Configuration Dilemma: Requirements, Aspirations, Resources, and Investment
Configuration dilemma reflects the challenges of implementation. As highlighted in the previous task, each log configuration scope comes with responsibilities, guidelines, and challenges. This means that the log configuration and logging are more than a simple practice of enabling logging from the assets and surviving among thousands of lines.
Each log configuration plan results from a unique analysis of the scope, assets, objectives, requirements, and expectations to be applied. Expectations, requirements, and limits are determined with the involvement of system administrators, legal and financial advisors, and managers, if possible. In summary, the main source of the dilemma is finding the balance between requirements, scope, details, and price (financial and labour costs, risks, and investment). During the meeting, there might be some points where participants get off the point, but it is vital to keep in mind that the main objective of the meeting is:
- Meeting specific operational and security requirements (non-negotiable) while also considering the feasibility of improving the capability by implementing additional data and insights.
Last but not least, a comprehensive risk assessment, prioritising security, compliance, and legal needs will be helpful to navigate this dilemma. Finding the balance in "operational and management" level decisions and achieve secure, efficient, proactive, resilient, and sustainable outcomes in the ever-evolving threat/IT landscape and technical operations.
Translating "Requirements" and "Aspirations" To Operational Level
Let's take a closer look at exactly how the dilemma arose.
While the main focus is the same, two question sets represent two distinct dimensions of logging and analysis:
- The base part heavily relies on an incident detection mindset. Still, it provides a solid framework for logging and analysis but is reactive. The requirements are a good place to start, but it is primarily helpful against known threats.
- The aspirations part is more focused on a threat-hunting mindset. Therefore, it is proactive and requires more resources due to the need to go above and beyond. Therefore, this part is more helpful against advanced and sophisticated threats.
The baseline part is necessary for a solid incident detection and response scope foundation. However, adopting proactive aspirations by adding them to the operational vision is strongly recommended, given the ever-evolving threat landscape.