Ugh! Is that your security budget? *Sucks teeth and shakes head*

Gartner report says size can be misleading


Organisations spend an average of 5.6 per cent of their overall IT budget on IT security and risk management, according to analyst Gartner.

IT security spending ranges from approximately 1 per cent to 13 per cent of the IT budget. Gartner warns that simply looking at the size of security spending - even in comparison to other firms in the same sector - is potentially misleading.

"Clients want to know if what they are spending on information security is equivalent to others in their industry, geography and size of business in order to evaluate whether they are practicing due diligence in security and related programmes," explained Rob McMillan, research director at Gartner.

"But general comparisons to generic industry averages don't tell you much about your state of security. You could be spending at the same level as your peer group, but you could be spending on the wrong things and be extremely vulnerable.”

“Alternatively, you may be spending appropriately but have a different risk appetite from your peers,” he added.

According to Gartner, the majority of organisations will continue to misuse average IT security spending figures as a measure of security program maturity, at least in the short to medium term. Business requirements and risk tolerance need to be brought into the equation when evaluating whether or not and organisation has set its security budget at the right level, Gartner advises.

Security features are being incorporated into hardware, software, activities or initiatives not specifically dedicated to security. And staff who have a security role often have other duties.

Gartner's experience is that many organisations simply do not know their security budget. “This is partly because few cost accounting systems break out security as a separate line item, and many security-relevant processes are carried out by staff who are not devoted full-time to security, making it impossible to accurately account for security personnel,” according to Gartner. “In most instances, the chief information security officer (CISO) does not have insight into security spending throughout the enterprise.”

Deciding what to spend that budget on is a different and even trickier proposition. Security spending is generally split among hardware, software, services (outsourcing and consulting) and personnel.

According to Gartner, secure organisations can sometimes spend less than average on security as a percentage of the IT budget. The lowest-spending organisations fall into two divergent camps: Unsecure organisations that underspend, and secure organisations that have implemented best practices for IT operations and security that reduce the overall IT complexity.

Gartner reckons that enterprises should be spending between 4 and 7 per cent of their IT budgets on IT security: lower in the range if they have mature systems, higher if they are wide open and at risk. This represents the budget under the control and responsibility of the CISO, and not the "real" or total budget.

Gartner clients can read more in the report, Identifying the Real Information Security Budget. ®

Similar topics


Other stories you might like

  • India reveals home-grown server that won't worry the leading edge

    And a National Blockchain Strategy that calls for gov to host BaaS

    India's government has revealed a home-grown server design that is unlikely to threaten the pacesetters of high tech, but (it hopes) will attract domestic buyers and manufacturers and help to kickstart the nation's hardware industry.

    The "Rudra" design is a two-socket server that can run Intel's Cascade Lake Xeons. The machines are offered in 1U or 2U form factors, each at half-width. A pair of GPUs can be equipped, as can DDR4 RAM.

    Cascade Lake emerged in 2019 and has since been superseded by the Ice Lake architecture launched in April 2021. Indian authorities know Rudra is off the pace, and said a new design capable of supporting four GPUs is already in the works with a reveal planned for June 2022.

    Continue reading
  • Prisons transcribe private phone calls with inmates using speech-to-text AI

    Plus: A drug designed by machine learning algorithms to treat liver disease reaches human clinical trials and more

    In brief Prisons around the US are installing AI speech-to-text models to automatically transcribe conversations with inmates during their phone calls.

    A series of contracts and emails from eight different states revealed how Verus, an AI application developed by LEO Technologies and based on a speech-to-text system offered by Amazon, was used to eavesdrop on prisoners’ phone calls.

    In a sales pitch, LEO’s CEO James Sexton told officials working for a jail in Cook County, Illinois, that one of its customers in Calhoun County, Alabama, uses the software to protect prisons from getting sued, according to an investigation by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

    Continue reading
  • Battlefield 2042: Please don't be the death knell of the franchise, please don't be the death knell of the franchise

    Another terrible launch, but DICE is already working on improvements

    The RPG Greetings, traveller, and welcome back to The Register Plays Games, our monthly gaming column. Since the last edition on New World, we hit level cap and the "endgame". Around this time, item duping exploits became rife and every attempt Amazon Games made to fix it just broke something else. The post-level 60 "watermark" system for gear drops is also infuriating and tedious, but not something we were able to address in the column. So bear these things in mind if you were ever tempted. On that note, it's time to look at another newly released shit show – Battlefield 2042.

    I wanted to love Battlefield 2042, I really did. After the bum note of the first-person shooter (FPS) franchise's return to Second World War theatres with Battlefield V (2018), I stupidly assumed the next entry from EA-owned Swedish developer DICE would be a return to form. I was wrong.

    The multiplayer military FPS market is dominated by two forces: Activision's Call of Duty (COD) series and EA's Battlefield. Fans of each franchise are loyal to the point of zealotry with little crossover between player bases. Here's where I stand: COD jumped the shark with Modern Warfare 2 in 2009. It's flip-flopped from WW2 to present-day combat and back again, tried sci-fi, and even the Battle Royale trend with the free-to-play Call of Duty: Warzone (2020), which has been thoroughly ruined by hackers and developer inaction.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021