February 1st, 2008 Drazen Drazic
Just like the posts I have written about before concerning the issues that internal security people have to deal with on a daily basis in terms of trying to get recognition of security issues their organisations face, the role of consultants is very much overlooked at times when viewed from a similar perspective.
In most cases, the consultant is engaged on a job, does the job, creates the report, presents it and then leaves. Most good consultants will try to maintain a relationship that allows for the client to follow-up at anytime on questions regarding the work and remediation advise recommended. Most good consultants will also, as part of their work, be able to identify issues outside of the scope of the engagement…ie; you just see things that are wrong….an experienced eye will! That information is also passed onto the client. End of the day, “root cause” is evident as to why the issues exist and based upon that, it’s clear that the root cause will and does affect other areas outside of the engaged scope. (Something that the client should also be addressing).
Now, if you’re still following, how does a good consultant switch off so to speak to a client that is clearly in a bad way and is doing nothing about it?
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Disclosure Laws, Risk Management, cyber crime, governance | 18 Comments »