A Case Study of The Capital One Data Breach
A Case Study of The Capital One Data Breach
Foremost, Capital One had established a Governance model but such a model lacks
the limitations set out in the CSF NIST framework as discussed in the case. The
company’s IT security team deliberately failed to detect the attack in its infant stage
even if on its face the said company seems to have gathered the technological
advancements in securing its network systems such as cloud technology, talented
technological engineers as personnel, AWS-supported tools, and environment. While
governance models that are designed to the interpretation of a company’s digital
architecture are in place if they are not further developed to fit a more tested
cybersecurity framework adopted by most of the industry, it proves to be fragile to
cyber-attacks.
It is patent that the company has already instituted its Incident Response Plan prior to
the said incident in 2019. However, the actions of its employees during the pendency of
the cyber attack imply immaturity as to its actual behavior during the cyber incident.
There was an obvious miscoordination between the operations team (the first line of
defense) and the technical audit team which catered to the delay in the detection of the
cyber problem. Because the operations team was prone to use technical coding jargon,
it appears that there was no clear communication to address vulnerabilities in the
system if there were any back then. The CISO failed to address this issue. Such action
by the CISO escalated into a toxic culture in the workplace and exacerbated problems
of employee retention.