrapped before or soon after deployment? The technology was overly complex and too difficult to operate Lack of in-house expertise to deploy and operate the technology The technology was too expensive to maintain Lack of vendor support and service The technology did not meet the needs of our cybersecurity strategy The technology diminished the performance of our systems The technology diminished the productivity of our employees Other (please specify) Total Pct% 77% 55% 41% 27% 16% 12% 10% 2% 240% Q14. How did your organization’s experience with shelfware change its approach to purchasing security technologies? Expanded the effort to evaluate vendors’ customer service and support Performed additional risk assessments Conducted extensive testing of the technology prior to purchase Implemented pilot or "beta" tests before investing in the solution Insisted on contracts (SLAs) that hold vendors’ accountable to their commitments No change Other (please specify) Total Ponemon Institute© Research Report Pct% 65% 47% 33% 25% 59% 8% 2% 239% Page 25 Part 5. Risk and innovation in investing in security technologies Q15. How much does security risk influence the purchase of specific security technologies? Please use the following 10-point scale from 1 = no impact to 10 = significant impact. 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8 9 or 10 Total Pct% 8% 9% 15% 21% 47% 100% Q16. How much do compliance requirements influence the purchase of specific security technologies? Please use the following 10-point scale from 1 = no impact to 10 = significant impact. 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8 9 or 10 Total Pct% 11% 18% 26% 24% 21% 100% Q17. How much do business objectives influence the purchase of specific security technologies? Please use the following 10-point scale from 1 = no impact to 10 = significant impact. 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8 9 or 10 Total Pct% 5% 6% 16% 23% 50% 100% Q18. What is more important a technology that reduces risk or one that supports the businesses processes? Reducing risk is more important Supporting businesses processes are more important Both are equally important Total Pct% 33% 32% 35% 100% Q19. Please rate your organization’s level of security innovation today using the following 10-point scale. 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 or 8 9 or 10 Total Pct% 12% 28% 28% 23% 9% 100% Q20. [For risk score at or above 6] If your organization is innovative, why? Uses existing technologies in ways that are more efficient and cost effective Uses enabling technologies to create a more secure and efficient organization Is not dependent upon any one vendor or solution to achieve a strong security posture Uses technologies to improve alignment between security initiatives and business goals Creative in using existing technologies to address new threats Other (please specify) Total Ponemon Institute© Research Report Pct% 75% 67% 60% 55% 46% 4% 307% Page 26 Q21. [For risk score at or below 5] If your organization is not innovative, why? Overly dependent upon vendors to make technology decisions Organizational culture inhibits innovation Lack of in-house expertise Lack of resources Belief that innovation increases security risk Overly dependent upon what industry peers are doing Other (please specify) Total Pct% 56% 53% 40% 37% 28% 16% 2% 232% Q22. How has your organization’s level of investment in security innovation changed over the past 24 months? Significant increase Increase No change Decrease Significant decrease Total Pct% 8% 26% 44% 15% 7% 100% Q23. In your opinion, what is the relative importance of security innovation to achieving a strong security posture? Essential Very important Important Not important Irrelevant Total Pct% 15% 34% 26% 13% 12% 100% Part 6. Your role and organization D1. What organizational level best describes your current position? Senior Executive Vice President Director Manager Supervisor Technician Staff Consultant Contractor Other (please specify) Total Pct% 1% 2% 16% 23% 15% 34% 3% 4% 2% 0% 100% D2. Check the Primary Person you or your IT security leader reports to within the organization. Chief Information Officer Chief Information Security Officer Chief Risk Officer Data Center Management Compliance Officer Chief Financial Officer Chief Security Officer CEO/Executive Committee General Counsel Other (please specify) Human Resources VP Total Pct% 56% 21% 7% 6% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% 1% 0% 100% Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 27 D3. What industry best describes your organization’s industry focus (stratified sample)? Financial services Federal government (various departments) Healthcare Hi Tech Utilities Pharmaceuticals Energy, oil & gas Telecom All others Total Pct% 18% 17% 15% 11% 10% 8% 9% 8% 4% 100% D4. Where are your employees located? Please check all that apply: United States Canada Europe Asia-Pacific Latin America (including Mexico) Middle East & Africa Total Pct% 100% 70% 69% 49% 43% 39% 370% D5. What is the worldwide headcount of your organization? < 100 100 to 500 501 to 1,000 1,001 to 5,000 5,001 to 25,000 25,001 to 75,000 > 75,000 Total Pct% 8% 9% 19% 28% 17% 11% 8% 100% Ponemon Institute Advancing Responsible Information Management Ponemon Institute is dedicated to independent research and education that advances responsible information and privacy management practices within business and government. Our mission is to conduct high quality, empirical studies on critical issues affecting the management and security of sensitive information about people and organizations. As a member of the Council of American Survey Research Organizations (CASRO), we uphold strict data confidentiality, privacy and ethical research standards. We do not collect any personally identifiable information from individuals (or company identifiable information in our business research). Furthermore, we have strict quality standards to ensure that subjects are not asked extraneous, irrelevant or improper questions. Ponemon Institute© Research Report Page 28
© Copyright 2024