"The story of the RMS Titanic has served as a grim reminder that regulatory compliance does not guarantee safety or security. The ship was carrying 2,224 passengers and crew when it sank one April night in 1912, killing over 1,500 people. The designers of Titanic had followed the British Board of Trade by equipping it with 20 lifeboats, and even threw in four more than the regulations required." (securicon.com) Dixon Wright, Vice President, Vice President, Compliance Management and Automation Platform, Coalfire, speaks to the importance of moving beyond the check-the-box approach and engaging in substantive information security compliance efforts. He recommends the judicious adoption and use of appropriate compliance management and automation platforms.
To access and download the entire podcast summary with discussion highlights --
https://www.dchatte.com/episode-23-is-cybersecurity-regulatory-compliance-good-enough/
"The story of the RMS Titanic has served as a grim reminder that regulatory compliance does not guarantee safety or security. The ship was carrying 2,224 passengers and crew when it sank one April night in 1912, killing over 1,500 people. The designers of Titanic had followed the British Board of Trade by equipping it with 20 lifeboats, and even threw in four more than the regulations required." (securicon.com) Dixon Wright, Vice President, Vice President, Compliance Management and Automation Platform, Coalfire, speaks to the importance of moving beyond the check-the-box approach and engaging in substantive information security compliance efforts. He recommends the judicious adoption and use of appropriate compliance management and automation platforms.
To access and download the entire podcast summary with discussion highlights --
https://www.dchatte.com/episode-23-is-cybersecurity-regulatory-compliance-good-enough/
Connect with Host Dr. Dave Chatterjee and Subscribe to the Podcast
Please subscribe to the podcast so you don't miss any new episodes! And please leave the show a rating if you like what you hear. New episodes release every two weeks.
Connect with Dr. Chatterjee on these platforms:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dchatte/
Website: https://dchatte.com/
Cybersecurity Readiness Book: https://www.amazon.com/Cybersecurity-Readiness-Holistic-High-Performance-Approach/dp/1071837338
Welcome to the Cybersecurity Readiness Podcast
Series with Dr. Dave Chatterjee. Dr. Chatterjee is the author of
A Holistic and High-Performance
Approach. He has been studying cybersecurity for over a decade,
authored and edited scholarly papers, delivered talks,
conducted webinars, consulted with companies, and served on a
cybersecurity SWAT team with Chief Information Security
Officers. Dr. Chatterjee is an Associate Professor of
Management Information Systems at the Terry College of
Business, the University of Georgia, and visiting professor
at Duke University's Pratt School of Engineering.
Hello, everyone, I'm delighted to
welcome you to this episode of the Cybersecurity Readiness
Podcast Series. Today, I'll be talking with Dixon Wright, Vice
President Product Management of Coalfire. Coalfire is a
cybersecurity solutions provider. And Dixon leads
product efforts for Coalfire's compliance management and
automation platform. He is responsible for product vision
and execution, go-to-market activities, and product revenue.
Dixon mentions in his professional profile, that he is
on a mission to make security compliance easier through
software and automation. And so I felt that he was the perfect
guest for our discussion on information security compliance.
Dixon, welcome. Thanks for taking time to share your
thoughts and perspectives with listeners.
Thanks for Thanks for having me excited to be here
and chat about something that I'm passionate about.
Yeah, let's talk about your passion. What
gets you passionate about information security compliance?
Yeah, I guess, you know, it's, as someone who kind
of came up through the ranks of IT audit started my career, at
the Big Four at KPMG. And I've had some considerable steps
along the way to get to Coalfire. But you know, thinking
about how historically like, everything is extremely manual,
it's extremely labor intensive, lots of narrative writing, when
the essence is trying to really dissect whether or not technical
things are implemented correctly, and then weighing an
opinion against that. So it's just that, you know, one of my
old colleagues said it best he's like, we hire really expensive,
technical people and 60, 70% of their job is being a technical
writer. Right. So, so both from a business stance, as well, as
you know, I think from a security stance, that's probably
not the best allocation of resources. So I think, you know,
our, again, our vision and mission is really to make that
easier from the customer side, but also, you know, use that to
enable the business as well.
Very cool. Very cool. So, you know, for the
benefit of the listeners, provide an overview of security
compliance, and the current state of affairs.
