Even if you do give “informed” consent, do you really understand what we’re doing with your data? Heck, we don’t know what we’re going to do with it yet, but we sure know we want a lot of it. It’s all coming up on this week’s episode of CISO/Security Vendor Relationship Podcast.



This episode is hosted by me, David Spark (@dspark), producer of CISO Series and founder of Spark Media Solutions and Mike Johnson. Our guest this week is Francesco Cipollone (@FrankSEC42), head of security architecture and strategy, HSBC Global Banking and Markets.

Thanks to this week’s podcast sponsor ExtraHop

Unlike security solutions that focus on signature- and rule-based detection, ExtraHop Reveal(x) helps you rise above the noise of alerts with complete east-west visibility and machine learning for real-time detection of known and unknown threats, plus guided investigations for rapid response. Find and address real threats faster with ExtraHop.

Got feedback? Join the conversation on LinkedIn.

On this week’s episode

Should you ignore this security advice?

This is advice you should not ignore. It comes from an article by Jonathan Jaffe, director of information security at People.ai where he offered up a great recipe for startup security. We discussed standout tips and were there any disagreements or omissions?

Close your eyes. Breathe in. It’s time for a little security philosophy.

Phil Huggins, GoCardless, said, “If we don’t know what value is in our data until it has been enriched and analysed can we give informed consent as to its use?”

What’s Worse?!

We’re concerned with the state of data in this game.

Ask a CISO

Mike Baier, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, asks, “When faced with the scenario of the vendor providing a recent SOC 2 Type 2 report, and then tells you that their internal policies/procedures are considered ‘highly confidential’ and cannot be shared, what tips would you provide for language that could help cause the vendor to provide the required documentation?”

The 1979 movie When a Stranger Calls gave us that unforgettable horror moment when the police informed Jill that the calls from the stalker were coming from inside the house. Nineteen years earlier, Hitchcock’s Psycho did a similar type of thing with the shower scene. We humans have a real problem when danger pops up in the place we feel safest – our homes. A similar problem happens in corporate IT security. We place a great deal of attention on watching for external hackers, as well as those that seek to dupe our overstressed employees into clicking that spearfishing link. What was it that Edward Hermann’s character, the vampire, said in the Lost Boys? “You have to invite us in.”

But what about internal bad actors? There are those who see great opportunity in accessing, stealing and selling company resources – data – like social security numbers, credit card numbers and medical files.

Experts have determined that it is indeed health care, manufacturing, and financial services that suffer this type of cybercrime the most. Personal data can be sold on the black market, but it can also be used to obtain new credit cards, houses, basically anything that the entrusted documents support. Most of these documents and data represent a “person” and have unlimited value because of this.

In addition to staff saboteurs, internal employee data can also be used to impersonate employees either when logging on to the network, or even showing up in person and posing as Pat from Accounting. Vigilance against this type of cybercrime is just one more building block in the trustless society, although not a fun one.

Check out lots more cloud security tips sponsored by OpenVPN, provider of next-gen secure and scalable communication software. OpenVPN Access Server keeps your company’s data safe with end-to-end encryption, secure remote access, and extension for your centralized UTM.

OK, what’s the risk?

A question from Robert Samuel, CISO, Government of Nova Scotia that I edited somewhat. It’s commonly said that the business has the authority for risk-trade off decisions and that security is there just to provide information about the risk and measurement of the risk. I’m going to push this a little. Is this always the case? Do you sometimes disagree with the business or is it your attitude of “I communicated the risk, it’s time for me to tap out.”