How do you justify the value of incident response activities?

All metics are valuable. These metrics are valuable in gauging IR capabilities. Ultimately, economics will limit the feasibility of better performance in each area.

Justifying the value of incident response activities requires a nuanced approach to metrics. Beyond the typical response time and resolution metrics, consider measuring the effectiveness of preventive measures, like the percentage of incidents identified before causing harm. One thing I found helpful is establishing a robust framework that not only assesses reactive elements but also focuses on proactive measures. By quantifying the success of preventive strategies, we provide a more comprehensive view of our incident response capabilities.

While "information is power" can lead us to believe that more information is better, metrics are only as valuable as they can be used to improve processes and increase our ability to respond to incidents. When the term metrics are brought into a conversation, we stay in the quantitative realm of thinking, when we should also consider the qualitative metrics from our response teams, with regards to the policies, processes, and procedures that are used to govern our day-to-day incident response efforts. The quantitative metrics used to gauge the effectiveness of a team during an incident may lead to complacency with process improvement, where there could be team members that feel like the governing documentation is difficult to follow.

The value of incident response activities could be measured by a small number of escalations and customer satisfaction. Customer satisfaction will increase if incident resolution time is within the established SLA. Satisfaction can also be measured, for example, by a post incident survey.

Using visual aids in presenting timelines for an incident is useful to articulate IR metrics. Or if it is a routine review meeting, then you can bring up a dashboard about Mean Times (such as, Mean Time to Detect, Mean Time to Respond, Mean Time to Contain, Mean Time to Resolve) and compare it with previous time frame values.

Error budgets are another useful metric to identify what services within an application would benefit most from investment in reliability and response. An error budget represents the acceptable amount of system downtime or errors within a given time period. By tracking the error budget usage, organizations can identify areas where improvements are needed and allocate resources accordingly. For example, if the error budget is consistently exceeded, it may indicate a need for additional incident response training or infrastructure upgrades.

In Incident Response, the criteria for considering response efforts to be a success or failure is often the outcome of the incident, and whether or not it was handled appropriately. The true value (considering the definition of value to be the perceived benefit of a product or service) in the eyes of non-technical individuals or stakeholders is the information they are presented during and after an event/incident occurs. Without sufficient reporting, the true value of any incident response effort could be seen as a loss, or a "non-event", when in reality, it could have been a massive win.

IR reporting is a great opportunity to showcase wins and losses in defending against cyber threats. Don't let it pass you by. Reporting sessions for audiences of different types (hint: there are at least two) are key.

In the realm of incident response, reporting plays a crucial role in conveying the impact and effectiveness of your efforts. Tailoring reports to your audience is key—executives may value strategic insights, while technical teams may require detailed analysis. How should one approach reporting in incident response to ensure one's message resonates with diverse stakeholders? One thing I found helpful is creating a layered reporting structure. Start with a concise executive summary that highlights key strategic impacts, followed by more detailed sections for technical teams. This way, everyone gets the information they need without feeling overwhelmed.

Tailoring reports to different audiences ensures clarity and relevance—senior management requires insight into strategic impacts and alignment with business goals, while IT management needs technical details on operational effects. Security management focuses on risk and posture improvements, and legal/compliance management requires understanding of regulatory adherence. Business units benefit from knowing how IR supports their functions. By addressing each group’s specific concerns, reporting not only demonstrates IR’s value but also fosters cross-functional support and collaboration.

Incident response activities are invaluable for minimizing damage, protecting sensitive information, maintaining trust with customers, and ensuring business continuity. Best practices for IR metrics and reporting: 1. Response Time: Measure the time it takes to detect, contain, and mitigate incidents. This helps in evaluating the efficiency of the response process. 2. Incident Volume 3. Severity Levels 4. Resolution Rate 5. Root Cause Analysis 6. Customer Impact 7. Feedback Loop 8. Compliance Metrics 9. Training and Preparedness 10. Continuous Improvement: Regularly review incident response metrics and reporting processes to identify areas for improvement and optimize the overall incident response strategy.

It can be hard to justify value until an event occurs. Numbers of attacks help. So does a ticketing system that has the right types of metrics built in. It's not just resolution time but also false positive rates, false negative rates, and extent of infection.

Incident response adds value by swiftly addressing security incidents, minimizing damage, reducing financial losses, and enhancing overall cybersecurity preparedness through learning from incidents.

Step 1, or what I'd even consider to be Step 0, is to educate stakeholders and other key individuals on Incident Response (at a high-level) and to seek to understand their perspectives. If I am in an organization of highly technical individuals, my reporting would look different than if I were the only "technical" person in that organization. So the best practice would be to understand your key stakeholders and those you report to, and then develop your level of knowledge to be able to translate the "technical" bits to the appropriate audience and create effective and efficient reporting. Possessing that "translating" ability alone can set individuals and organizations apart from others.

Navigating the landscape of incident response metrics and reporting demands a set of best practices. Consider establishing a standardized reporting framework that aligns with industry benchmarks. Here are the top 3 things I believe one should consider when building such a framework: Clear Objectives: Define reporting goals aligned with organizational KPIs for actionable insights and overall effectiveness. Adapt to Stakeholders: Tailor the framework to diverse stakeholder needs, ensuring it serves various organizational levels effectively. Regular Review: In a dynamic IR landscape, regularly assess and adjust the framework based on evolving threats, organizational changes, and stakeholder feedback. Continuous improvement is vital.

I often speak with veterans that have served in technical capacities (cyber, intelligence, IT, etc.) across all branches and they often promote their hands-on technical acumen while overlooking other aspects of their careers that lend to other disciplines of cyber security. Having redundant equipment and a contingency plan of how to operate outside of ideal conditions is a foundational part of incident response, disaster recovery and business continuity planning. Veterans should always be encouraged to seek external input on how to interpret their time in service.

Explore the integration of AI and automation to enhance response times and accuracy. By leveraging AI-driven threat intelligence feeds one can significantly boost their incident response capabilities. Their systems can continuously monitor and analyze vast datasets, swiftly identifying patterns indicative of potential threats. Automating this initial analysis, response times can be dramatically improved, allowing responders to stay ahead of evolving threats and minimize the impact on systems.

#??0??1?? ?? Host a Question and Answer session, plus tell a story, and add in some humor: Q: How did the hacker get in? A: Someone left their Windows open. Q: How did hacker get away? A: Used the backdoor and ransomware. Q: Why couldn't the witness identify the hacker? A: Used Spyware and Subnet Mask to hide identity. Q: How did the hacker get caught? A: CSIRT used a Bug, to lure in Scattered Spider, and they got stuck in the Web. A2: The CSIRT used Python to Byte...well, let's just say that a little bird (a.k.a. Parrot) did some squawking, but now they are done talking. Q: What happened to the hacker after getting caught? A: Police made them WannaCry by clearing their cookies. A2: FBI made their Heartbleed by deleting their cache.

After I woke up to the fire alarm around 2:30am in my building last night I have some fresh insights. Luckily things were not as bad as they could have been but they were still bad. Without the prompt intervention from the fire dept we could have had multiple deaths. This got me thinking about incident response beyond metrics - into the realm of cost in terms of human suffering and loss on a scale that can’t be defined by numbers or monetary impacts. How do our incident response practices impact and protect our community? And to be clear yes, I urge you to consider your business or company workers as your community as well.