Quote for the day:
“You may be disappointed if you fail, but you are doomed if you don’t try.” -- Beverly Sills
Moving Beyond Compliance to True Resilience
Organisations that treat compliance as the finish line are missing the bigger
picture. Compliance frameworks such as HIPAA, GDPR, and PCI-DSS provide critical
guidelines, but they are not designed to cover the full spectrum of evolving
cyber threats. Cybercriminals today use AI-driven reconnaissance, deepfake
impersonations, and polymorphic phishing techniques to bypass traditional
defences. Meanwhile, businesses face growing attack surfaces from hybrid work
models and interconnected systems. A lack of leadership commitment, underfunded
security programs, and inadequate employee training exacerbate the problem. ...
Building resilience requires more than reactive policies, it calls for layered,
proactive defence mechanisms such as threat intelligence, endpoint detection and
response (EDR), and intrusion prevention systems (IPS). These are essential in
identifying and stopping threats before they can cause damage which should be at
the front line of defence. Ultimately reducing exposure and giving teams the
visibility they need to act swiftly. ... True cyber resilience means moving
beyond regulatory compliance to develop strategic capabilities that protect
against, respond to, and recover from evolving threats. This includes
implementing both offensive and defensive security layers, such as penetration
testing and real-time intrusion prevention, to identify weaknesses before
attackers do.Architecture Debt vs Technical Debt: Why Companies Confuse Them and What It Costs Business
The contrast is clear: technical debt reflects inefficiencies at the system
level — poorly structured code, outdated infrastructure, or quick fixes that
pile up over time. Architecture debt emerges at the enterprise level —
structural weaknesses across applications, data, and processes that manifest
as duplication, fragmentation, and misalignment. One constrains IT efficiency;
the other constrains business competitiveness. Recognizing this difference is
the first step toward making the right strategic investments. ... The
difference lies in visibility: technical debt is tangible for developers,
showing up in unstable code, infrastructure issues, and delayed releases.
Architecture debt, by contrast, hides in organizational complexity: duplicated
platforms, fragmented data, and misaligned processes. When CIOs and business
leaders hear the word “debt,” they often assume it refers to the same
challenge. It does not. ... Recognizing this distinction is critical
because it determines where investments should be made. Addressing technical
debt improves efficiency within systems; addressing architecture debt
strengthens the foundations of the enterprise. One enables smoother
operations, while the other ensures long-term competitiveness and resilience.
Leaders who fail to separate the two-risk solving local problems while leaving
the structural weaknesses that undermine the organization’s future
unchallenged.Data Fitness in the Age of Emerging Privacy Regulations
Enter the concept of Data Fitness: a multidimensional measure of how well data
aligns with privacy principles, business objectives, and operational resilience.
Much like physical fitness, data fitness is not a one-time achievement but a
continuous discipline. Data fitness is not just about having high-quality data,
but also about ensuring that data is managed in a way that is compliant, secure,
and aligned with business objectives. ... The emerging privacy regulations have
also introduced a new layer of complexity to data management. They shift the
focus from simply collecting and monetizing data to a more responsible and
transparent approach, which call for sweeping review and redesign of all
applications and processes that handles data. ... The days of storing customer
data forever are over. New regulations often specify that personal data can only
be retained for as long as it's needed for the purpose for which it was
collected. This requires companies to implement robust data lifecycle management
and automated deletion policies. ... Data privacy isn't just an IT or legal
issue; it's a shared responsibility. Organizations must educate and train all
employees on the importance of data protection and the specific policies they
need to follow. A strong privacy culture can be a competitive advantage,
building customer trust and loyalty. ... It's no longer just about leveraging
data for profit; it's about being a responsible steward of personal
information.
Independent Management of Cloud Secrets
An independent approach to NHI management can empower DevOps teams by automating the lifecycle of secrets and identities, thus ensuring that security doesn’t compromise speed or agility. By embedding secrets management into the development pipeline, teams can preemptively address potential overlaps and misconfigurations, as highlighted in the resource on common secrets security misconfigurations. Moreover, NHIs’ automation capabilities can assist DevOps enterprises in meeting regulatory audit requirements without derailing their agile processes. This harmonious blend of compliance and agility allows for a framework that effectively bridges the gap between speed and security. ... Automation of NHI lifecycle processes not only saves time but also fortifies systems by means of stringent access control. This is critical in large-scale cloud deployments, automated renewal and revocation of secrets ensure uninterrupted and secure operations. More insightful strategies can be explored in Secrets Security Management During Development. ... While the integration of systems provides comprehensive security benefits, there is an inherent risk in over-relying on interconnected solutions. Enterprises need a balanced approach that allows for collaboration between systems without compromising individual segment vulnerabilities. A delicate balance is found by maintaining independent secrets management systems, which operate cohesively but remain distinct from operational systems.Why cloud repatriation is back on the CIO agenda
Cost pressure often stems from workload shape. Steady, always-on services do not
benefit from pay-as-you-go pricing. Rightsizing, reservations and architecture
optimization will often close the gap, yet some services still carry a higher
unit cost when they remain in public cloud. A placement change then becomes a
sensible option. Three observations support a measurement-first approach. Many
organizations report that managing cloud spend is their top challenge; egress
fees and associated patterns affect a growing share of firms, and the finops
community places unit economics and allocation at the centre of cost
accountability. ... Public cloud remains viable for many regulated workloads,
assisted by sovereign configurations. Examples include the AWS European
Sovereign Cloud (scheduled to be released at the end of 2025), the Microsoft EU
Data Boundary and Google’s sovereign controls and partner offerings. These
options have scope limits that should be assessed during design. Public cloud
remains viable for many regulated workloads when sovereign configurations meet
requirements. ... Repatriation tends to underperform where workloads are
inherently elastic or seasonal, where high-value managed services would need to
be replicated at significant opportunity cost, where the organization lacks the
run maturity for private platforms, or where the cost issues relate primarily to
tagging, idle resources or discount coverage that a FinOps reset can address.