Yeah, it's a great, it's a very, very broad
topic, I try to do do it to the best of my ability. But I think,
I think security compliance, like starts with third party
trust. So when we think about, you know, why they exist, kind
of, I would say, the foundation, the genesis of compliance was,
hey, like, we want to do business with other businesses,
like we need to determine whether or not they're doing the
things we need them to do. And I think a lot of this even started
financially with some of the Sarbanes Oxley like IT controls
when you outsource particular pieces of your, your process
internally. So specifically, some of the, you know, I've been
an expert in for a while is SOC reporting. And that, you know,
basically what happened is is like, all these third, you know,
all of these companies wanted to go in and like audit their
vendors. And so basically, there was, you know, things change,
and they develop this kind of, okay, well, actually, let's
create a standard so that third party organizations can go in
and do their own assessments and then provide a report that can
then be distributed across to all those customers so that, you
know, it's do once provide many versus having these like
one-to-one audits per customer that you have. And I think
that's, you know, that is expanded so, you know, vary
greatly over the last, like, you'll see, we'll call it 10
years because all of these different kinds of industries
and sectors have created their own types of standards that now
all of these organizations have to comply with. And I think,
more recently, we've seen a large amount of like
jurisdictional specific standards pop up. So if you want
to go and do business inside of Germany, German organizations
may now require you to follow some type of German standard
same in India, same in Japan. So when you think about these large
technology, SAS providers, they have, you know, so many things
that they have to comply with. But it all comes back, I think,
you know, at its core is like, the, the point is to be able to
show trust, the way in which trust is executed or is
implemented or evidence is just now becoming vastly different
depending on who you do business with and where you do business.
So, you know, the larger the company, the more things you
have to do, obviously, the you know, it gets exponentially more
and more complicated to be able to satisfy that.
Very true. Talking about getting things
complicated. As you mentioned, industries have their own
standards, such as PCI DSS for the payment card industry, then
there are various laws and regulations such as HIPAA, GDPR,
CCPA, CPA and more. There are also a whole bunch of frameworks
such as NIST, ISO 27,001, Center for Internet Security controls,
and more. So one of the challenges I see organizations
grappling with, is to make sure they are in compliance of all
they need to be in compliance off. In other words, just trying
to stay on top of all these different regulatory and
compliance requirements can be an extremely challenging
proposition. What do you think?
Oh, absolutely. I mean, I think there's, there's
there's a challenge getting compliant. And then there's,
there's certainly maybe an even even more challenge of actually
like maintaining it. And then it's just like, you know, the,
are you really any better off? Right? I mean, I think it's also
you have to ask, right, it's just like, yeah, like, I'm
compliant. And certainly, there's some benefits. And, you
know, but I think but, you know, I think there's there's all
these other challenges of dilution of kind of the types of
people that are doing the assessments. There's different
types of quality and the third parties. So, you know, one
report from one particular third party, like, we'll call it
auditor assessor is not necessarily equivalent to
another that's also accredited, right? So. So I think it comes
back, if you, if you come back to trust, it's just like, at
what point will we start to go beyond some of these point in
time, like pieces of paper, right, that kind of prove
compliance to these organizations? Or when do
organizations no longer trust a piece of paper, and I think
we're seeing that now, like, a lot of our customers, like have
to do it, it's contracts there, they're contractually obligated,
or they're trying to do business with the federal government, as
an example, I have to be FedRAMP compliant. But I think a lot of
these like commercial like SOC 2 and ISO 27,001, it really is,
it's kind of table stakes, like you have to have it. And then
there's still a very vicious kind of vendor review process
that, you know, you still may have to do a questionnaire, you
still may have to provide, you know, scanning reports or pen
test reports. So, you know, it's just like all this work for, to
basically have a conversation, and then you still have to, you
know, prove out your security.
Yeah, I can totally see that. And that can
be frustrating. What concerns me is organizations, finding ways
of somehow meeting the compliance requirements to be
eligible to be able to compete for a certain contract. In other
words, organizations can be motivated to adopt the
check-the-box approach. So how do you ensure that this
check-the-box mentality or behavior is not encouraged?
Yeah. Yeah, I mean, it's a good question. I
mean, I think there's a couple of different factors in that.
I'm obviously biased, coming from like, the third party
world. You know, I think it's, you know, did did they use a
reputable third party? Is that, you know, I think specifically
in the realm of cybersecurity, right, is that is that third
party known for really understanding and being kind of
a technical type of company? Like, are they an audit firm?
Right, like, you know, we can we can talk about that a lot,
right? Like, a lot of audit firms do a lot of these things.
And some of them are really good, right. There's others that
aren't like, they're, you know, the, the, the resources are
predominantly, like, they're not very technical. So I think, you
know, being able to evaluate what that third party is doing.
And then again, I mean, I think that, I do believe that, you
know, some of the compliance reports, and some of the
standardization of it are really good. But I don't think like,
that's where it should stop. Like, I think, you know, there's
additional kind of tech Bill tech, technical due diligence
that shouldn't be done. And quite frankly, I mean, I think
that's becoming common, right, I think the companies that take
security really seriously and take third party secure third
party vendor security very seriously. You know, like, I
have one customer, Silicon Valley, publicly traded customer
now. And they, they basically would just send over kind of
open ended kind of technical questions. And they, it's very
easy to detect, like when someone is, you know, is full of
it, right? They don't really know what they're talking about.
So I think just even things, simple things such as that can
really make you question whether or not like the the party on the
other end, right, that's going to hold your data, like actually
knows what they're doing and has their hands around it. So again,
I think other companies take it different places, and you know,
that it likely should be a risk based kind of decision, right?
Like, what what is being stored? What is being what are they
handling for you? Is it critical? Is it not? And then,
you know, make make decisions on the rigor that you want to put
on because you can't, it's, it's impossible, especially with the
kind of intertwined cloud services. The cloud service
used, that's gonna ramp in today's society like to go and,
you know, really do deep, deep technical reviews of every
single company, right? It's just not scalable. So so, you know,
having these kinds of kinds of ways to really early detect
whether or not this has been a you want to do business, whether
or not I think is this kind of a good approach that I've seen
some of our customers take?
That's good to know. In fact, I'd like to
pick up on something you said you talked about. Yeah, I think
you were alluding to oversight, that you can have a compliance
team in place, you know, ensuring that the organization
is in compliance of the relevant regulations. But there also
needs to be oversight to ensure that the organization is going
beyond the check-the-box approach, the approach is
substantive, that, you know, when, let's say our compliance
requirement is to have a certain type of security training,
making sure that the training is really personalized, customized.
And there's a follow up, there is assessment, there is
repetition. So I'm just using training as an example, to make
the difference between what could be somehow get it done
hire a vendor company, and they offer you an out of the box
training curriculum, let's say, and that is, that is okay. But
the organization needs to customize it, because every
organization has unique needs, has unique roles that people
perform. So that's where I feel that this discussion on
compliance needs to be coupled with the discussion on
governance mechanisms, measures, which ensure that, you know, the
tools that are being used to assess compliance, to ensure
compliance, are being leveraged effectively and essentially,
people are doing the right thing. Your thoughts, your
reactions?
Yeah, I mean, I think when, like, I think
without a layer of governance, and a strategy for like, what
you want to accomplish out of some of these compliance
frameworks, like it, I think, in many cases, it becomes like,
like, compliance is just sales, right? You're just doing it so
that you can sell to other companies. It's not actually
used as a mechanism to secure things internally, in the long
run, right? Like, will that help probably like there's, you know,
implementing controls and versus not having them is probably
effective. But I think until there's like this kind of top
down approach of like, hey, like this is, you know, we obviously
have to do this, but here's how we're gonna do like, take this
seriously, like, kind of the same customer I was mentioning
earlier, they they handle handle a lot of payments, right. And so
payments, payments, security is extremely important to their
business. And they have to take it seriously, right, like, maybe
that's the nature of this company that they run. But, you
know, it's like, security's embedded into like, every layer
of their organization, right, developers are responsible for
security. You know, and so, like, that's part of the culture
that they establish and buying in. And you know, funny enough,
like, a lot of lot of the compliance stuff is for them,
it's an outcome, it's not something that they like have to
do. And so, you know, they, they take security very seriously.
Then they get audited, and as a nature of taking security very
seriously, like, generally, their, their audits are
extremely clean and very successful. So again, I think
that that type of approach that we've seen is, is super
effective. And I think it really starts with that governance
level, or at least, like, you know, leadership being
completely bought in and to what that what that means.
Very true. In fact, yesterday, I was
talking with a CISO. And he mentioned, he said, you know,
compliance is expected, but compliance by itself, it's not
good enough, when it comes to establishing a strong
cybersecurity posture. So, I'm interested in getting your
perspective on what does it take to create a robust cybersecurity
compliance program? In other words, if you could highlight
some of the key elements of a robust compliance program?
Yeah, from a compliance person, I'm speaking
specifically to compliance not necessarily, like overall, like
security, right. But so I think for to having an effective
compliance program is really to think about, you know, what is
like what is that kind of like, you know, continuum of like,
maturity, right. So for us, like, what we see is you've got,
you know, you get this new organization, they're doing
compliance. And they're largely like, doing it in a manual
fashion, right? Like, they're kind of, they got a couple of
people, they run around, chasing people down, trying to, again,
say, like, kind of checking the boxes, right? It's not
proactive, it's reactive. Audit season is typically extremely
stressful. And you really have like, your, your fingers
crossed, that you've done all that you need to do, right. You
know, you'd be surprised at the size of companies that we deal
with where it's like, Oops, like, forgot to do a quarter
quarterly vulnerability scan. Right? Not good guys, right?
That's going to be a problem. You know, here's, here's what
we're gonna have to do so. So I think that's kind of where I
would say, like, you know, you get the most like, immature
companies, and there's probably even a spectrum of that
immaturity. Where it's like, you know, that's expected for a
startup, right? That's not expected for a publicly traded
company right. So so that lack of investment in you know, not
taking that stuff overly seriously or at least just being
thoughtful about it, I think is kind of at the very kind of
beginning and then you get into you know, what we call like
coordinated which is you understand all you need to
accomplish you think about how you build you know, solid
workflows to make that happen. You minimize the amount of like
auditors that you deal with like we call it kind of coordinated
assessments, right. So you choose you know, vendors that
can eliminate audit fatigue throughout your organization.
And you really tried to like you know, as another feature this
will be centralizing, you know, compliance across like business
units right. So if you have your have kind of a conglomerate, and
you have 30 different business units you know, and you have
every single business unit kind of does their own thing like
that's, that's not very mature but having some type of
coordinated effort and a centralized group that helps
manage some of those things. Those are some ways that we see
people kind of continue down this like maturity skip cycle.
Um, And then I think you, you start to get into this this kind
of realm of automation, right? So I would say like, the next
big bucket is okay, you know, what am I am I using really good
tooling to automate like the workflows, you know, I have a
way to have this like centralized place where all
those things are happening. I'm using very few type of
assessors. And I don't have like, you know, 10 different
kind of audit opinions being spun at me. And then I think
that kind of the next two places are really around, you know,
kind of further automating a lot of the technical components that
you you can do, which I think is very, it's a very new kind of
concept in general. And I think the adoption of that will be
slower for enterprise companies. But you know, I think that's
going to continue, like how do I start to do things and like,
report on those things in an automated fashion versus having
humans do it? And then I think, at the end of that spectrum is
just like, Okay, how do we get to this place of real continuous
monitoring for the large majority of our kind of control
environment? If 60 70% of our controls are kind of technical
in nature? You know, how do we, you know, pull that information
out and visualize it more in real time versus waiting for
internal control assessments, or annual, you know, annual
assessments for auditors to really determine the overall
effectiveness of that. So I think like to me, like that's,
that's where we're headed in terms of the future of trust is,
you know, that customer start to actually share real time
insights into actually what's actually happened versus like
people distributing, you know, PDF reports of compliance
status. And I think there's been some really large organizations
that have talked publicly about it. One of them is Equifax.
Like, right now, they have some type of program. So for their
customers, they share out, you know, dashboards of some of
their cloud environments, and what the status of those
controls are. So I think stuff like that is going to become way
more, the adoption of that is going to become much higher. And
I think as a result, you know, scanners, it will establish more
trust and can be a differentiator for these, those
types of companies that do that go the extra mile.
