Cyber Security Managed Services

Whenever a breach occurs it reveals weaknesses in how an organization approached security.  Compromises are a great way to reveal the hidden sins organizations are committing.  In the case of the Target breach, it is a gift that keeps on giving.  While the initial breach report came out in December, it seems every week there are new “interesting” details that are revealed.  One of the more recent items is the fact that Target did not have a CSO and all security responsibilities were buried under the CIO.

The first question that people ask is whether the CIO should have been held responsible for the breach.  The bottom line is when a major event like this occurs; someone needs to be held responsible for the negligence.  Therefore it is not surprising that someone was blamed for the breach.  What was surprising is that security was a responsibility of the CIO.  Computer Security Services The fact that a large organization did not have a separate CSO that is a peer with the CIO, is what is most concerning about the story.  Clearly many things went wrong during the breach and whoever had the responsibility of security needs to be held accountable.  However, it was not fair that the executives structured the company in this manner.  Running the IT infrastructure (typically a role of the CIO) and protecting the information (typically a role of the CSO) are two different roles and it is unfair to have one person expected to do both effectively.  These roles while at times can be complementary, they are often at odds.  Having security buried under the CIO, puts that person in a conflict of interest situation.

First and foremost, organizations of any size, especially one the size of Target needs to have an executive that is responsible for security.  With the large interdependence organizations have on a digital infrastructure, security needs to have a seat at the table in the boardroom.  If security gets buried under IT, whose primary responsibility is running a reliable infrastructure, bad decisions will be made and breaches will happen. 

computer security service

Whenever a breach occurs it reveals weaknesses in how an organization approached security.  Compromises are a great way to reveal the hidden sins organizations are committing.  In the case of the Target breach, it is a gift that keeps on giving.  While the initial breach report came out in December, it seems every week there are new “interesting” details that are revealed.  One of the more recent items is the fact that Target did not have a CSO and all security responsibilities were buried under the CIO.

The first question that people ask is whether the CIO should have been held responsible for the breach.  The bottom line is when a major event like this occurs; someone needs to be held responsible for the negligence.  Therefore it is not surprising that someone was blamed for the breach.  What was surprising is that security was a responsibility of the CIO.  Computer Security Services The fact that a large organization did not have a separate CSO that is a peer with the CIO, is what is most concerning about the story.  Clearly many things went wrong during the breach and whoever had the responsibility of security needs to be held accountable.  However, it was not fair that the executives structured the company in this manner.  Running the IT infrastructure (typically a role of the CIO) and protecting the information (typically a role of the CSO) are two different roles and it is unfair to have one person expected to do both effectively.  These roles while at times can be complementary, they are often at odds.  Having security buried under the CIO, puts that person in a conflict of interest situation.

First and foremost, organizations of any size, especially one the size of Target needs to have an executive that is responsible for security.  With the large interdependence organizations have on a digital infrastructure, security needs to have a seat at the table in the boardroom.  If security gets buried under IT, whose primary responsibility is running a reliable infrastructure, bad decisions will be made and breaches will happen. 

Computer Security Services

Where you place the camera lens is important. The distance of the camera from its subject should be carefully considered, making sure the right areas are in focus and clearly visible. If you mount a camera to a wall or structure, Information Security Service make sure it's mounted properly so the camera won't shake and distort the picture. Outdoor cameras can deter criminals from ever attempting a break-in, and they can cover large areas, but a camera placed outside should have an appropriate weatherproof casing to protect it from the elements. Tough casings can also prevent tampering or vandalism.

You should also determine whether or not you'll want to record your surveillance. If you're simply making sure your children are safe while playing or monitoring who comes to the front door, a direct video feed with no recorder should be sufficient. But if you wish to see what's happening in a particular area over long periods of time, you should connect a recording system that's compatible with your security cameras. Some people use VCRs to record video, while others run the whole system via a computer and save information digitally. To avoid wasting video, some surveillance systems have motion detectors that only begin recording once the device picks up movement within the area.

As you can see, there are many video surveillance options available. Choosing the right one for your personal needs is a matter of knowing how you want it to work for you.