Disruption: Active Directory security's worst enemy

IT always has to sift through "new and improved" Active Directory security solutions. It's an unsung, never-finished task on the journey to create a layered defense against external and insider threats, malware attacks, ransomware, and the like. And sometimes, just sometimes, you might actually get excited about the idea of running one of those solutions in your environment. It’s going to automate so much of your work, fits across all your users, and will solve all your concerns around that part of security, right?

But, there’s just one problem —what if implementing and using it is disruptive?

Whatever your security goal is, it's already dead on arrival.

We look at security and productivity as a balance. Admittedly, it's not an easy balance to find.

If security overwhelms and stifles productivity, users can’t do their jobs.

Or, if your Active Directry security solution puts even more much work on IT’s already-packed plate, it’s equally doomed.

But, too much focus on productivity (that is, not enough security) and you raise the risk of downtime, theft, data breaches, and attacks across the organization.

The challenge with this balance is that you may very well require a certain amount of security, period. But, at the same time, every solution (including those focused on security) falls subject to the ever-powerful issue of adoption.

The solution might provide the best security known to man (or AI), but if adoption is hard, no one is going to use it.

So, how do you ensure security without disruption?

What is non-disruptive security?

The answer lies in shifting your criteria when you select a security solution in the first place.

First, consider the impact disruption, for users and IT, may have on the success or failure of a security solution. By doing this upfront, you increase the chances of choosing a solution that will provide great security without frustrating your user base and IT.

Look for security solutions that tout these disruption-free features:

• Easy to implement: A security solution that requires three expensive consultants on-site for two months just to get it up and running isn’t something IT can immediately take ownership of and expertise over. Solutions that take hours or less are better choices that IT will welcome.

• Simple to manage: A security solution is only as powerful as the continual focus IT gives it to ensure it is an integral part of IT’s ongoing approach to security. Security solutions with “stickiness” tend to be intuitive, with limited clicks to get any task accomplished.

• Integrates with current user processes: Try telling a user that the process they used to perform now has four additional steps. Thanks to your new security solution, of course. A non-disruptive solution will seamlessly integrate with the work the user already performs, leveraging the same interfaces, applications, and methods they’re used to.

• Should balance security with productivity: If users are finding workarounds to your security solution (like using webmail to send out files because the DLP solution blocks everything), the solution (or perhaps the implementation of it) has missed the mark.

  Ideally, security happens behind the scenes, protecting the user and the environment, never getting in the way until the moment the user truly conflicts with security protocol.