That's really good to hear. Because I
couldn't agree with you more, the importance of continuous
monitoring, and the extent to which we can use technology, not
only to automate the process, but also to direct the alerts to
the appropriate folks. And make sure that the alerts are being
received and acted upon. I'm very, I'm very passionate about,
you know, while organizations have monitoring mechanisms,
where they tend to fall behind, is, you know, often good
intelligence goes unrecognized. Good intelligence is ignored.
It's not responded to, and I wish we can have appropriate
tools, that reduces the possibility of that happening.
So based on what I'm hearing from you, that is very
encouraging news. So going back to automation, compliance, and I
know that your organization has developed a platform to provide
those services, when an organization is considering
investing in such tools and capabilities, what guidance or
what recommendations would you have for them?
Yeah, I mean, I think I think it really comes
down to like, what what are your organization's like, biggest
pain points? Right? You know, so we see kind of the full full
spectrum of like, what that is for organizations, we see
organizations on different parts of that like maturity cycle. And
it's different for everybody. And, you know, I think for us,
and kind of a large majority of our customer base are typically
bigger customers. And so, the problems are more complicated,
right? So they have many different business units, many
different applications, they may have, you know, applications
that are federal in nature and have to go through FedRAMP they
may have that same application in a commercial environment,
which is governed by four different kinds of commercial
standards. So it gets like really messy really quick. So I
think it's, one, just like really understanding that you
you know that you need help, and that spreadsheets aren't doing
it for you and spreadsheets and email. And then two you know, if
that's not doing for you, right? What is? What are kind of the
core pieces of your workflow? And how do you start to, like,
chip away at it? You know, so for us, like, you know, we think
like, the first kind of step that you need to solve is, do
you understand all the things that you need to do? And who
needs to do them? And at what time? Do they need to do them?
So that you kind of get your hands around? The what is the
compliance problem that you're at your organization? Right? And
then the next piece of that is like, Okay, well, how do we then
start to automate more and more of this activity? And then how
do we get to this, like continuous state of continuous
compliance, you can, you know, continuous monitoring and
continuous visualization of what's going on. So, you know, I
think, what we see right now, there's the marketplace is kind
of, it's really wild. In this, it's a new category, like, it's
not even. It's not even something that you know, is on a
quadrant within like Gartner, Forrester, it's really spun up
in the last like, two years. So you got, you know, all of these
different types of organizations popping up. And they're, they're
finding a lot of product market fit, I think, specifically in
the lower lower end of the market for these tech startups.
Because, again, the startups needed need to show compliance
to sign contracts, right. So so I think there's some really good
things that have happened and the disruption or kind of the
creative destruction that's happened with it in terms of
what it's doing to, you know, the, the, the audit assurance
space, I think, is extremely healthy. But I think it's also
has a tendency to, hey, we're just gonna hack compliance,
right, which gets us back to the old ways of checking boxes,
right, it's like, just doing automated fashion, with a SAS
tool. So I think, you know, we've seen kind of various
things, and we're trying to be intentional about how we, how
we, how we make compliance easier, but we also realized
that it's still extremely hard, and it's still very valuable to
people's business, right? It's like you do business with
federal government, you have to be FedRAMP compliant. And it's
got seven figure implications, right? If you come out of
compliance, that can be hacked, right. So you know, make just
making sure that those tools like are going to fit your needs
and kind of your use case, making sure that you you kind of
sneak about it with the goals of the company, right? Like going
and hacking SOC 2, early on, like maybe what you need, right?
But if you get a start to expand on these other things, and let's
say FedRAMP is on your roadmap, you know, maybe it's not? So do
you have a tool that can grow with you and kind of accomplish
the things that you need to do? And then, you know, I think the
other thing, too, is just like, who is, you know, these tools
make a lot of claims, a lot of which that I think we as a
company and co founder disagree with, there's certain pieces of
compliance that can't be automated, right? So large
claims, like 70% of PCI can be automated. I find that to be I
find that hard to believe. And then I think, you know, along
with that, right, it's, can I support multiple business units
and have like, the same visibility is like that I have
with one.
And then to what extent does it, you know, connect into my
technology stack. So another thing that we've seen in the
marketplace is like, these tools are great for cloud services.
