How can you compare cloud and traditional incident response frameworks?

1 Cloud IR Frameworks

Cloud IR frameworks are designed to address the specific characteristics and challenges of cloud computing, such as shared responsibility, scalability, elasticity, automation, and multi-tenancy. Cloud IR frameworks typically follow the same general phases as traditional IR frameworks, such as preparation, identification, containment, eradication, recovery, and lessons learned. However, cloud IR frameworks may require different tools, techniques, and procedures for each phase, depending on the cloud service model (IaaS, PaaS, or SaaS) and deployment model (public, private, or hybrid) that the organization uses. For example, cloud IR frameworks may rely more on cloud-native tools and APIs, such as cloud log management, cloud security posture management, and cloud incident response orchestration. Cloud IR frameworks may also need to account for the legal and contractual obligations and limitations of the cloud service provider (CSP), such as data sovereignty, service level agreements, and incident notification.

2 Traditional IR Frameworks

Traditional IR frameworks are based on the assumption that the organization has full control and visibility over its own infrastructure, network, and data. Traditional IR frameworks typically follow a standard set of phases and best practices, such as the NIST SP 800-61 or the SANS Incident Handling Process. Traditional IR frameworks may use a variety of tools and techniques for each phase, such as network and host-based forensics, malware analysis, threat intelligence, and incident response playbooks. Traditional IR frameworks may also need to comply with the regulatory and industry standards and requirements that apply to the organization, such as PCI DSS, HIPAA, or ISO 27001.

3 Hybrid IR Frameworks

Hybrid IR frameworks are a combination of cloud and traditional IR frameworks, that aim to address the complexities and challenges of operating in a hybrid environment, where some systems and data are hosted on-premises and some are hosted in the cloud. Hybrid IR frameworks may require a higher level of coordination and integration between the cloud and traditional IR teams, tools, and processes, to ensure a consistent and effective response across the hybrid environment. Hybrid IR frameworks may also need to balance the benefits and risks of using both cloud-native and traditional IR capabilities, such as scalability, automation, visibility, and control.

4 Framework Comparison

Comparing cloud and traditional IR frameworks can help organizations understand the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, and how to leverage them for their specific needs and goals. Factors that can be used to compare the two frameworks include scope, speed, complexity, and flexibility. For example, cloud IR frameworks may have a broader scope than traditional IR frameworks, as they may cover multiple cloud service models, deployment models, and CSPs. Additionally, they may have an advantage in speed over traditional IR frameworks due to automation, orchestration, and scalability. However, cloud IR frameworks may be more complex than traditional ones due to more layers, components, and dependencies. Lastly, they may have more flexibility than traditional IR frameworks as they may allow for more customization.

5 Framework Selection

Selecting the right IR framework for an organization depends on several factors, such as size, industry, risk profile, security maturity, and business objectives. To help organizations select the right framework, they should assess the current state of their information systems and assets to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities. Additionally, they should define the goals and requirements of the IR process and evaluate the available frameworks to compare features, benefits, and drawbacks. Furthermore, they should choose the framework that best fits their context and expectations and implement it with the appropriate resources. Finally, they should monitor and measure the performance and effectiveness of the IR framework while updating it based on feedback and lessons learned.

6 Framework Improvement

Organizations can continuously improve their incident response (IR) framework through regular training and awareness programs for the IR team and stakeholders, periodic audits and reviews, simulated exercises and scenarios, data and metrics collection, and incorporating feedback and lessons learned. These activities ensure that the IR framework has the necessary skills, knowledge, and confidence to handle incidents, is compliant with relevant standards and regulations, is ready for any situation, can measure its performance and impact, and can update its tools, techniques, and procedures to prevent or mitigate future incidents.

7 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?