"King of the Hill" of Banking IB
Posted: Thu Feb 13, 2025 4:45 am
The banking sphere of information security is more complex than many other information security sectors - it has a separate regulator, it is one of the first to be attacked by cybercriminals, the IT landscape of banks is more complex compared to other industries (only telecom and IT can argue here, perhaps). Who makes the greatest contribution to the information security of the banking system - the vendor, the consultant, the regulator, law enforcement agencies or the banks themselves?
Dmitry Romanchenko and Dmitry Tirsky noted the key role of regulators, with the former emphasizing the need for each participant to contribute to the effective operation of the system as a whole, while Mr. Tirsky placed banks in second place, followed by vendors and consultants.
Alexey Grishin and Denis Gorchakov went beyond the paradigm of the question and noted the key "contribution" of cybercrime to the development of banking information security, and Mr. Grishin even described a whole sequence of the significance of the "contribution" to the development of information security: cybercrime, regulators, consultants, manufacturers. Banks close the chain, but among them there are sometimes leaders who outpace the entire industry, he noted.
Dmitry Ogorodnikov did not define the key player south korea whatsapp data, calling the landscape of information security of banks very complex, where each player has "their own roles and tasks." In particular, he mentioned a precedent when the bank's own team of developers created a product for internal use, but over time transformed into an independent vendor company with an IDM-class product, which is quite successfully promoted in our market. (I note that almost every Russian information security product was created with the customer's money, because the level of interest rates on bank loans and the underdevelopment of the venture industry leave vendors with little choice.)
Dmitry Romanchenko and Dmitry Tirsky noted the key role of regulators, with the former emphasizing the need for each participant to contribute to the effective operation of the system as a whole, while Mr. Tirsky placed banks in second place, followed by vendors and consultants.
Alexey Grishin and Denis Gorchakov went beyond the paradigm of the question and noted the key "contribution" of cybercrime to the development of banking information security, and Mr. Grishin even described a whole sequence of the significance of the "contribution" to the development of information security: cybercrime, regulators, consultants, manufacturers. Banks close the chain, but among them there are sometimes leaders who outpace the entire industry, he noted.
Dmitry Ogorodnikov did not define the key player south korea whatsapp data, calling the landscape of information security of banks very complex, where each player has "their own roles and tasks." In particular, he mentioned a precedent when the bank's own team of developers created a product for internal use, but over time transformed into an independent vendor company with an IDM-class product, which is quite successfully promoted in our market. (I note that almost every Russian information security product was created with the customer's money, because the level of interest rates on bank loans and the underdevelopment of the venture industry leave vendors with little choice.)