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.
DOCUMENT
Critical incident response (CIR) has evolved to require a high level of cultural competence, customization, and adaptability to meet the needs of client organizations while incorporating clinical best practices and current research. The Critical Incident Outcome Measure (CIOM) is a timely and pioneering evidence-based evaluative tool developed by Morneau Shepell over the course of a four-year period. The CIOM tool, based on the Workplace Outcomes Suite (WOS) tool originally developed in 2010, was developed in 2016 [Herlihy et.al., 2018]; beta tests and modifications, along with the publication of a validation paper, were completed in 2017; further feedback was incorporated and an implementation plan developed in 2018; and full program implementation began in 2019.
LINK
Cybersecurity threat and incident managers in large organizations, especially in the financial sector, are confronted more and more with an increase in volume and complexity of threats and incidents. At the same time, these managers have to deal with many internal processes and criteria, in addition to requirements from external parties, such as regulators that pose an additional challenge to handling threats and incidents. Little research has been carried out to understand to what extent decision support can aid these professionals in managing threats and incidents. The purpose of this research was to develop decision support for cybersecurity threat and incident managers in the financial sector. To this end, we carried out a cognitive task analysis and the first two phases of a cognitive work analysis, based on two rounds of in-depth interviews with ten professionals from three financial institutions. Our results show that decision support should address the problem of balancing the bigger picture with details. That is, being able to simultaneously keep the broader operational context in mind as well as adequately investigating, containing and remediating a cyberattack. In close consultation with the three financial institutions involved, we developed a critical-thinking memory aid that follows typical incident response process steps, but adds big picture elements and critical thinking steps. This should make cybersecurity threat and incident managers more aware of the broader operational implications of threats and incidents while keeping a critical mindset. Although a summative evaluation was beyond the scope of the present research, we conducted iterative formative evaluations of the memory aid that show its potential.
DOCUMENT
