Businesses may be having problems addressing Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS), even if they are compliant, experts told an Interop gathering.
Retail chain Forever 21, which revealed that nearly 99,000 customer payment cards may have been compromised, claimed it was PCI compliant, said John Pironti, the chief information risk strategist for Getronics.
"They claim to be PCI compliant, Hannaford's [the supermarket chain that suffered a data breach] claimed to be PCI compliant," said Pironti, who moderated an Interop panel on the subject of compliance.
But those firms may have restricted compliance auditors' access to areas where they thought they would meet standards, said Jennifer Mack, vice president of Master Card Worldwide and a member of the PCI Security Council.
The companies may have submitted their headquarters to review by a qualified security assessor (QSA) but not their retail stores, for example, Mack said. QSAs are also hindered by the fact that they can't require changes to meet compliance. "They recommend and they can't do much more than that," she said.
Even companies that do try to comply fully with the standards may not wind up secure, Pironti said. "Businesses are more interested in meeting a check list than assessing how best to secure their networks," he said.
Mack agreed that businesses also need to do risk assessments to make sure their networks are protected and that blind following of the standards hasn't left them vulnerable. But the standards are still important to get corporations to take security seriously. "If the check list weren't there, we probably wouldn't be thinking about some of these things. We have to pick the ones that fit us best," Mack said.
Jim Routh, CISO of Depository Trust Clearing, which processes quadrillions of dollars of financial transactions each year, said each company has its own set of security priorities that need to be thought through. Knee-jerk compliance won't work.
Pironti said a client of his diverted funds from projects that he thought would make their network more secure in order to encrypt all customer data wherever it was in the network. The company thought the risk to other data was outweighed by the potential blow to corporate reputation if customer data were breached, he said.
The decision was prompted by data-breach disclosure laws that say breaches must be publicly disclosed only if the data was unencrypted when it was stolen. "Maybe compliance has gone too far when companies need a foot to stand on in the court of public opinion," Pironti said.