Intersections (and Collisions) Between Security, Compliance, and Privacy

Navigating the intersections of security, compliance, and privacy can be challenging for organizations. Each domain has its distinct goals, approaches, and underlying methodologies, but they also share a common ground. Security aims to protect data from threats, compliance helps ensure data handling and supporting processes adhere to applicable laws and standards, and privacy focuses on the appropriate, intentional and transparent handling and secure deletion (when no longer needed) of individuals’ personal information. Understanding where these areas align and where they often collide is essential for organizations to manage risks effectively, collaboratively work together, maintain trust, and foster growth.

Where Security, Compliance, and Privacy Naturally Align

At their core, security, compliance, and privacy share a common objective: safeguarding and protecting sensitive information. Security measures, such as data encryption in transit and at rest, least privilege access control, and hardening supporting systems and cloud environments are aligned with privacy’s aim of protecting personal data and can also support compliance with applicable frameworks, customer agreements, and regulatory requirements. All three areas prioritize transparency, risk management, and trust-building among stakeholders. By adopting robust security protocols, organizations can demonstrate their commitment to privacy and compliance.

However, while the three areas overlap, their alignment is often more nuanced than it seems.

Where Security, Compliance, and Privacy Collide

Despite their shared goals, conflicts between security, compliance, and privacy often arise due to their distinct priorities:

• Legal vs. Technical Perspectives: Privacy can be primarily a legal-driven program, dictated by regulations such as the GDPR or CCPA, whereas security is often driven by protecting and defending data against breaches or unauthorized access by implementing technical security controls and detection mechanisms. Compliance can sometimes sit somewhere in-between, consisting of both legal mandates and specific compliance frameworks such as ISO 27001 or SOC 2. These differences can lead to misunderstandings when security teams, privacy officers, and compliance professionals attempt to collaborate and work together. Security might prioritize data protection at all costs (sometimes without the focus on the intentionality around which data elements are being collected), while privacy regulations carry a clear expectation around the types of data collected, for how long, and for what purposes or processing practices.
• Conflicting Requirements: Security teams may insist on comprehensive monitoring to detect threats and harden supporting systems and cloud environments, but privacy regulations might restrict the types and retention of data in logs for this type of use. For example, using endpoint protection software to safeguard corporate data may conflict with the privacy around the types of activities and personal data collected for security purposes. Similarly, compliance requirements for data retention could clash with privacy mandates for data minimization and prompt deletion.

Best Practices for Prioritizing Security, Compliance, and Privacy

When these domains have conflicting requirements, organizations must navigate them carefully. Here are some ideas to help unite these causes:

1. Understand the business context: Decision-makers should first understand the organization’s business context and goals. These objectives will help determine which requirements are non-negotiable and where more flexible solutions can be employed.
2. Transparent communication: Clear communication between security, compliance, and privacy teams is critical. Organizations should create forums where these teams can discuss concerns, identify conflicts, and work together to find solutions. Sometimes the language used between these teams is different. Taking the time to understand each other helps not only build understanding, but helps build trust between these teams, too.
3. Balance legal obligations and ethical considerations: Balancing strict legal requirements with ethical considerations is essential. Privacy laws may allow certain actions, but ethical considerations may dictate a more conservative approach.
4. Adopt a risk-based approach: Organizations should prioritize security, compliance, and privacy efforts based on assessed risk. By identifying and analyzing the conflicts and assessing the risks associated with each, organizations can determine where to allocate resources.
5. Establish a decision-making or steering committee or framework: A clear framework should guide decision-making when conflicts arise. This framework should consider the organization’s risk appetite, legal obligations, and ethical values, and help make sure all are included in deciding. When override is needed, surface the associated risks to the right approving team member(s) to consider prior to approval.

Real-World Examples of Clashes and Resolutions

The following are some examples where security measures have clashed with privacy regulations or compliance mandates, along with how these conflicts were resolved:

1. Encryption vs. Law Enforcement Access: While encryption is a key security measure to protect data, it often conflicts with law enforcement’s need for access to information during investigations. To resolve this, some companies have implemented “key escrow” systems, where encryption keys are held securely but can be accessed under strict legal conditions.
2. Data Minimization vs. Security Monitoring: Privacy regulations often require data minimization, while security monitoring can necessitate extensive data collection. To balance these needs, organizations may implement anonymization techniques, ensuring that monitoring data is collected without infringing on individual privacy rights.
3. Retention Periods vs. Incident Response: Security teams may want to retain logs for extended periods to support incident response and forensic investigations, while privacy laws may mandate shorter retention periods. Organizations can resolve this conflict by establishing retention schedules that meet minimum legal requirements and ensure that any retained data is necessary for specific security purposes.
4. Biometric Authentication vs. Biometric Data Protection: Biometric data, such as fingerprints or facial recognition, is increasingly used for secure authentication. However, it is also highly sensitive personal data, and its use is tightly regulated. To address this, organizations must implement robust data protection measures and ensure that biometric data is stored securely and only used for its intended purpose.

The Role of Transparency in Maintaining Trust

Transparency is fundamental in maintaining trust among all involved when navigating the intersections of security, compliance, and privacy. Open communication about how data is handled, what measures are in place to protect it, and how conflicts are managed is crucial to building stakeholder confidence.

Communicating Privacy’s Importance in a Security-Focused Organization

In security-focused organizations, communicating the importance of privacy is key:

• Highlight interdependence: Emphasize that privacy and security are not mutually exclusive; they are interdependent. A breach of privacy can indicate a failure of security, and robust security measures can support privacy initiatives.
• Integrate privacy into security approaches: Incorporate privacy considerations into existing security frameworks, ensuring that privacy is a core component of security efforts. Many privacy programs can be integrated into existing security programs already in place in a software development lifecycle, for example.
• Educate through training and awareness: Regular training and awareness programs can help bridge the gap between security and privacy teams and foster a culture of collaboration.

Growth Opportunities from Navigating Intersections

Successfully managing the intersections between security, compliance, and privacy can unlock significant growth opportunities:

• Access to new markets: Demonstrating robust compliance with privacy and security standards can open doors to new markets that have stringent regulatory requirements.
• Attracting new customers: Companies that prioritize privacy and security are more likely to attract customers who value data protection.
• Strengthening competitive advantage: Effective management of these intersections can strengthen an organization’s competitive position, building trust and loyalty among customers and partners.

By recognizing and effectively navigating the intersections and collisions between security, compliance, and privacy, organizations can protect their data, meet regulatory obligations, and drive growth while maintaining the trust of customers, employees, and investors.

Learn how Drata empowers companies to stay audit-ready, and manage risk and compliance with ease at drata.com.

Matt Hillary is the Vice President of Security and CISO at Drata, a continuous compliance automation platform, where he oversees Drata’s global security, IT, compliance, and privacy strategy and programs. Learn how Drata empowers companies to stay audit-ready, and manage risk and compliance with ease.