An insider threat program by any other name
TLDR; I hobbled together the Insider Threat Program Name Generator because I’m mostly tired of this debate. The name of the program is irrelevant as long as you are transparent about the program itself. I put this on Neocities because I learned HTML on Geocities in the seventh grade so it really is the pinnacle of internet technology as far as I’m concerned.
But if you really want some insider threat alternatives, I insist you give it a whirl and see what ideas it may spark. Some of the more irritating options I was able to generate include:
Data Loss Intelligence Department
Identity & Access Fusion Organization
Trust & Conduct Organization
User Fusion Task Force
The term insider threat seems to carry a lot of baggage in the corporate world. This isn’t a surprise given a breakdown to its simplest form basically equates to you people (insiders) are dangerous (threats). The issue is further exasperated by the differences in scope that occur across various industries (i.e. cyber versus physical), disconnects between the public versus private sector sentiment around the issue at-large (e.g. Edward Snowden), and a general preference not to come across all “big brother-y” despite it sometimes being the most accurate metaphor for proactive employee monitoring efforts.
I have time and again seen discussions pop up as people search for some alternative to insider threat, the team or program who often shall not be named. The arguments for and against haven’t changed in nearly a decade, but the sentiment on either side remains static.
Many feel the term is some combination of too aggressive, too us versus them, and, frankly, too accurate a description of the actual work being conducted. Others insist it remains the industry standard, which is arguably true. But this industry in particular draws its history from spooks, spies, and government secrets, and many are left wondering if the abilities and use cases developed in public sector insider threat programs reliably translate to many private sector industries at all.
The terminology is even further muddied as the field of insider threat has become grossly inundated with vendors trying to sell every bell and whistle they can scrounge up as the next great insider threat feature. This dilution of insider threat has shifted it from a concept to a toolset. As such, people will more and more equate their corporate insider threat programs with aggressive and invasive technical monitoring solutions, continuing the renaming cycle we repeatedly want to address.
I know at its core this issue is a semantic one, and it begs the question: Do employees actually think insider threat is a negative term? Or are we projecting our own security assumptions onto the user population because that’s what security people often do?
To address any good semantics issue, we need more semantics. As such, I’ve created the Insider Threat Program Name Generator, a site that smashes words together to get you alternative and less scary names for your insider threat program. There is only a 2.6% chance it will generate the dreaded term we’re trying to avoid, so take it for a whirl and see what luck brings you. Your human resources and legal departments will love it.