They're great for like infrastructures, service
providers, so they connect into Amazon and GCP. And some of
those in Azure. What they don't do is they don't, they don't do
anything at the operating system level, right, which is really
hard. And I think it's a problem that still needs to be solved.
But like, so. Yeah. Like, you may be automating certain
components, let's say for identity and access management,
and like, who has access and who has administrative access,
right? Like you can go and kind of pull and test some of those
things. But you're not, you're not doing that at an operating
system level. Right. So when we do when we look and evaluate
security, we get to evaluate the the actual application itself,
the underlying operating systems, and then the underlying
infrastructure. So it's like you're covering kind of 1/3 of
the technology stack, not, not too not all three. So again,
it's like, I think that comes with, you know, these are
product companies, not security companies. Again, I think it's
super healthy for like, what they're doing and how they're
pushing the industry to evolve and to get out of paper, but I
think at the same time, there's still a level of maturity that
that we have to kind of establish. And it'll be
interesting, I think, you know, to see like what type of
governance is applied to like, even those types of tools,
right? Like, yeah, you can go and do your your own kind of
like SOC 2 report, your own ISO 27,000 report. But, you know, I
don't, I'm not sure like, that's the type of assurance that we
need, we need better assurance that, you know, what is being
automated is legitimate. That, you know, the green, the green,
Harvey balls that show green are actually green, the Reds
actually red and you know, making sure that you know, what
it like, what it what we are reporting, what we are
automating, and, you know, where we see some of the auditors
consuming these tools and kind of, and still checking boxes,
right? Like, just making sure that there's some due diligence
that's done, or we're going to get in the situation where,
like, there, there's like, no trust, because it's all, you
know, a bunch of garbage so. So yeah, it's a real fascinating
subject, again, tons of money being thrown at it right now.
And we're just trying to kind of wade through it all, and be
thoughtful about how we're building it and what our
customers need. But there's certainly some some really great
technology out there that I think can can certainly make a
big difference, and allow organizations to scale without
having to hire, you know, armies of people to just manage
compliance, which is something it's a kind of common occurrence
that we see for very, very large organizations.
Yeah, very true. You know, when I, when I
think about this in the big scheme of things, and obviously,
from a cybersecurity perspective, where an
organization is trying to stay as secure as possible, and be
proactive in their approach, one of the goals of compliance would
be to ensure that all the relevant controls are in place,
and they are doing what they're supposed to do. But as you
pointed out, these tools can't be left to themselves, in the
sense, you have to do your own due diligence, to make sure the
tools do what they promised to do. In other words, you can't
become slaves of the tool, the organization has to have its own
governance team by whatever name, they are called, maybe the
compliance team to review the relevant tools, recognize the
shortcomings, document the shortcomings, and also document
how they plan to address the shortcomings this way, there is
greater transparency, that, yes, we have this tool, which is
going to help us enforce controls. But we also recognize
that there are areas where we may or may have to, you know,
use other approaches. So so we are coming back to taking a very
holistic approach to compliance management as opposed to a tool
driven approach where we are basically relying on what the
vendor tells us, and we're just going with it, which I don't
believe any, any company or any right thinking company will do.
But I think it's good to caution them about it. So I appreciate
that insight. What else do you think listeners could benefit
from learning about compliance management from an information
security standpoint? Or anything else that you think is pertinent
to this discussion that we haven't talked about yet? Yeah,
I
mean, I think we've covered covered quite a
bit. You know, I think, again, I think we can talk a lot about
how compliance is challenging. Again, I think there there's
certainly benefits of compliance. I think there's
benefits of, you know, industry standards. Like I've always
been, you know, a huge fan of how the how the PCI Council is
handled, like the PCI standards, in the sense that, you know, I
think what is common is like, you know, if you go talk to 100
100 customers, and ask about how they do risk management,
everybody does it differently. Some of them do it very
incorrectly. Some of them do it really well, right. And there's
a lot of in between so, so I think like, you know, their
stance, his stance, historically is just like, oh, well, we
don't, we don't have a lot of trust that organizations know
how to do risk management, and then apply the necessary
controls to address all the risks that face, you know,
payment security. So it's like, we're going to kind of do that
for you. Right and tell you there's a 300 things that you
need to do to be secure. And if you don't do it, you need to
tell us like what else you're doing and what they call a
compensating control worksheet. So I think those types of
approaches, I think you're super healthy, in many cases,
especially if you think about the different types of maturity
levels organizations that need to be PCI compliant. But then,
at the same time, it really hurts organizations in some
cases that take security very seriously and have been very
thoughtful about compensated, how they compensate for not
having something in place because they don't need to,
because the way their systems are architected, or a different
piece of technology that they have, in the backend that solves
that problem slightly different. So, you know, I think it's, it's
all about, you know, I think it's just like we learn
something new every day, and a new standard is released every
day. And, you know, I think the more that, you know, the the, I
think, you know, as all the scares last year with some of
the third party stuff that happened and breaches. And I
think the rigor that will now be placed on vendor management, I
just think it's going to be really interesting in kind of
how it all plays out how, what does trust look like, in three
years? What does it look in five years? What does it look like in
10 years? And can we keep up right, with the pace of all
these new regulations? Like, can people really afford to do it?
