full-disclosure - Re: Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <m2wf37852831004221708qdeafd3cbq427036335d394756@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:08:16 -0700
From: Mike Hale <eyeronic.design@...il.com>
To: Christopher Gilbert <motoma@...il.com>
Cc: full-disclosure <full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk>,
	security-basics@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Compliance Is Wasted Money, Study Finds

Their conclusions are based, IMO, on a flawed methodology.

With some conservative assumptions, the paper indicates that companies
actually spend 50% of their budget protecting secrets versus 20% on
complying with external regulations.

I wrote up a more thorough response which I'll post in a few days when
I've proof-read it some more.

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Christopher Gilbert <motoma@...il.com> wrote:
> The paper concludes that companies are underinvesting in--or improperly
> prioritizing--the protection of their secrets. Nowhere does it state that
> the money spent on compliance is money wasted.
>
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 5:44 PM, Mike Hale <eyeronic.design@...il.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> I find the findings completely flawed.  Am I missing something?
>
>

-- 
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/