Preventing a Product Security Crisis
Matthew Rosenquist
CISO at Mercury Risk. - Formerly Intel Corp, Cybersecurity Strategist, Board Advisor, Keynote Speaker, 190k followers
The video conference company Zoom has skyrocketed to new heights and plummeted to new lows in the past few weeks. It is one of the handful of communications applications that is perfectly suited to a world beset by quarantine actions, yet has fallen far from grace because of poor security, privacy, and transparency. Governments, major companies, and throngs of users have either publicly criticized or completely abandoned the product. In a time of unimaginable potential growth, Zoom is sputtering to stay relevant, fend off competition, and emerge intact.
Avoiding Total Loss of Product Confidence
There are lessons to be learned, applicable to all product and service companies, to avoid such gruesome misfortune. Leadership of every organization should be taking an introspective look to understand how they can best prevent such missteps and determine how they might respond in times of such crisis.
Zoom is a teleconference platform that has proven to be scalable and effective at bringing groups together to collaborate remotely. It is in a competitive field where features, time-to-market, performance, and usability are crucial to success. This is true for so many products, services, and businesses. Often in such environments, management possesses a razor-sharp focus being competitive which means getting products and new features out to the market as fast as possible.
There are costs to such a narrow focus. Accuracy in marketing messages can be overlooked. Documentation quality is often sacrificed. More importantly, it is very common that security is also deprioritized as an acceptable tradeoff. This is where the shortsightedness begins.
Security is a foundation for trust. What is easily seen as a distraction by engineers and executives during the frantic development cycles, that can be addressed ‘later’, will introduce fundamental weakness that compound over time which can be exploited.
This is where Zoom is at. The organization is feeling the pain and chaos of decisions made far earlier, during product development, that are now emerging due to the rapid growth and adoption of their solution.
A number of issues have arisen that have customers, governments, and stockholders questioning the leadership and confidence in the product. There was a privacy issue that harvested user data and sent it to Facebook without consent. Default designs that allowed incidents of harassment, called “Zoombombing”, to the embarrassment and fury of users. The inaccuracy of marketing claims of End-to-End (E2E) security and an inaccurate privacy policy. The architecture design and code that has many vulnerabilities and that does not protect E2E the privacy of sessions between parties. Then there was the choice to use data center assets in China where they stored sensitive information but did not inform customers who are very uncomfortable to such configurations. Now Zoom faces grave and very public concerns regarding the trust in management’s commitment for secure products, the respect for user privacy, the honesty of its marketing, and the design decisions that preserve a positive user experience.
Learning from Failures
The lesson is straightforward. All the issues Zoom is facing could and should have been addressed earlier, well before they have exploded in spectacular fashion. This is the key takeaway for everyone: a lack of investment for security and privacy in the development phases can manifest into devastating consequences. Every organization should be evaluating their DevOps security programs. They should be re-evaluating the role and value of security during product design, development, updates, and sustaining operations. Zoom is showcasing the severe consequences of ignoring proper risk management. They aren’t the first, but the world is changing and peoples’ tolerance and patience for such issues is evolving to be less forgiving. Zoom and every other product company must adapt to meet the growing expectations for security, privacy, and safety.
-----------------------------------------
How can Zoom recover?
For those interested in how Zoom should be addressing the systemic issues they face during their product crisis, I recommend the Zoom in crisis: How to respond and manage product security incidents article on HelpNetSecurity, where I break down a number of issues and steps for resolution.
Common sense 1st. I speak & think for myself, not for ANY organization, branch, company or government.
4 年Too much focus on making money and not on security which is key in communication platforms
CEO CIP. Fellow Cyber Theory Institute. Director Fintech & Cyber Security Alliance (FITCA) working with Governments. NAMED AN EXPERT IN INTERNET ASSET & DNS VULNERABILITIES
4 年The rate of crash and burn through inadequately bringing in the right experts and not prioritising security once again proves you ignore such a critical area at your peril. Travelex's year from Boom to near bust is a similar story. When will organisations learn and there's plenty of experts!
Chief Information Digital Officer | Operational Excellence | High Performance Team Builder | Modernization Champion
4 年Great read Matthew Rosenquist. I looked at the LinkedIn profile of the Zoom CEO and I see a transition from VP of Engineering at Cisco to CEO for Zoom. While the CEO for Zoom built an incredible following and a successful company which is a huge accomplishment, it really comes down to CEO skills of knowing the business from all angles. Unfortunately for the CEO, this is now a public company and Boards don't have the patience for major missteps that plunged the company with a self-inflicted wound.
Human Security Champion | Highly Customized Security Awareness | Consumer Fraud | 40 Years In Cyber | Brain and Mental Health Advocate
4 年I believe that Zoom's failure was in ethics and not security. We'd have to believe that this incredibly deep and experienced management team never in nearly a decade of business and two decades on the leading edge of video conferencing thought about these issues, predicated them, tested for them, hired people like Alex Stamos years ago and not after they were busted as part of an apology tour. This is not lax security. This was an absence of integrity. These were not complex security and privacy issues, they were all "duh" issues.