The purpose of the “Don’t Wait: The Evolution of Proactive Threat Hunting” survey, sponsored by Raytheon, is to examine how organizations are deploying managed security services to strengthen their security posture. The research also looks at the critical success factors, barriers and challenges to having a successful relationship with managed security services providers.
We surveyed 1,784 chief information security officers and other senior IT security leaders in North America, Europe, Middle East and Asia Pacific who are familiar with their organizations’ managed security service practices. Managed security services providers (MSSPs) are engaged by organizations to manage and strengthen their IT environment’s security by providing services including security information and event management (SIEM), network security management (NSM), endpoint detection and response (EDR), incident response, forensics and more.
Security tools such as anti-virus, firewalls, intrusion detection and sandbox technologies, are built upon the assumption that attackers adhere to a known set of tools and tactics. Today, while a majority of MSSPs focus on these traditional, reactive tools, some provide more advanced, proactive services. Proactive threat hunting services can effectively find sophisticated and damaging threats, including previously undetected attacks, and stop them before businesses suffer damage.
In this study, 56 percent of respondents use an MSSP and 22 percent say they plan to engage an MSSP in the future. Part 2 of this report provides analysis of the 56 percent who are engaged with a provider. In many cases, it is a serious security incident such as a data breach that motivates companies to engage an MSSP to strengthen their security posture.
A key takeaway is that organizations using MSSPs understand the primary benefits of leveraging external expertise. Eighty percent view MSS as essential, very important or important to their overall IT security strategy. Figure 1 shows the primary reason to have an MSSP is to improve security posture (59 percent). This is followed closely by the need to reduce the challenge of recruiting and retaining necessary talent (58 percent) and the lack of in-house security technologies (57 percent).
The following are the seven most salient research findings.
1. MSSPs help companies achieve a stronger security posture. With evolving cyber threats, organizations face the critical challenge of lack of expertise, personnel and resources. MSSPs are seen as filling these gaps to improve their security.
Many organizations worldwide still typically wait until after a breach before the money is allocated to engage an MSSP. Two-thirds of organizations not currently using an MSSP say that the top trigger would be a significant data loss resulting from an IT security incident.
A breach would confirm that the organization’s risk of compromise is high, so it becomes a priority.
2. A shift from reactive services to proactive services offered by providers and demanded by organizations is occurring but is still in the early stages. The lack of proactive threat hunting services could be contributing to the daily barrage of media headlines about data breaches in organizations worldwide. It highlights a need for organizations to be doing more to protect their networks from the most insidious threats. Currently, MSSPs offer cybersecurity assessment (39 percent), integration services (31 percent) and digital forensics and incident response (DFIR) engineering and/or assessment (28 percent). Only 16 percent say their MSS offers proactive threat hunting to find advanced threats based on behaviors and anomalies.
3. Interoperability with security intelligence tools such as SIEM is essential or very important. When asked what characteristics of MSSPs are essential or very important, the number one feature is high interoperability with the company’s security intelligence tools, such as SIEM (73 percent). Also critical are speedy deployment (65 percent), round-the-clock threat monitoring and management (63 percent), a tried and tested service offering (62 percent) and scalability of services (61 percent). Not as critical are compliance with data protection requirements (52 percent) and indemnification for service failures (36 percent)\
Whether organizations use MSSPs or not, interoperability/integration between MSSP and the customer is top priority. Those currently not using one say it is difficult to find MSSPs that would support or integrate with their systems and requirements. Fifty-three percent list difficulty finding vendors strong in interoperability as the reason they choose not to outsource.
4. MSSPs provide insights about security events and a better understanding of the external threat environment. Sixty-five percent of respondents believe their MSSP leverages insight gained from monitoring a large number of security events from a global customer base and 53 percent say the MSSP helps to better understand the external threat environment through the collection and analysis of information on attackers, methods and motives. More than half (51 percent) say it effectively mitigates the risks after they are identified.
5. MSSPs have identified existing software vulnerabilities that are more than three months old. Fifty-four percent of respondents say their MSSPs identified exploits of existing software vulnerabilities greater than three months old, and 45 percent say exploits of existing software vulnerabilities less than three months old have been discovered. They also revealed Web-borne malware attacks (51 percent). New threats are often going undetected because typical providers are not actively identifying new threats but importing threats identified by industry into their toolsets.
6. Responsibility for relationships with MSSPs is shifting. Fifty-nine percent say responsibility for the MSSP is shifting from IT to the lines of business. Today, however, the IT (43 percent) or IT security professional (15 percent) owns their organizations’ relationships with MSSPs. This represents a trend that MSS services are not considered a commodity but a strategic element and competitive advantage companies can foster. One reason for this shift is that in many organizations the CEO and board of directors now have a responsibility to the shareholders to ensure that companies are protected.
7. A lack of visibility into the outsourcer’s IT security infrastructure is a barrier to successful outsourcing of security services. Fifty-one percent say a lack of visibility into the outsourcer’s IT security infrastructure is the main hindrance to a successful approach to outsourcing. Other barriers are inconsistency with the organization’s culture (49 percent) and turf or silo issues between the organization’s IT security operations team and the outsourcer (46 percent).
 The countries represented in these regions are: United States, Canada, United Kingdom, Denmark, France, Germany, Netherlands, Brunei, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar, UAE, India, Australia, Japan, Singapore and South Korea.