The proliferation of cyber security tools has created the illusion of security. Organizations often believe that by deploying firewalls, anti-virus software, intrusion detection systems, identity threat detection and responseand other tools, they are properly protected. However, this approach not only does not solve the main problem of the attack surface, but also creates a dangerous risk for third parties.
The world of cybersecurity is constantly changing, and cybercriminals are becoming more sophisticated in their tactics. In response, organizations are investing heavily in cybersecurity tools, hoping to build an impregnable fortress around their digital assets. However, believing that adding “just one more cybersecurity tool” will magically fix your attack surface and increase your defenses is a dangerous misconception.
Limitations of Cyber Security Tools
Cybersecurity tools, while important, have their own limitations. They are designed to address specific threats and vulnerabilities and often rely on signature-based detection that can be easily circumvented by zero-day attacks. What’s more, the tools can generate a flood of alerts, overwhelming security teams and making it difficult to identify true threats. According to this Gartner survey75 percent of organizations are seeking supplier consolidation. Named the number one reason? A reduction in complexity.
In addition, tools often operate in isolation, creating backlogs of information that prevent effective threat detection and response. Without a a holistic view of the attack surface, organizations remain vulnerable to attacks that exploit gaps in their defenses.
If the net is not positive: the hidden dangers of adding another tool
Ironically, every new cybersecurity tool you add to your arsenal can inadvertently expand your attack surface, introducing third-party risk. Every vendor you work with, from cloud service providers to software developers, becomes a potential entry point for cybercriminals. Their own security practices, or lack thereof, can directly impact your organization’s security posture. A data breach by a third-party vendor may expose your sensitive information. A vulnerability in their software can create a backdoor into your network. This complex web of interconnected systems and dependencies makes it increasingly difficult to effectively manage and mitigate third-party risk. We saw this performance in violation of Sisensewhere customers who trust a third party have had their credentials stolen – an incident severe enough to trigger a CISA alert.
And let’s remember the CIA’s cybersecurity triad: privacy, integrity, and availability. Loss of availability is equally damaging to a business regardless of the root cause: failures caused by security measures and failures caused by a DOS attack are equally damaging. And we saw from Art Shutting down CrowdStrike that security tools can and do cause serious harm. This is because these tools get privileged access to your systems: in CrowdStrike’s case, it gets kernel-level access to every endpoint to provide full visibility. Incidentally, this same deep access made the failure of the Falcon platform so incredibly devastating and expensive to fix.
This is true for almost all IT security products. Your tool, designed to reduce risk, may fail the systems it is supposed to protect. A misconfigured firewall can crash your network, a spam email filter can interfere with your email communication, and access control solution can block your front line workers – the list goes on. And while these tools greatly improve an organization’s security, customers must find a balance between adding third-party risk to the software supply chain and mitigating risk with each new tool.
Simplify the chaos with a unified platform
The danger comes from the complexity we mentioned above. It is now seen as the biggest cybersecurity challenge, motivating customers to move to larger, unified platforms in SASE and XDR – according to the cited Gartner survey – but also in identity security. Analysts are pushing customers towards identity frameworks and unified identity for this very reason: it reduces complexity and brings disparate tools together in pre-tested, pre-integrated ways. Not surprisingly, every identity vendor touts its “unified suite,” regardless of its status, the actual benefits it offers customers, or whether it really has the potential to unify a customer’s entire internal identity landscape.