Colocation meets regulation
While there have been many instances of behind-the-meter agreements in the data center sector, the AWS-Talen agreement differed in both scale and choice of energy. Unlike previous instances, often utilizing onsite renewables, the AWS deal involved a regional key generation asset, which provides consistent and reliable power to the grid. As a result, to secure the go-ahead, PJM Interconnection, the regional transmission operator in charge of the utility services in the state, had to apply for an amendment to the plant's existing Interconnection Service Agreement (ISA), permitting the increased power supply. However, rather than the swift approval the companies hoped for, two major utilities that operate in the region, Exelon and American Electric Power (AEP), vehemently opposed the amended ISA, submitting a formal objection to its provisions. ... Since the rejection by FERC, Talen and AWS have reimagined the agreement, with it moving from behind to an in-front-of-the-meter arrangement. The 17-year PPA will see Talen supply AWS with 1.92GW of power, ramped up over the next seven years, with the power provided through PJM. This reflects a broader move within the sector, with both Talen and nuclear energy generator Constellation indicating their intention to focus on grid-based arrangements going forward. Despite this, Phillips still believes that under the correct circumstances, colocation can be a powerful tool, especially for AI and hyperscale cloud deployments seeking to scale quickly.Employees learn nothing from phishing security training, and this is why
Phishing training programs are a popular tactic aimed at reducing the risk of a
successful phishing attack. They may be performed annually or over time, and
typically, employees will be asked to watch and learn from instructional
materials. They may also receive fake phishing emails sent by a training partner
over time, and if they click on suspicious links within them, these failures to
spot a phishing email are recorded. ... "Taken together, our results suggest
that anti-phishing training programs, in their current and commonly deployed
forms, are unlikely to offer significant practical value in reducing phishing
risks," the researchers said. According to the researchers, a lack of engagement
in modern cybersecurity training programs is to blame, with engagement rates
often recorded as less than a minute or none at all. When there is no engagement
with learning materials, it's unsurprising that there is no impact. ... To
combat this problem, the team suggests that, for a better return on investment
in phishing protection, a pivot to more technical help could work. For example,
imposing two or multi-factor authentication (2FA/MFA) on endpoint devices, and
enforcing credential sharing and use on only trusted domains. That's not to say
that phishing programs don't have a place in the corporate world. We should also
go back to the basics of engaging learners.
SOC teams face 51-second breach reality—Manual response times are officially dead
When it takes just 51 seconds for attackers to breach and move laterally, SOC
teams need more help. ... Most SOC teams first aim to extend ROI from existing
operations investments. Gartner's 2025 Hype Cycle for Security Operations notes
that organizations want more value from current tools while enhancing them with
AI to handle an expansive threat landscape. William Blair & Company's
Sept. 18 note on CrowdStrike predicts that "agentic AI potentially represents a
100x opportunity in terms of the number of assets to secure," with TAM projected
to grow from $140 billion this year to $300 billion by 2030. ... Kurtz's
observation reflects concerns among SOC leaders and CISOs across industries.
VentureBeat sees enterprises experimenting with differentiated architectures to
solve governance challenges. Shlomo Kramer, co-founder and CEO of Cato Networks,
offered a complementary view in a VentureBeat interview: "Cato uses AI
extensively… But AI alone can't solve the range of problems facing IT teams. The
right architecture is important both for gathering the data needed to drive AI
engines, but also to tackle challenges like agility, connecting enterprise
edges, and user experience." Kramer added, "Good AI starts with good data. Cato
logs petabytes weekly, capturing metadata from every transaction across the SASE
Cloud Platform. We enrich that data lake with hundreds of threat feeds, enabling
threat hunting, anomaly detection, and network degradation detection."Timeless inclusive design techniques for a world of agentic AI
Progressive enhancement and inclusive design allow us to design for as many
users as possible. They are core components of user-centered design. The word
"user" often hides the complex magnificence of the human being using your
product, in all their beautiful diversity. And it’s this rich diversity that
makes inclusive design so important. We are all different, and use things
differently. While you enjoy that sense of marvel at the richness and wonder of
your users' lives, there is no need to feel it for AI agents. These agents are
essentially just super-charged "stochastic parrots" (to borrow a phrase from
esteemed AI ethicist and professor of Computational Linguistics Emily M. Bender)
guessing the next token. ... Every breakthrough since we learnt to make fire has
been built on what came before. Isaac Newton said he could only see so far
because he was "standing on the shoulders of giants". The techniques and
approaches needed to enable this new wave of agent-powered AI devices have been
around for a long time. But they haven't always been used. In our desire to ship
the shiniest features, we often forget to make our products work for people who
rely on accessibility features. ... Patterns are things like adding a "skip
to content link" and implementing form validation in a way that makes it easier
to recover from errors. Alongside patterns, there are a wealth of freely
available accessibility testing tools that can tell you if your product is
meeting necessary standards.
No comments:
Post a Comment