Re:Threat Modeling Manifesto
by lmkg on Sunday February 07, 2021 @01:55PM
(#26057141)
> some risks I have that are not covered by the standard are not mitigated or transferred
If you're compliant with a regulation or a standard, then you're not liable for failures of those standards.
I think there's an implicit assumption that the harm of a failure will fall on users/consumers/some other third party, rather than yourself. In this case, the "risk" is liability for damages, rather than actual damages. If you roll your own risk-management strategy, then you assume responsibility for its failures. If you follow a blessed external standard, then you transfer responsibility to the standard. So the risk of a failure is not fully mitigated, but your risk of being liable for that failure is. Which, to GP's point, disincentivizes exploring novel approaches that mitigate the risk of real failures.
If you're compliant with a regulation or a standard, then you're not liable for failures of those standards.
I think there's an implicit assumption that the harm of a failure will fall on users/consumers/some other third party, rather than yourself. In this case, the "risk" is liability for damages, rather than actual damages. If you roll your own risk-management strategy, then you assume responsibility for its failures. If you follow a blessed external standard, then you transfer responsibility to the standard. So the risk of a failure is not fully mitigated, but your risk of being liable for that failure is. Which, to GP's point, disincentivizes exploring novel approaches that mitigate the risk of real failures.