A guest post by: Pulak Sinha, CEO Pepper and Paras Shah, CEO LAMR Group

In the world of Business and Technology, two areas are drawing a great deal of attention- FinTech and Security.  It’s no surprise- they are deeply connected and causally related areas.  The connection between the two reminds us of the apocryphal story of Bank Robber Willie Sutton who when asked why he robbed banks, replied sheepishly, “Because that’s where the money is.”  So too with Fintech.

In our experiences- very different experiences that is—the issues of Security and Financial Services converge neatly and can be summed up with two core conditions:  Stewardship and Trust.  When the “product” being dealt with is peoples’ money or other core assets, the absence of trust is a death-knell; conversely, the existence of trust creates a bridge to success.  For the FinTech dealing with money, the role of stewardship is critical- they have to be dutiful stewards of both money and data related to that money.

Stewardship is of course not simply about intent.  It is also about having the systems in place- and the processes, culture, and personnel- that allow for the enactment of that stewardship.  Good intentions are wonderful, but insufficient.  Stewardship is not about a point in time, either.  It is about ongoing resiliency and an “always on” culture of proactive behaviors that ensure the proper handling of money, data, and other assets.

Financial Services as an industry has a mixed record here.  For the most part, things are good.  Most people interact with the industry on a daily basis and do so with ease.  Of course, when things are almost always good, we take them for granted.  As such, when a lapse or breach does take place, it becomes the defining characteristic, the Achilles heel of an otherwise useful and productive company.  In addition, since we are talking about money, data, and personal information, such lapses can have outsized impacts on peoples’ and companies’ lives.  It’s great to be good 99.9999% of the time.  But if that .0001 % possibility is an “extinction event,” then even that is not tolerable.

The responsibilities here are joint.  In the world of, for example, Asset Management, the AM company has to take the issue seriously and invest in the right systems and platforms to ensure that ROI doesn’t come at the cost of impossible risk or regulatory breach.  But the investors who entrust their money to the AM company also have to demand of its executives to invest in these systems, processes, and people.  The passive approach by any party is a non-starter.

Massive advances have been made in Security but just as they’ve been made, the attack vectors have multiplied exponentially.  The Security industry has done a fine job of elevating Security to a top business issue, but many companies still honor that notion only rhetorically.

We need a new paradigm.

Trust in Fintech is key.  So too is stewardship.  A flexible and powerful security stance helps get us to both.

A guest article by Romi Mahajan

In an early part of my career- almost 20 years ago- I had the opportunity to work with some incredible people in the “security” space. Many of those I had the privilege of working with and learning from have gone on to do noteworthy things in the space- from being CISOs of large companies, to starting successful security startups, to authoring important and even tectonic articles on the space.

As I recall from those heady days two decades ago, those involved in the “Business” and “Marketing” sides of security (as opposed to the technical side) all agreed on one thing: Security has to be framed as a business issue not just a technical one. Ninety percent of those on the technical side agreed with this.

While the sentiment appears to be a cliché, it is perhaps more nuanced than it might seem. The point is not that security impinges on business and as such must be taken seriously. Instead, the emphasis here is on the nature of the business and the corresponding defense-posture that a business should take. Additionally, it’s a reminder that the nature of the business will dictate the differential investments in security that make up the whole.

Twenty years ago, I had an easy example to trot out for explanation: If your company is an ecommerce play then making sure your website is not hacked and is up and functional is key to your business. Not so much if your company is a restaurant. Both require security but in different ways and at different levels of investment.

At that time, we created a “Risk Assessment” that essentially assessed business risk and mapped it onto security posture and spending. The idea was that they should match in valence level- you don’t want an important asset unprotected nor do you want to spend millions to protect something that is irrelevant.

The notion that Business risk is the key element of analysis has persisted and would be a truism if indeed it was a universally understood idea. But alas it is not.

We still encounter generic language and un-nuanced views of security. We still see complacency in the ranks of business leaders, relegating security to something that “IT will think about.” We also still see a shifting landscape of blame- forgetting conveniently that security has to be a Board level issue.

LAMR Group’s Paras Shah says it well- “After the fact finger pointing does no one any good in security. Resilient frameworks for managing the business issue that is security have to be developed and funded, continuously, by the Board of any organization of appreciable size.” Security thinker Manish Godha adds, “Security better be part of your 2022 plan. Not-negotiable.”

In a world of daily breaches, attacks, ransom demands- on and to the systems on which our entire human infrastructure runs- security must not only be top of mind but the “thinking” has to be met with real action. The suggestion that security is just a technology issue has no place in the dialogue of 2022 and beyond.

Marketing Darwinism had the opportunity to meet up with Paras Shah, Managing Director at LAMR Group Inc.

Marketing Darwinism:  Paras, you are an acknowledged expert in Security and Privacy.  Tell us about these areas and please inflect with your experience.

Paras Shah:  Thanks Paul.  I am not sure I am an expert.  I say this not out of false humility but because one can never truly be an expert in these areas, given the pace of technological change, always expanding attack surface and the complexity of risk scenarios  arrayed against any organization.  But, yes, I’ve been in the space for 20 years and am struck by two seemingly contradictory themes.  

The first is that much of what we knew even 10 years ago, particularly around probable targets, has been rubbished by later developments.  Technologies change rapidly and with the democratization of devices and technology-business singularity, threats are literally ubiquitous.  20 years ago, many thought only about large organizations and companies being under threat.  Now, threats are equal opportunity.  So yes, that has materially altered the threat landscape and along with it the solution market place.

The second is how much has stayed the same.  We had a mantra decades ago that security was about technology but also people, process, culture, and other factors.  Well, that’s still the same.  So, any framework you build to deal with Security and Privacy has to have multiple components in its composition and spirit.

Marketing Darwinism:  What roles does LAMR Group play in this space? 

Paras Shah:  We follow what I just covered as a core tenet of our value proposition.  We offer consultation and frameworks but also human capital to large and medium sized companies so that they can think of Security and Privacy holistically.  We also identify best in breed products and managed services in the Security space and either resell them or advise customers on their adoption.  Business has been brisk, which is an indication of just how much work has to be done in the space.

Marketing Darwinism:  Many of our readers are Marketers by profession though all are senior enough to wear multiple hats.  How does marketing play a role in this space?

Paras Shah:  Marketing plays a very large role in Security and Privacy, in some expected ways and in some unexpected ways.  

Given the ubiquity of the “Security” conversation, almost all companies that deal with technology, data, personal information, or anything even remotely “sensitive” have to refer to their security and privacy protocols in marketing literature – communicating good security hygiene has become “table stakes” for a competent marketer. This is good and bad.  It’s good that almost all organizations take these areas seriously but also, as is the wont of marketers, there are many boasts and hyperbolic statements that set organizations up for failure.  Too good to be true is, well, never true.  Technologists and Security professionals have to deal with the fallout of these marketing claims.  I’d ask all Marketers to consult with Security and Privacy people before making claims that cannot be paid off.

Marketing Darwinism:  It’s almost a marketing ethics issue isn’t it?

Paras Shah:  In some ways yes but also, to cut folks some slack, there are some misconceptions about Security and Privacy;  that there are quick fixes or silver bullets or that doing an “audit” then remediation is a one-time deal.  Not at all.  These are constant, continuous, dynamic spaces that require frequent attention –  top of mind always.

Marketing Darwinism:  Parting thoughts? 

Paras Shah:  All people in Security have to be evangelists of some sort.  So, all I can really say is that for all organizations, of any size, Security and Privacy to be a Board-Level issue and a core strategic pillar. Security and privacy cannot be relegated  to a parenthetical discussion.