You’ve been attacked and you’re defending your organization against the intrusion. Do you need to know who’s behind the attack, and why they’re targeting you?
There have always been two schools of thought in response to this question. One school of thought believes that attributing the attack to a threat actor, i.e. attribution, is less important than figuring out how your defenses failed and focusing your efforts on mitigating the attack. The other school believes that identifying who the attackers are can help to inform the way an organization protects against such incidents.
In the current geopolitical context, have the tides turned in favor of one or the other approach as the global security community grapples with an increasing volume of state-sponsored attacks? Is how the better question than who?
Join BlackBerry Cylance and (ISC)2 on February 6, 2020 at 10:00 AM PST | 1:00PM EST for a discussion on attribution. We’ll debate the merits of both schools of thought and examine the possible costs and advantages of each approach.
ABOUT THE SPEAKER:
CISO and Senior Vice President, BlackBerry
John E. McClurg (@JohnMcClurg) serves as CISO and Senior Vice President at BlackBerry. McClurg engages the industry around the globe on the risk challenges today and how BlackBerry uniquely mitigates them with the application of machine learning and other AI supported solutions. He champions a move from a historically reactive security posture to one focused on proactively predicting and mitigating future risks.
*** This is a Security Bloggers Network syndicated blog from Cylance Blog authored by The Cylance Team. Read the original post at: https://threatvector.cylance.com/en_us/home/webinar-the-blame-game-does-attribution-matter.html