SaaS Cybersecurity Best Practices: Uses and Limitations

When embracing cloud-based SaaS solutions, it’s crucial to develop an acute awareness of their unique security vulnerabilities, and with that, recognize that even the most robust SaaS cybersecurity best practices have limitations.

Because cloud-based systems are not above risk; in fact, the numbers demonstrate the opposite: IBM notes in its 2023 Cost of a Data Breach Report that 82% of data breaches include data from cloud environments, implicating most cloud-based pricing solutions today.

Here at Pricefx, as a cloud-native pricing software vendor whose customers trust us to keep their data secure, security is part of our DNA. In fact, for any Software-as-a-Service (Saas) solution, data security is not only important, it’s expected by law, with current cybersecurity regulations, in addition to GDPR, stressing the importance of safeguarding sensitive information.

However, all SaaS cybersecurity practices have their shortcomings. In this article, we’ll outline several cybersecurity measures prevalent in the industry today – and offer an honest portrayal of the limitations of each – to ensure your company is well-informed when navigating the complexities of the modern-day SaaS cybersecurity landscape.

SaaS Cybersecurity Best Practices: Uses and Limitations

Most SaaS software companies adhere to a handful of the same cybersecurity frameworks and employ similar tools to safeguard sensitive data, aiming to minimize and address risks. However, claiming that these measures eliminate all security gaps would be misleading. It’s crucial to recognize and understand their limitations, largely stemming from factors largely beyond anyone’s control.

With that, let’s break down some key elements of modern cybersecurity and their inherent limitations.

Data Security Measures for Mitigating Risk

Any third-party data vendor, with SaaS pricing companies being no exception, should have processes and measures in place for mitigating security and data breaches by default.

Some tools used to achieve this could include encryption services to keep information securely, threat monitoring systems to detect threats like malware or phishing attacks, and incident notification plans to respond quickly when security incidents arise.

Additionally, wide open-source adaptation, while a best practice for SaaS vendors, should be scanned thoroughly with tools like OWASP dependencies scanners to catch and assess vulnerabilities.

Configuration standards define system-hardening practices to limit any unsecure configurations, remove default settings (like weak passwords), or disable unused services to limit attack factors.

However, external factors, such as human error due to negligence or a lack of awareness, as well as evolving cyber threats (especially in light of the increasing prevalence of social engineering), can limit the impact of even the strongest security measures.

Also, keep in mind that a software vendor’s approach to its cybersecurity is fluid; as the vendor’s infrastructure continues to grow with its maturity, the organization is in a constant state of adapting its security measures and policies to respond to evolving risk.

With that in mind, a vendor’s current cybersecurity measures should be treated as ongoing efforts to improve, rather than static catch-all fixes.

Incidence Response Plans

An incidence response plan clearly outlines what the vendor will do in the event of a data breach or similar event. Because in the event of an incident, a solid plan ensures the vendor is well-equipped to minimize the damage. For example, the vendor might follow an accredited framework like the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s Incident Handling Guide.

However, one possible limitation is the capacity and size of the emergency response team responsible; this is particularly the case in small-scale software companies. Additionally, data acquisition from third-party systems for legal action could be a challenge due to limited access.

Protection From Insider Harm

SaaS solutions, even with firewall-fortified perimeters, are vulnerable to risk from the inside. Some measures to minimize insider breaches include monitoring suspicious employee behavior, such as bulk downloading or attempts to access restricted areas or documents, or implementing a strong access controls according to the least-privileged model.

Still, insider breaches persist, and largely by accident: the 2023 Ponemon Cost of Insider Threats Global Report found that over half (55%) of security incidents were due to employee negligence.

However, monitoring behavior is not immune to false positives (incorrect indications of a security vulnerability), which creates challenges in detecting genuine issues. Additionally, monitoring is generally limited to certain environments, which, given the remote nature of most SaaS programs and the prevalent use of personal devices, inevitably gives rise to gaps in insider risk tracking.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly: software is used by people, and people are imperfect. A software vendor can only exercise so much control over how its stakeholders independently handle, implement, and interact with the software. And the more players are added, the more risk there is.

So, with that said, a vendor’s security measures to address insider harm should be approached as adaptable, not gospel.

Security Risk Assessments and Compliance Auditing

IT experts recommend that companies conduct a security risk assessment (SRA) regularly, at least once a year, to remain compliant with cybersecurity regulations; more often if new incidents become prevalent. Risk assessments are undoubtedly useful tools in identifying potential threats and prioritizing them effectively, but they do have limitations.

First, security risk assessments are inherently static evaluations, capturing a snapshot of the security landscape at a specific point in time, meaning that actionable recommendations aren’t available between assessments.

Additionally, SRAs may miss vital gaps when based on one-sized-fits-all criteria that don’t reflect the intricacies of the unique security infrastructure in question. This limitation is also present in third-party auditing, which can be more focused on checking off regulatory boxes than noting any vulnerabilities outside of the predefined framework.

While security risk assessments and auditing are crucial measures in ensuring regular compliance, they are largely framework-driven by design, and important gaps could fly under the radar. Even with a perfect assessment on both counts, it can never be assumed that the infrastructure is entirely risk-free.

Cybersecurity Training and Certification

When considering cybersecurity best practices, few can dispute the value of security training and certification.

The impact of good training (or lack thereof) is self-evident; if a vendor doesn’t invest adequately in training its employees and implementation partners on its security policies and protocol, the security measures it’s worked hard to implement have reduced impact – leading to (well-intentioned, but just as harmful) security vulnerabilities. So, by default, training should be in place.

However, training alone isn’t a silver bullet. An element that is often missing in discussions around the efficacy of cybersecurity training programs is culture. Even after undergoing training, employees can be resistant to putting the security principles they’ve learned into practice. This lack of adoption can happen for many reasons; some may find the protocols outlined as cumbersome “obstacles”, while others may struggle to embrace responsibility to the collective as a value.

Moreover, even when employees ingest and embrace what they’ve been taught in cybersecurity training, human error persists, and many still fall prey to security risks such as phishing attempts.

So, while training can be useful in disseminating important security guidelines, it’s still an imperfect method for ensuring absolute risk evasion due to the limitations of those receiving it.

Closing Thoughts (Plus – How Pricefx Approaches Security)

At the end of the day, no software cybersecurity setup is impenetrable. With that said, while absolute safety isn’t a guarantee, open communication, a proactive response, and ultimately, a team effort on the part of everyone involved, should be. Accepting limitations with proactivity – heads firmly out of the sand –  is how a service provider can effectively navigate the often-uncertain landscape of SaaS cybersecurity today.

After reading this article, you may be left wondering, does Pricefx practice what it preaches? For a complete overview of our own security measures and policies, consider checking out our guide below: