Image generated by OpenAI's DALL·E
One in three cyber attacks now leads to an interruption in operations - an alarming statistic that shows how vulnerable even well-prepared companies are. While prevention has long been considered the strategy for cyber security, reality shows that prevention alone is no longer sufficient. Attacks such as zero-day exploits, which exploit security vulnerabilities before they become known, or insider threats from employees who intentionally or inadvertently cause damage, often evade traditional security measures.
A particular example is the MGM Resorts hack in 2023. Through a simple social engineering attack on the company's help desk, cybercriminals managed to gain access to the IT infrastructure. The consequences were devastating: MGM Resorts' systems were paralyzed for several days, hotel bookings could not be made, casinos were shut down and guests were massively affected. This incident shows that even the best technical prevention measures can be useless if there is a lack of preparation and resilience.
Preparation and resilience are just as important as prevention to ensure an effective cybersecurity strategy. It's about not only preventing attacks, but also limiting their impact and recovering quickly from them.
The Role of Preparation: Resilience Begins Here
When prevention fails, preparation determines the extent of the damage. Preparation means having plans and resources in place to detect, respond to, and quickly recover from attacks.
Why preparation is just as important as prevention:
Not every attack can be prevented, but good preparation can significantly minimize the impact. Companies can shorten business interruptions, limit data loss and contain reputational damage.
What does good preparation involve?
1. Incident Response Plan (IRP): The roadmap for emergencies
An incident response plan specifies who has to do what in the event of an attack. It defines clear roles and responsibilities, describes procedures for detecting and containing attacks, and ensures that everyone involved knows what to do. Regular tests and simulations are essential to keep the plan up to date.
2. Backup and recovery strategies
A solid backup strategy is a lifeline after an attack, especially in the case of ransomware. Offline backups protect against encryption and manipulation. Regularly checking the recoverability is just as important - a backup is only as good as the ability to use it in an emergency.
3. Threat detection and rapid response
Systems such as SIEM (Security Information and Event Management) and EDR (Endpoint Detection and Response) help to identify and contain threats at an early stage. Speed is crucial here to stop an attack from spreading.
4. Training and raising awareness among employees
People are often the weak link in the security chain. Regular security awareness training and simulated phishing campaigns help to sensitize employees to dangers. Awareness of insider threats should also be raised.
Incident Response Plan: The often underestimated key to cyber resilience
An incident response plan (IRP) is the heart of any cyber resilience strategy. But in practice, it is often underestimated or inadequately implemented. Many companies see the IRP as merely documentation that could only be relevant in an emergency - and repeatedly postpone the creation of this plan. This view fails to recognize that the value of an IRP lies not only in its existence, but in its regular review, maintenance and application. A poorly thought-out or outdated IRP can be just as damaging in an emergency as no IRP at all - or worse, lead to confusion and delays that multiply the impact of an attack.
It is a common misconception to equate the Incident Response Plan (IRP) with a Disaster Recovery Plan - they are fundamentally different. While the recovery plan aims to restore IT infrastructure and business operations after an incident, the IRP focuses on the immediate response during an ongoing attack. It ensures that threats are identified, contained and their impact limited - even before recovery measures take effect. Both plans are essential, but they address completely different phases and challenges of an incident.
An Incident Response Plan (IRP) goes far beyond a simple collection of telephone numbers and recommended actions. It ensures that roles and responsibilities within the company are clearly defined, communication channels are established and how incidents are identified, reported, contained and resolved is described in detail. Decision-making processes are also established so that no uncertainty arises in the event of an emergency.
An IRP does not only include technical measures. Legal and communication aspects that are aimed at external and internal target groups alike are equally important. Well-thought-out crisis communication plays a central role here: it must be determined in advance how and when affected customers, authorities, the public and employees will be informed. Press work and public statements are essential to create transparency, maintain trust and prevent rumors.
It is important to find the right balance. Disclosing all the details without thinking can be just as damaging as remaining completely silent. The IRP must therefore include a communication strategy that remains credible, protects sensitive information and at the same time strengthens trust in the company.
It is important that the IRP is tested regularly - ideally through simulated attacks, so-called tabletop exercises. These tests reveal weaknesses that are often overlooked in theory: Are important contacts missing? Are all relevant employees trained and do they know how to react in an emergency? Do technical systems such as alarms or escalation levels work reliably? Only regular tests and updates can ensure that the IRP actually works in an emergency.
Collaboration with external partners is an aspect of the Incident Response Plan (IRP) that is often underestimated. Service providers and specialists, for example in the field of IT forensics, play a crucial role in professionally analyzing and resolving security incidents. Their expertise can make a significant contribution to minimizing the impact of an incident and making well-founded decisions. To ensure that this collaboration works smoothly in an emergency, it is important to involve external partners in the planning phase of the IRP. Clear agreements on access rights, communication channels and responsibilities ensure that no valuable time is lost. Without this coordination, delays and misunderstandings can occur that unnecessarily exacerbate the incident.
A well-thought-out IRP is therefore not only an internal tool, but also a basis for efficient and targeted collaboration with external experts and authorities. This enables a coordinated approach and ensures that all actors involved can work together effectively.
Integrating insights from past incidents is an essential part of an effective Incident Response Plan (IRP). Companies that have already had experience with cyber attacks or security incidents can gain valuable insights to further develop their IRP in a targeted manner. This involves not only technical adjustments, but also organizational and communication improvements.
Important questions here are: Which measures and decisions have proven successful? Where were there delays or difficulties in the process? An honest analysis of such points makes it possible to identify weak points and remedy them in a targeted manner. This can include, for example, optimizing decision-making processes, improving communication or introducing new processes. Through regular reflection and adaptation, the IRP becomes a living tool that adapts to current challenges and is continuously improved.
The role of management should not be underestimated either. An IRP is only effective if it is supported and actively supported by the top management. This means that management must not only provide the resources for planning, implementation and regular testing, but must also be involved in the process itself. After all, it is often the management level that has to make decisions about public crisis management or dealing with ransom demands in an emergency.
Last but not least, an IRP should also be flexible enough to keep up with new threats. The cyber threat landscape is changing rapidly, and what was considered sufficient yesterday may be outdated today. Regular updates of the IRP based on current threat analyses are therefore essential. It is also worth using external sources of information such as industry reports or warnings from CERTs in order to take new attack vectors into account at an early stage.
Conclusion
In summary, the Incident Response Plan is much more than a static document. It is a living tool that develops its full effect through regular maintenance, testing and adjustments. Companies that take the IRP seriously not only create a basis for effective crisis management, but also strengthen the confidence of their customers, partners and employees in the ability to deal with incidents professionally.