The distinction between disaster recovery (DR) and cyber recovery is more crucial than ever, writes Modeen Malick, principal engineer at Commvault.
While both strategies aim to safeguard organisations from disruptions, they address fundamentally different threats and require tailored approaches.
What I found particularly interesting were recent insights from a survey conducted by Commvault in partnership with ESG that shed light on the complexities surrounding cyber recovery, revealing a pressing need for organisations to rethink their strategies.
At its core, DR is all about getting operations back on track after unexpected disruptions like natural disasters, hardware failures, or power outages. Think of it as the safety net that catches your business when something outside your control goes wrong. It is about restoring systems, data, and processes so that you can resume business as usual as quickly as possible.
Cyber recovery, however, is a whole different ballgame. It’s not about accidental disruptions – it is about intentional, malicious attacks.
Cyber recovery focuses on dealing with the aftermath of cyberattacks like ransomware, data breaches, or other forms of hacking. These are not random events; they are calculated moves by bad actors aiming to disrupt your business, steal sensitive data, or hold your systems hostage.
This fundamental difference in intent – accidental versus deliberate – means that organisations cannot simply lump cyber recovery into their existing DR plans.
The methodologies for each need to be distinct and purpose-built. While DR is often about speed and getting back online quickly, cyber recovery requires a more cautious approach. It involves forensic analysis to understand the scope of the attack, ensuring systems are clean before restoring them, and implementing measures to prevent reinfection.
The survey unearthed several alarming trends among IT and security leaders:
- Low Confidence Levels: Only 26% of respondents feel confident in their ability to protect mission-critical applications and data, with just 20% feeling adequately protected when it comes to operational data.
- Complexity of Cyber Recovery: A staggering 70% reported that cyber recovery is either more complex or time-consuming than traditional disaster recovery, primarily due to the additional steps required to manage cyber incidents effectively.
- Challenges in Cyber Recovery: An overwhelming 91% highlighted the necessity for extensive forensic analysis to fully understand incidents before recovery can begin. Additionally, 85% acknowledged the risks involved in recovering systems without first ensuring a secure environment.
- Need for Specialised Skills: Nearly 59% of respondents noted difficulties in hiring qualified personnel for cyber recovery compared to DR, indicating a significant skills gap in this area.
- Targeted Attacks on Backups: The survey found that 92% of organisations have experienced attacks aimed at their backup systems, with 71% reporting these attacks as a significant portion of their overall incidents. However, 96% have implemented additional protective measures for their backup data.
- Integration with DR: Despite the differences between the two approaches, over 52% of organisations are integrating cyber recovery planning into their broader DR strategies, reflecting a trend toward alignment in processes and protocols.
What these findings underscore is the critical need for organisations to enhance their cyber recovery strategies while maintaining robust disaster recovery protocols.
I believe that cyber recovery should be viewed as a distinct approach from traditional DR, requiring tailored investments in technology and training. By integrating cyber recovery into broader disaster recovery plans and proactively addressing these challenges, organisations can enhance their resilience against future threats. Ultimately, being prepared is essential in today’s digital landscape, allowing businesses to not only recover but also emerge stronger from incidents.