Or, you know, at what point does it become such a nuisance,
right? The organization's is like, can't support it any
longer, it's too expensive. So I think, you know, we've got to be
careful around, like, what we adopt and why we adopt it. Or
else, you know, I think it can be a detriment to like moving
forward to, you know, for funding that should be spent
more on actual security or other parts that kind of enable the
business. So. So certainly the thing, a lot of other things to
watch out for is, you know, in the coming years, as I think
we're going to continue to see more, more of the same, and then
there'll be some, there'll be some additional type of
disruption that happens and, but hard to see, you know, through
all the all the smoke in terms of what that's kind of
ultimately going to look like,
yep, yep. Very interesting. In fact, the
phrase that comes to mind, while you were talking about trust, is
trust, but verify, right? We can have all the tools in the world,
but we can't become slaves to automation, tools can do only so
much. They have to be backed by good governance mechanisms,
highly trained personnel, robust oversight. So it has to be a
multi pronged approach. Even when it comes to effective
compliance. While compliance is one aspect of security
governance, it can become a very effective aspect. Once again, if
there is a real intent, there's a real commitment behind it, as
opposed to trying to outsource it and saying, okay, we have
this vendor who can take take care of this for us, we have
their platform, they have their tool, and we can look the other
way, I don't think that works. And I think you spoke to that,
that there has to be oversight, there has to be ownership. And
that's when the process will go better. Because it's a evolving
landscape, it's a moving target. And conscientious organizations,
security concerned organizations must take very deliberate,
thoughtful steps. Well, Dixon, this has been a real pleasure.
Thank you very much for your time. And let's conclude with a
few final words, if you have any for the listeners.
Yeah, appreciate you. Appreciate you having me
on. So I have been trying to talk shop about this stuff. I
can geek out about it all day. But yeah, I think for those
listening and yeah, there's a, I would say there's a huge
opportunity for folks that, you know, have interest in kind of
getting in the security realm of, you know, following some
type of like, GRC path as an entry point. Like, there's not a
lot of experience that's required. Generally, you know,
you don't even need a college degree in some cases, right.
There's a lot of security certifications out there. While
I'm not really very big on those, right, like go and pursue
cloud certifications or security certifications, but but yeah,
great entry path into the security world. And then you can
kind of pivot where you want to go, but you get a lot of
exposure to a lot of different companies and a lot of different
kinds of security measures. And so it's a great primer for folks
wanting to join and not having a big kind of hurdle to get there.
So, we're always looking for great people. So, go look us up.
Fantastic, fantastic. Yep. The
opportunities are out there for people who are interested,
passionate, who are curious, who want to make a difference. So,
so yeah, sounds great. Well, thank you again, it has been a
pleasure. Thanks. A special thanks to Dixon Wright for his
time and insights. If you like what you heard, please leave the
podcast a rating and share it with your network. Also,
subscribe to the show, so you don't miss any new episodes.
Thank you for listening, and I'll see you in the next
episode.
The information contained in this podcast is for
general guidance only. The discussants assume no
responsibility or liability for any errors or omissions in the
content of this podcast. The information contained in this
podcast is provided on an as-is basis with no guarantee of
completeness, accuracy, usefulness, or timeliness. The
opinions and recommendations expressed in this podcast are
those of the discussants and not of any organization