Now that time has passed since the Heartland credit card data breach (even though we might have another one at our hands), it is a good time to reflect on PCI DSS a bit more. I am AMAZED about how much deep [shallow too!] thinking and, even, soul-searching, has transpired in our community as a result (see all this covered under in my On Heartland I, II, III and IV series). I already posted some of my own thoughts on this in Compliant + 0wned. So, what else is there to reflect on? Plenty!
First, some folks hate PCI DSS because it is – gasp! – not perfect. Some of these same folks have hated firewalls since “firewalls are full of holes,” hated IDS since “they are trivial to bypass” and hated logging since “good hackers never get logged” (what a bunch of crock :-)) - many also hate “the whole compliance thing” since it is “not security.” Yes, in our industry some people will hate everything that will not stop any and all attacks from an attacker of absurdly arbitrary skill level. And since such a thing doesn’t exist and won’t exist – they just hate everything but their “31337 mad sk1lz.”
To such I say: try to get out more! If you look out of your high-floor ivory tower window, you’d see there is a ginormous crowd of people who confuse a firewall with a fire-extinguisher! And those people have your credit card data, SSNs and medical records in their computers! Get it? IF PCI DSS made ONE of these people use a firewall or update their AV (after it lapsed back in 2005), we are all better off already!
Second, PCI DSS perception has firmly split from PCI DSS ground reality. I have a love - hate relationship with “perception is reality” maxim; in some cases it rings true, it some cases it sounds silly, but ends up being true, and in some cases it is just plain idiotic and makes you live in your own world of illusions. I’ve long been tempted to summarize the whole PCI DSS perception vs reality:
|PCI DSS works as expected – and not perfectly
|PCI DSS is sufficient for good security
|PCI DSS is necessary, common-sense basic security
|PCI is a complete security checklist
|PCI is a base list to build upon and grow
|Everybody is just doing the minimum of PCI to get rid of it
|For many organizations "this “minimum” adds much needed security!
|Breaches prove PCI irrelevant
|Breaches prove we need to drive security even more – and PCI helps with it
So, once again:
- PCI was never supposed to guarantee "intrusion-free" operation, nothing did, does or will do.
- No canned checklist is “sufficient for adequate security,” now or ever.
- It makes no sense to write prescriptive checklists for the impossible (e.g. “your defenses MUST stop all known and unknown malware as well as ‘mal-hard-ware’”)
- If you find something to be useless for you, think – are you 1 in a 1,000,000? Have you thought about the remaining 999,999 people?
- There are always people who will avoid common sense, drive without seatbelts and ignore PCI DSS: so, Darwin Awards 2008 (here too) are out!
- Yes, there might be pressure to choose “an easygrader QSA” for your assessment; but see item #5 above. Then remember – you are still responsible for the breach!
- Similarly, PCI does not “create” a false sense of security due to #1 and #2 above. If you magically “feel secure” since you’ve “done PCI,” see #5 above :-)
- Finally, if something is NOT perfect, it does not mean it is useless.
To summarize, this and other previous breaches definitely do NOT prove PCI useless or inefficient. They simply serve to remind us that PCI DSS was established as a standard of minimum care for card holder data security. It never meant to be sufficient for all security or “a security silver bullet.” Today as much as ever, the organizations needs to think about their specific risks and implement controls for dealing with said risks. Following 12 PCI requirements is a great start, but being secure cannot be reduced to a checklist: PCI does not replace addressing the risks to your business; however, it is an awesome start for those who cannot even spell the word “risk” today …
What is the perfect ending for this post?
Possibly Related Posts: