The ROI in threat intelligence solutions vs enforcing industrial security "101" in ICS/OT

In ICS/OT, investing in cybersecurity technology has become increasingly important. However, many security leaders are left wondering: Are threat intelligence solutions worth the associated costs, complexity, and potential distractions they introduce? Is adhering to the "Industrial Security Standards and Best Practices" concepts and improving existing compensating controls sufficient?

Understanding the Cost-Benefit Equation

As organizations implement more advanced digital defenses, questions often emerge regarding the return on investment (ROI) for these technologies. Threat intelligence solutions are appreciated for their capacity to provide timely insights into potential cyber threats; however, they also pose significant challenges. These solutions often generate a high volume of alerts, which can overwhelm teams and complicate decision-making processes. This persistent noise raises an important question: “Am I benefiting from these insights, or are they simply adding unnecessary overhead?”

In addition, ICS/OT environments are typically designed to be isolated from external networks, employing an "air gap" strategy for protection, which is huge factor that serve as a compensating control for many attack vectors. In these scenarios, some argue that existing compensating controls, such as network segmentation, strict access control policies, and endpoint protection are sufficient for maintaining security. This raises the question: “Does investing in threat intelligence yield tangible benefits in such contexts?”

The Case for Proactive Defense and Cyber Resilience

Despite ongoing challenges, the threat landscape for ICS/OT has evolved considerably. Professional attackers have advanced beyond conventional methods, targeting loopholes in connected systems and deploying advanced persistent threats against critical infrastructure. Even resources that appear to be isolated can be compromised by attackers through insider threats, supply chain weaknesses, or physical access.

Reactive response technology is simply not built to increase your defenses; THEY DON’T READ SECURITY CONTROLS.

Proactive defensive measures are essential for enhancing cybersecurity. Instead of waiting for a breach to occur, allowing businesses to anticipate and prevent attacks. By providing insights into global threat activity, organizations can proactively adjust their security protocols, address vulnerabilities, and safeguard against emerging threats. This approach is particularly critical in the ICS/OT environment, where the stakes are exceptionally high, and disruptions can lead to significant negative consequences.

Balancing Technology and Investment

How can organizations invest in cybersecurity technology while avoiding the problems of irrelevant data? The objective is to strategically implement the right technology. Threat intelligence solutions must be developed to meet the specific requirements of ICS/OT environments. By seamlessly integrating these technologies with existing security frameworks, organizations can enhance their defenses while minimizing complexities and costs.

Conclusion: Right Technology, Right Investment

Investing in threat intelligence for ICS/OT environments does not replace essential security controls; rather, it enhances them. Organizations can increase their cyber resilience beyond basic measures by selecting the right technology and strategically leveraging intelligence. When considering cyber maturity levels, reactive technology should be implemented at a later stage of an organization’s roadmap, while defense technology can effectively address needs during the early to mid-stages.