Resources for Presidents and Senior Executives: Information Security (239824257)

Download Resources for Presidents and Senior Executives: Information Security (239824257)

Post on 02-Jun-2018

217 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/11/2019 Resources for Presidents and Senior Executives: Information Security (239824257)

    1/4

    educause.edu | 1

    CIOs view information security and related issues (dataprivacy, regulatory compliance) as the most important IT

    risks in higher education (figure 1). Yet only 3% of centralIT budgets and staff in higher education are devoted toinformation security and related identity managementactivities, compared to 5% in sectors other than highereducation. Higher education spends 60% less perinstitutional employee on information security than istypical among all U.S. industries. Institutional attentionto information security may be increasing. Although onlyabout one in three (32%) colleges and universities had a

    full-time information security lead in 2013, this representedan increase from 27% in 2012. Smaller institutions viewthemselves as less effective at addressing informationsecurity and are less likely to have a full-time informationsecurity lead than larger institutions.

    Is safeguarding information security a priority for your institution?

    Data breaches and other information security incidents may be one of the biggest risks facing colleges and universities. Information

    security encompasses the technologies, policies and procedures, and education and awareness activities that maintain the balancebetween an institutions need to use data and IT resources to achieve its mission (openness) and the need to secure those data and

    resources from external and internal threats (risk control).

    Figure 1. CIO rankings of IT risks in higher education

    SEPTEMBER2014

    Key Questions forInformation Security:Institutional Implications for Safeguarding Data

    Unique risks posed by cloud computing

    Disaster planning and recovery systems

    Physical security of I T resources

    Identity/access management

    Data privacy/confidentiality

    Information security

    Compliance with laws and regulations

    Insufficient strategic funding of IT

    65%

    66%

    68%

    74%

    76%

    79%

    79%

    82%

    84%

    62%

    61%

    Personnel negligence or malfeasance

    Information systems acquisition,development, maintenance

    Asset management

  • 8/11/2019 Resources for Presidents and Senior Executives: Information Security (239824257)

    2/4

    educause.edu | 2

    Information security relies on numerous practices to protectthe network, servers, end-user devices, and data. The followingcore technical practices are in place in over 95% of colleges and

    universities:

    Malware identification and cleanup

    Network segmentation

    Server and desktop configuration management

    The scanning of the network for vulnerabilities

    Confidential data search and discovery

    Intrusion detection system operation

    Network access control

    IT departments are actively implementing additional

    technical protections in response to changing and increasing

    threats (figure 2).

    Which information security practices do you have in place?

    Figure 2.Projected increases in the deployment of information security protections

    In placein 2013

    2015(projection)

    20162017(projection)

    Biometric authorization

    Enterprise identity accessmanagement (IAM) solutions

    Database encryption

    Federated ID management

    Content-aware DLP

    Strong authentication forcritical applications

    E-mail encryption

    E-signatures

    Enterprise GRC systems

    33%

    28%

    25%

    19%

    9%

    10%

    8%

    6%

    2%

    72%

    59%

    45%

    36%

    34%

    33%

    25%

    20%

    6%

  • 8/11/2019 Resources for Presidents and Senior Executives: Information Security (239824257)

    3/4

    educause.edu | 3

    Figure 3. Level of adoption of security practices for various applications,devices, and systems

    Figure 4. Faculty perceptions of personal and institutional security practices

    Essentially all colleges and universities have implementeda core acceptable use policy (AUP, 99%) and engage in

    compliance-related practices (99%). Policies to protectcritical systems are also widespread. Although personallyowned devices are often used to transmit, process, and storeinstitutional data, few institutional security policies extend tothem (figure 3).

    Almost all institutions (96%) provide education and training

    to increase faculty, staff, and student awareness of goodinformation security practices. However, fewer than half offaculty (48%) believe their institutions are facilitating a betterunderstanding of information privacy and security. This gapmay be due to lack of awareness or might imply the need toimprove offerings.

    Only about half of faculty report they have access toresources to keep their data secure; the same proportionare confident in their institutions ability to safeguard theirpersonal information. However, the majority of facultyreport that they themselves are taking sufficient measuresto safeguard data (figure 4). Turning to another dimension,most institutions have instituted privacy and security policiesthat have not interfered with faculty productivity.

    Which information security policieshas your institution implemented?

    How effective are your institutionsinformation security awareness andend-user protection activities?

    Disabling of network ports connecting devicesviolating AUP/disrupting the network

    Written agreements for faculty/staff use of personalcloud services to house student or institutional records

    Encryption of institutionally owned mobile devices withconfidential information

    Patching/updating of all personally owned computers

    Patching/updating of all institutionally owned computers

    Security assessments for licencing commercial soware

    Proactive scanning of critical systems

    Patching/updating of critical systems

    Security assessments for hosted services

    Deploying domain name system security extensions

    Encryption of all institutionally owned mobile devices

    Proactive scanning of all personally owned computers

    Proactive scanning of all institutionally owned,public-facing web applications

    Proactive scanning of all institutionally owned computers

    Mobile device management for personally owned devices

    45%

    53%

    73%

    8%

    9%

    18%

    27%

    90%

    39%

    32%

    14%

    79%

    72%

    27%

    9%

    Personal devices

    Institutional devices

    Critical institutional systemsPercentage of respondents

    I have access to all the resources I need to keep myresearch and scholarly data secure.

    I take sufficient measures to keep data about mystudents secure.

    I take sufficient measures to keep my researchand scholarly data secure.

    I have confidence in my institution's ability to

    safeguard my personal information.

    My institution facilitates a better understanding ofinformation privacy and security.

    Agree Strongly agree

    50250% 75 100%

  • 8/11/2019 Resources for Presidents and Senior Executives: Information Security (239824257)

    4/4

    educause.edu | 4

    About This Brief

    This report is one of a series of executive briefs designed to help institutional leaders optimize the impact of IT in higher education.It was supported by a grant from the Lumina Foundation. To read the other briefs and access related resources, go toResources for Presidents and Senior Executives.

    EDUCAUSE is a nonprofit membership association created to support those who lead, manage, and use information technology to benefit higher education. A comprehensive range of resources

    and activities are available to all EDUCAUSE members. For more information about EDUCAUSE, including membership, please contact us at infoeducause.eduor visit educause.edu.

    EDUCAUSE This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License.

    Maturity indices measure the capability to deliver IT services

    and applications in a given area. They examine multipledimensions of progressnot just technical requirements

    for IT effectiveness, such as culture, process, expertise,

    investment, and governance. Maturity indices enable institutions

    to determine where they are and where they aspire to be.

    EDUCAUSE has identified five dimensions of maturity for

    information security (figure 5).

    Threats to the security of institutional, research, and scholarly

    data are mutable and on the rise. The key to good information

    security is a strong partnership between IT, institutional risk

    management, and the institutional community to ensure that the

    institution is providing the necessary technologies, policies, and

    processes and that faculty, staff, and students are using themeffectively and consistently.

    The primary goal of good security is to safeguard data and

    identities. This means protecting the data that the institution usesto meet its mission, as well as protecting the identity information

    of the campus community. Foster an environment that strikes

    a realistic balance between controlling risk (with investments

    and policies that protect data) and facilitating the openness

    necessary to the academic enterprise. Ensure your institution has

    a qualified and empowered leadership role to understand how to

    apply contemporary solutions at your institution.

    How would you rate your institutionon the maturity of these majorelements of information security?

    Implications

    What is the single most importantnext step for your institution ininformation security?

    Figure 5. Informa

Recommended

View more >