Essential Tips for Avoiding Mistakes in Your Security Incident Response
Experiencing a ransomware attack or any security breach is incredibly stressful, and the situation can quickly worsen if the response isn’t handled properly. If an organization mismanages the investigation into the incident, it can lead to even greater financial losses. One cybersecurity expert, Jake Williams, who is known for his background in the U.S. National Security Agency and as a consultant at Hunter Strategy, often stresses this point. After being brought in to clean up after a poorly conducted investigation, he took to social media to emphasize: “This is NOT something you can just do yourself.”
In some cases, mistakes made during these investigations can result in losses that reach into the millions. Williams pointed out that common error patterns, largely stemming from a phenomenon known as “confirmation bias,” can lead teams astray. According to him, investigators may form a hypothesis about how an attack occurred and then only look for evidence that supports that theory, ignoring data that contradicts it. This failure to welcome dissenting evidence can skew the entire forensic report, leaving critical questions unanswered.
Williams shared a specific example involving a Fortune 1000 company where hackers exploited vulnerabilities like SQL injection and directory traversal to infiltrate multiple servers. Following the investigation, both the Chief Information Security Officer (CISO) and Chief Information Officer (CIO) lost their jobs because of the fallout from the breach. What was most alarming was that investigators jumped to conclusions about which server was the initial entry point, only to find out later that it was compromised well after the attackers had gained access through a different method.
In a different light, industry experts like Microsoft’s Director of Incident Response, Ping Look, noted that victims of such attacks often react with a sense of urgency akin to receiving serious medical news. Their emotions can cloud judgment, causing them to overlook essential steps. Failure to scope the investigation appropriately can lead to continued vulnerabilities and insufficient incident resolution.
One common error is rushing into remediation while ignoring the crucial task of evidence preservation. This rush can lead to critical data loss, complicating efforts to fully understand the attack’s impact. James Perry from CrowdStrike explained how the drive to restore normal operations can sometimes overshadow the need to conduct a thorough investigation and maintain a detailed incident report. Establishing a timeline and documenting all findings is essential for identifying gaps and understanding the full scope of an incident.
Ransomware incidents add an extra layer of complexity due to the immediate pressure they create. Organizations often scramble to restore functionality while simultaneously addressing the ongoing threat. The lack of tested response plans often leads to poorly coordinated efforts that can exacerbate the problems, such as incomplete restorations that may result in reinfection.
Once ransomware infiltrates a system, the situation can quickly turn desperate. Cybercriminals often exfiltrate sensitive data before locking it, creating further complications. Many organizations may struggle to determine what has been stolen and how it may affect them, especially when log data is limited or security tools have been disabled by the attackers. The inability to grasp the full extent of the attack can hinder effective recovery and compliance with necessary reporting.
Cybersecurity experts consistently underscore the importance of having a well-prepared incident response (IR) plan in place. Organizations should consider having an incident response retainer to ensure that expert help is readily accessible in times of crisis. Collaborating with multiple vendors can also create a more effective investigative environment, contrary to the belief that keeping vendors separate improves security.
Investing in significant system updates and development can reduce the attack surface and enhance resilience against future incidents. It’s often more cost-effective to rebuild systems than to attempt cleaning them post-breach, as remnants of malware can linger even after thorough remediation efforts. Cybersecurity professionals recommend a slow, methodical approach during investigations, allowing time to accurately capture critical evidence and avoid hastily made conclusions that may inadvertently lead to further complications in the recovery process.
In summary, organizations must prioritize preparedness, collaboration, and careful investigation management in response to cyberattacks to navigate the risks effectively and mitigate losses during an incident.
