Protecting Organizational Assets And Information 153419

Protecting Organizational Assets And Information Within The Company Ha

Protecting organizational assets and information within the company has become a top priority for many organizational leaders. Review the article titled “Missed Alarms and 40 Million Stolen Credit Card Numbers: How Target Blew It,” located here. Write a four to six (4-6) page paper in which you: Determine the fundamental challenges that organizations face in general in regard to protecting organizational assets and information. Specify the red flag(s) that Target overlooked or ignored before the retail attack and give your opinion as to why Target overlooked or ignored the red flag(s). Determine the main actions that Target took after the breach occurred and evaluate the efficiency of such actions. Conclude the main reasons why the attack on Target occurred. Give your opinion as to whether or not the attack was mainly due to the poor infrastructure or the inability of management to act accordingly. Justify your response. Use at least three (3) quality references. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites do not qualify as academic resources. Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements: Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions. Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

Paper For Above instruction

The increasing frequency and sophistication of cyber threats pose significant challenges for organizations aiming to protect their assets and information. This paper explores the fundamental challenges faced by organizations in safeguarding their assets, examines the red flags ignored by Target prior to its data breach, analyzes the company's subsequent actions, and evaluates the root causes of the attack. The analysis underscores the importance of proactive security measures, management vigilance, and infrastructural robustness in mitigating cyber risks.

Fundamental Challenges in Protecting Organizational Assets and Information

Organizations face numerous challenges when it comes to protecting their assets and sensitive information. One primary challenge is the rapid evolution of technology, which often outpaces the security measures organizations implement (Rushing & Wager, 2020). Cybercriminals continuously develop new attack vectors, including malware, phishing, and advanced persistent threats (APTs), making it difficult for organizations to remain fully protected (Cummings, 2021). Additionally, the vast amount of data collected and stored by organizations increases the attack surface, expanding vulnerabilities (Albreiki et al., 2019).

Another significant challenge is the human factor. Often, employees inadvertently or negligently compromise security through weak passwords, falling for phishing scams, or mishandling sensitive data (Kumar & Singh, 2020). Moreover, insufficient cybersecurity training and awareness programs contribute to vulnerabilities (Nguyen et al., 2021). A cultural gap within organizations, where security is seen as an administrative task rather than a strategic priority, further hampers effective protection (Dixon et al., 2019).

Resource limitations also impede organizations’ ability to implement and maintain robust security frameworks. Many organizations grapple with budget constraints that restrict their investments in the latest security technologies and skilled cybersecurity personnel (Chen et al., 2020). Lastly, the challenge of balancing operational efficiency with security controls often results in compromises that leave systems exposed (Liu & Zhang, 2022).

Red Flags Overlooked by Target Prior to the Breach

Target’s breach was preceded by several red flags that, if heeded, might have mitigated or prevented the attack. Notably, Target had recognized vulnerabilities in its third-party vendor networks, which were exploited during the breach (Sullivan, 2014). Despite this, management failed to enforce strict security protocols for vendor access. Another red flag was the presence of outdated intrusion detection systems that did not effectively monitor and alert suspicious activities (Heckel, 2014).

Furthermore, there was a lack of effective segmentation of payment card data within Target’s network. This oversight allowed attackers to access a broader scope of sensitive data once they penetrated a single point (Javelin Strategy & Research, 2014). Additionally, Target’s security team identified potential vulnerabilities but did not prioritize hacker activity or conduct regular risk assessments adequately (Menn, 2015). These ignored warnings contributed to the ease with which cybercriminals infiltrated the network.

Target’s management appeared to underestimate the severity of these vulnerabilities, perhaps due to budget priorities or a focus on operational efficiency, which led to the overlooking of crucial security red flags. This complacency created an environment where attackers could exploit systemic weaknesses unnoticed or unaddressed.

Actions Taken by Target After the Breach and Their Effectiveness

Following the breach, Target undertook several remedial actions. The company by then engaged cybersecurity firms to conduct forensic investigations, identify vulnerabilities, and enhance security measures (Nakashima & Sanger, 2014). They invested in improved intrusion detection systems, implemented data encryption, and enhanced network segmentation to contain potential breaches (Krebs, 2014). Target also revised its security protocols, including stricter vendor management policies and increased investment in cybersecurity personnel (Yadron & Eavis, 2014).

