With every passing year, the IT security market gets bigger and bigger. The increase in frequency and scope of attacks, driven by the ever-growing amount of valuable data stored on computers, created a huge demand for defensive solutions. Each of them has a unique selling proposition, but most would claim to be the best at detecting a certain type of malicious attack, if not all of them.

Yet systems still get hacked, proving time and time again that no security product is perfect. In fact, it’s an industry paradigm that given a dedicated attacker with enough time and resources, no security solution can be 100% effective. And that’s not about to change. Not now, not in five years – not ever.

Security Solutions Can’t Solve All Security Problems

The major problem for security solutions is their limited ability to see and understand what’s going on with the systems they’re protecting in real time. Especially when it comes to zero-day attacks, which weren’t detected ever before and from which the security solution was never trained to protect, the task is arduous.

It’s made even more difficult by the notion that a security solution should balance its stated mandate of protecting the system, with minimal impact on performance, and minimal invasiveness. These two requirements are not something a typical client would compromise on, as they adversely impact their experience, and require large amount of trust.

Yet even without a perfect cure for cyberattacks, the defensive landscape is changing. Whereas defensive security solutions are being judged by how much of they risk they’re able to mitigate, the systems they’re protecting are being judged by how much risk they expose the organization to. After all, well-made product is easier to protect than one that’s full of security holes.

Enter methodologies such as DevSecOps, and overall better general awareness of security procedures within the companies that manufacture software. In the past three years, we see more and more companies realize that a security suite their clients might have are not an excuse to develop an unsecure product. And when successful attacks happen, the blame is shared between the one who couldn’t protect from it, and the one that enabled it in the first place.

From Security to Value

But while the security-minded software developers are the most direct agents of change, for businesspeople running software manufacturing companies, and business-oriented clients who buy their products, security is still a tenuous concept. Oftentimes, the former have no reliable way of understanding the value in making products more secure, and the latter don’t know what being more secure means. Yet these are the people who allocate the budgets. And they’re reluctant to rethink these allocations without actionable intelligence.

To move the industry forward, this is the spot in which meaningful change must occur. At Cybellum, we’re trying to facilitate this by creating a platform that provides decision-makers with  security risk assessment, while giving developers the tool to detect vulnerabilities in software they’re integrating. With our platform, all decision-makers and stakeholders can have an informed conversation about security.

And as for security products? There will always be a place for them. As we’ve mentioned previously, no software is perfect, and no system is invulnerable. And above all else, human errors will happen, and when they do, having a security product is much better than not having one.

More from Cybellum:

Blog Post: The Bug Bounty Problem – How Mishandled Bounties Hurt the Industry

Blog Post: CY-2017-022: Type Confusion in Microsoft Word 2016

Blog Post: DevSecOps Is Important, but Can It Be Done Well?


Subscribe to get our vulnerability analysis posts, new blog content and very infrequent special announcements. We won’t spam you, and will never sell your data.

About the Author


Did you find this interesting? Share it with others:

< Back to Blog