1 / 9

Collective Risk Discovery Event

Collective Risk Discovery Event. LESSONS LEARNED. June 18, 2013. Scenario Similarities. Collective Risk Recognition Where to go for information and assistance Capability requirements at multiple levels And across public and private spheres Impacts and Interdependencies

penney
Download Presentation

Collective Risk Discovery Event

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Collective Risk Discovery Event LESSONS LEARNED June 18, 2013 Confidential Information of RMTA

  2. Scenario Similarities • Collective Risk Recognition • Where to go for information and assistance • Capability requirements at multiple levels • And across public and private spheres • Impacts and Interdependencies • Cyber is not just IT

  3. Top Level Observations • Significance of an enabling body and structure • Requirement for an enabling instrumentality • Trust among participants first, foremost, and throughout • Trust Framework is paramount; absence is a show-stopper • The Discovery Event as catalyst for Trust Framework reinforcement and improvement • To WCX: Benefits of Sharing = Preaching to Choir • Not universally true • Challenge: Spreading the Good Word more broadly

  4. Key Findings • Category 1: Key Enablers • Category 2: Triggers to Sharing • Category 3: Barriers to Sharing

  5. Category 1: Key Enablers • Having a formal information sharing instrumentality • Ad hoc arrangements are insufficient • Trust-building facilitation to gird Trust Framework • Trust Framework • Comply with regulatory and stakeholder interests • Public sector: State Sunshine Law considerations; private sector: proprietary and compliance concerns • Leadership Buy-in • Sharing can be counter-intuitive • Business continuity messaging • Breach costs and liability exposures

  6. Category 2: Triggers to Sharing • Type of Attack and Scope of Attack Classifications • Collective Risk appreciation not always triggered • Data mining, DDOS, social media vs. virus infection, low level DOS • Exceeding Capacity • Network capacity • Expertise • Need for Intelligence and Situational Awareness • Nexus to Above Factors: what don’t you know? what do you need? • Key question: WHERE to go for answers? • Government role / private sector role and nexus to “collective risk”

  7. Category 3: Barriers to Sharing • State Sunshine Laws and Regulatory Provisions • Nexus to Trust Framework to resolve many issues • Competitive, Capitalist Marketplace • Default mindset to compete and protect brand and IP • Counter-intuitive concept to share vulnerabilities • Nexus to Trust Framework • Distrust of Government • Sharing data with regulators • Sharing data with distant Federal Government • Trust is local

  8. Core Conclusions • Community Information Sharing Hub is Essential • Convergence Point: Education, Information Sharing, Trust Building, Training, Outreach • Public-Private Partnership model • Trust is Local • Trust must be built and sustained • Trust Framework • Trust Building activities • WCX Forums are key enablers, in addition to broader WCX activities

  9. Western Cyber Exchange Doug DePeppe doug.depeppe@i2iscorp.com 719.785.0355

More Related