In evaluating the effectiveness of these efforts, initial improvements appeared promising, as Target reduced its vulnerability to similar attacks. However, critics argue that the response was reactive rather than proactive, characterized more by damage control than systemic overhaul (Krebs, 2014). While some security enhancements likely reduced the risk of subsequent breaches, the overall impact was limited by foundational issues in organizational security culture and management oversight (Greenberg & Rubin, 2017). Thus, while Target made strides in strengthening defense mechanisms, the response was arguably insufficient to prevent future incidents entirely.

Root Causes of the Target Data Breach

The core reasons behind the Target breach center on a combination of technological vulnerabilities and organizational management failures. Evidence suggests that the attack occurred due to a confluence of outdated infrastructure, inadequate security protocols, and lax oversight of cybersecurity risks (Higgins, 2014). The malware used during the breach exploited gaps in third-party vendor security and network segregation, indicating systemic weaknesses.

Moreover, the breach highlighted deficiencies in management’s cybersecurity awareness. Decision-makers failed to prioritize and allocate sufficient resources towards building a resilient security infrastructure (Perlroth & Sanger, 2014). This complacency allowed cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities with ease. Additionally, the incident underscored a broader issue of organizational complacency, where security was treated as an afterthought rather than a core component of operational strategy (Smith, 2015).

From a technological perspective, outdated and poorly maintained security systems, coupled with insufficient monitoring, created an environment conducive to infiltration. On the managerial side, lack of proactive threat detection, delayed response to warnings, and insufficient training contributed to the success of the attack (Romanosky, 2016). Therefore, the attack was not solely a product of weak infrastructure; it was also a consequence of management’s failure to adopt a security-first mindset.

Conclusion

The attack on Target was driven by a dual failure—technological vulnerabilities combined with organizational management shortcomings. While outdated infrastructure played a role, a significant factor was the management’s inability or unwillingness to recognize and act upon red flags that could have averted the breach. An effective cybersecurity strategy necessitates both robust technological defenses and vigilant, informed leadership that prioritizes security at all levels. Organizations must foster a proactive security culture, continuously monitor and improve defenses, and allocate sufficient resources to safeguard their assets against evolving threats. The Target breach serves as a cautionary example that emphasizes the importance of integrating technological resilience with strategic management to prevent catastrophic data losses.

References

• Albreiki, N., Alenezi, M., & Muthukkumarasamy, V. (2019). Challenges in securing cloud environment: A review. IEEE Access, 7, 149063-149077.
• Chen, Y., Zhao, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2020). Cybersecurity investments and protection measures: An emerging challenge. Journal of Cybersecurity and Information Management, 4(2), 55-69.
• Cummings, M. (2021). The evolution of cyber threats: From malware to nation-states. Cybersecurity Journal, 10(1), 23-37.
• Greenberg, A., & Rubin, A. (2017). At Target, a massive data breach exposes flaws in cybersecurity. The New York Times.
• Higgins, K. (2014). Target breach exposes weaknesses in retail cybersecurity. Security Magazine.
• Heckel, A. (2014). How Target’s network was hacked: The inside story. Wired.
• Javelin Strategy & Research. (2014). 2014 Identity fraud report. Javelin.
• Krebs, B. (2014). Target’s security overhaul after breach. Krebs on Security.
• Menn, J. (2015). The fallout from Target’s data breach. The Wall Street Journal.
• Nakashima, E., & Sanger, D. E. (2014). Target says hackers stole credit card data. The Washington Post.
• Perlroth, N., & Sanger, D. E. (2014). Hackers penetrate Target’s defenses, stealing credit card data. The New York Times.
• Romanosky, S. (2016). Examining the costs and causes of cybersecurity breaches. Journal of Cybersecurity, 2(2), 121–135.
• Sullivan, M. (2014). Target breach highlights vulnerabilities in retail security. CSO Online.
• Yadron, D., & Eavis, P. (2014). Target steps up security after cyberattack. The Wall Street Journal.