Let me tell you a secret: MSSP is not a box that you throw your money in, and security comes out screaming! Sadly, many would say that the only reason they went with a Managed Security Service partner is to avoid doing any security on their own. However, if you decided to go with an MSSP and not with an in-house capability (such as internally-staffed SOC with SIEM tool at the center) …
… YOU STILL HAVE RESPONSIBILITIES!
This post is an attempt to outline my thinking about such responsibilities and create a structured approach to analyzing them. Intuitively, there are some things that an enterprise MUST do to allow the MSSP to help them (e.g. deploy their sensors, give them credentials for device management, etc). Still, there are more responsibilities that allow the MSSP to help the client better.
In any case, think of this table NOT as a comprehensive list, but as a framework to organize examples:
|Value | time –>||During on-boarding / before service||During MSSP service consumption|
|To enable service delivery (MUST)||Deploy sensors, share network diagrams and access credentials, provide contacts, etc||Notify on asset and network changes, access changes, contact info, etc|
|To enable maximum value from the MSSP
|Refine & share a security policy, have IR plans, provide detailed asset and context info, etc||Respond to alerts (!), remediate systems, declare incidents and run IR, jointly tune the alerts, communicate changing security priorities, etc|
An expanded version of this type of a visual should become your shared responsibility matrix, that will actually enable you to benefit the most from your MSSP relationship. BTW, one MSSP succinctly states in their policies: “The Customer is responsible for all remediation activities.” What about compliance, you may ask? An excellent question – to be handled in the next post
P.S. Of course, there will be people who will insist that “if you want it done well, do it yourself” (that may be true, but it does not mean this route is always the most cost-effective). On the other hand, there will be people who will say “… but security is not our core competence” (eh.. as if locking the doors is)
Blog posts related to this research on MSSP usage:
Read Complimentary Relevant Research
Leadership Vision for 2018: Security and Risk Leaders
Security and risk management are key enablers for digital business. SRM leaders are accountable for helping the enterprise balance the...
View Relevant Webinars
Managing Risk and Security at the Speed of Digital Business
Digital business challenges the basic principles of information risk and security management. Risk and security leaders must understand...
Comments or opinions expressed on this blog are those of the individual contributors only, and do not necessarily represent the views of Gartner, Inc. or its management. Readers may copy and redistribute blog postings on other blogs, or otherwise for private, non-commercial or journalistic purposes, with attribution to Gartner. This content may not be used for any other purposes in any other formats or media. The content on this blog is provided on an "as-is" basis. Gartner shall not be liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the content or use of this blog.