The growing sophistication, frequency and severity of cyberattacks targeting all sectors highlight their inevitability and the impossibility of completely protecting the integrity of critical computer systems. In this context, cyber-resilience offers an attractive alternative to the existing cybersecurity paradigm. We define cyber-resilience as the capacity to withstand, recover from and adapt to the external shocks caused by cyber-risks. This article seeks to provide a broader organizational understanding of cyber-resilience and the tensions associated with its implementation. We apply Weick's (1995) sensemaking framework to examine four foundational tensions of cyber-resilience: a definitional tension, an environmental tension, an internal tension, and a regulatory tension. We then document how these tensions are embedded in cyber-resilience practices at the preparatory, response and adaptive stages. We rely on qualitative data from a sample of 58 cybersecurity professionals to uncover these tensions and how they reverberate across cyber-resilience practices.
De Cyber Resilience Act, versterkt de regels voor cybersecurity van producten met digitale elementen. Deze verordening is gericht op het verbeteren van de cyberveiligheid en veerkracht in de EU door gemeenschappelijke normen vast te stellen voor producten met digitale elementen, zoals verplichte incidentrapporten en automatische beveiligingsupdates.Binnen het project Cybersecurity Noord-Nederland is deze beslisboom en het digitale stappenplan ontwikkeld door een afstudeerstudent, zodat het voor organisaties makkelijker te bepalen is of zij moeten voldoen aan de Cyber Resillience Act.Disclaimer:De afstudeeropdracht wordt uitgevoerd door een vierdejaarsstudent in het kader van zijn/haar afstuderen bij het Instituut voor Rechtenstudies. De student levert een juridisch beroepsproduct op en doet daartoe onderzoek. De student wordt tijdens de uitvoering van zijn/haar afstudeeropdracht begeleid door een afstudeercoach. De inspanningen van de student en de afstudeercoach zijn erop gericht om een zo goed mogelijk beroepsproduct op te leveren. Dit moet opgevat worden als een product van een (vierdejaars)student en niet van een juridische professional. Mocht ondanks de geleverde inspanningen de informatie of de inhoud van het beroepsproduct onvolledig en/of onjuist zijn, dan kunnen de Hanzehogeschool Groningen, het Instituut voor Rechtenstudies, individuele medewerkers en de student daarvoor geen aansprakelijkheid aanvaarden.
In case of a major cyber incident, organizations usually rely on external providers of Cyber Incident Response (CIR) services. CIR consultants operate in a dynamic and constantly changing environment in which they must actively engage in information management and problem solving while adapting to complex circumstances. In this challenging environment CIR consultants need to make critical decisions about what to advise clients that are impacted by a major cyber incident. Despite its relevance, CIR decision making is an understudied topic. The objective of this preliminary investigation is therefore to understand what decision-making strategies experienced CIR consultants use during challenging incidents and to offer suggestions for training and decision-aiding. A general understanding of operational decision making under pressure, uncertainty, and high stakes was established by reviewing the body of knowledge known as Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM). The general conclusion of NDM research is that experts usually make adequate decisions based on (fast) recognition of the situation and applying the most obvious (default) response pattern that has worked in similar situations in the past. In exceptional situations, however, this way of recognition-primed decision-making results in suboptimal decisions as experts are likely to miss conflicting cues once the situation is quickly recognized under pressure. Understanding the default response pattern and the rare occasions in which this response pattern could be ineffective is therefore key for improving and aiding cyber incident response decision making. Therefore, we interviewed six experienced CIR consultants and used the critical decision method (CDM) to learn how they made decisions under challenging conditions. The main conclusion is that the default response pattern for CIR consultants during cyber breaches is to reduce uncertainty as much as possible by gathering and investigating data and thus delay decision making about eradication until the investigation is completed. According to the respondents, this strategy usually works well and provides the most assurance that the threat actor can be completely removed from the network. However, the majority of respondents could recall at least one case in which this strategy (in hindsight) resulted in unnecessary theft of data or damage. Interestingly, this finding is strikingly different from other operational decision-making domains such as the military, police and fire service in which there is a general tendency to act rapidly instead of searching for more information. The main advice is that training and decision aiding of (novice) cyber incident responders should be aimed at the following: (a) make cyber incident responders aware of how recognition-primed decision making works; (b) discuss the default response strategy that typically works well in several scenarios; (c) explain the exception and how the exception can be recognized; (d) provide alternative response strategies that work better in exceptional situations.
