One essential element of a secure website structure and a secure IT environment within an enterprise organization is the use of digital certificates. These electronic credentials verify the identity of servers, applications, and devices, ensuring secure communication and data transfer.
These certificates require management throughout their entire lifecycle, from deployment to renewal, which can be difficult for organizations with hundreds or even thousands of certificates. There’s often a fragmented approach in place to manage these certificates, creating blind spots that can quickly lead to costly outages and security breaches.
While the exact cost of IT downtime varies by industry, the impact can be massive. For instance, large corporations reportedly experience losses of around USD$ 9,000 per minute during outages, with healthcare and finance sectors potentially losing upwards of USD$5 million per hour. (1)
Not having a strong digital certificate lifecycle management solution in place can cause issues with partial certificate visibility, which can result in organizations facing major losses. So, the question is: what are the factors that contribute to these losses, and how can you mitigate these risks? Read on to learn more.
Digital certificate management within enterprise organizations
Traditionally, the responsibility for digital certificates is often divided amongst different teams within a larger organization. For example, public certificates, which secure external domains and websites, might be handled by Network Operations (NetOps) or Security teams. Meanwhile, private ones, like certificates managed through Microsoft AD CS (Active Directory Certificate Services), may fall under the purview of Windows Server administrators.
When multiple teams are responsible for managing different certificates and there’s no central location where all of the information lives, it can create significant challenges. Partial visibility can lead to inconsistencies in renewals, revocations, and can even lead to some digital certificates reaching their expiration date. Expired certificates can quickly lead to costly outages and/or security breaches.
Why partial visibility is risky
Imagine navigating a busy intersection with limited vision. That’s essentially what happens when an organization can’t see the complete picture of their digital certificate lifecycles. Here’s why a fragmented approach to management is risky:
No central source of truth
Without a centralized system, tracking the status of all certificates (public and private) becomes a logistical nightmare. This makes it difficult to identify expiring certificates before they cause disruptions or security vulnerabilities.
Manual mayhem
The reliance on manual processes for compiling, updating, and renewing certificates creates a recipe for errors; human mistakes can lead to missed renewals, inaccurate configurations, and, ultimately, security gaps. Manual errors will become even more likely with the upcoming change proposed by Google where SSL/TLS certificates will only be valid for 90 days.
Error loop
Manual processes are also time-consuming and prone to repetition. This can lead to fatigue and further increase the likelihood of errors. It’s a vicious cycle that can be easily broken with automation.
Expiration enigma
Inconsistent expiration notifications create a guessing game. Teams might miss critical renewal deadlines, leading to service outages or scrambling to fix issues at the last minute.
These risks highlight the importance of having a comprehensive view of your entire digital certificate ecosystem.
The power of a unified approach
The answer to fragmented certificate management lies in adopting an automated Certificate Lifecycle Management (CLM) solution. An automated certificate management system streamlines and centralizes each stage in the certificate lifecycle for all certificates within an environment, including:
- Discovery: Tracking and maintaining a centralized repository of all certificate information for easy access and reporting.
- Provisioning: Issuing new certificates based on predefined policies and security requirements.
- Renewal: Automatically renewing certificates before they expire to ensure uninterrupted operations.
- Revocation: Promptly revoking compromised certificates to prevent unauthorized access.
By automating these tasks, CLM solutions eliminate the risks associated with manual processes. They also offer several key benefits:
Improved visibility
A central dashboard can provide a holistic view of all certificates, public and private, including their status, expiration dates, and ownership. This empowers teams to make informed decisions and proactively address potential issues.
Enhanced security
Automated renewals and revocations ensure certificates remain valid and secure. This minimizes the window of vulnerability and strengthens your organization’s overall cybersecurity posture.
This is important because, according to a 2023 report, the global average cost of a data breach reached $4.45 million, and this figure can be even higher for American businesses, with some reports suggesting costs approaching $9 million per incident. (2)
With a CLM solution, you can fortify your systems and mitigate these risks.
Reduced costs
Automating repetitive tasks saves time and resources so your teams can focus on other important tasks. Eliminating the need for manual interventions also minimizes the risk of costly errors.
Simplified Management
CLM solutions streamline complex certificate management processes, making them easier to handle for even non-technical staff.
Why is CLM beneficial for Microsoft AD CS Users?
While widely used, a private certificate management platform, like Microsoft AD CS, has limitations. This includes:
Manual reliance
AD CS heavily relies on manual oversight for configuration and management. This manual approach could increase the risk of errors and security vulnerabilities.
Integration challenges
AD CS has limited capabilities for integrating with third-party security tools and platforms. This creates silos of information and hinders a holistic security approach.
Size constraints
AD CS is primarily designed for on-premises environments and may not be able to issue certificates with more than 4 kilobytes (KB) size extensions. As organizations increasingly adopt cloud-based solutions, AD CS becomes less flexible. Although there are ways to expand it, this limitation could still be a dilemma when the organization scales. (3)
Misconfiguration woes
Due to its complexity, AD CS is prone to misconfigurations. These can have serious security implications, leaving your organization vulnerable.
A comprehensive CLM solution can bridge these gaps by:
Automating tasks
Automating key functionalities within AD CS helps reduce human error and streamlines certificate management for IT teams.
Fostering integration
Some CLM platforms can integrate seamlessly with AD CS and other security tools, providing a unified view of your security posture.
Embracing the cloud
Some modern CLM solutions are cloud-based, offering scalability and flexibility for hybrid and cloud-based environments.
Mitigating misconfiguration
Automated checks and alerts within a CLM system can help identify and prevent misconfigurations within AD CS.
In conclusion
A fragmented approach to digital certificate management creates blind spots that expose organizations to cybersecurity risks and operational disruptions. However, by adopting a comprehensive Certificate Lifecycle Management solution, enterprises can gain a holistic view of their digital certificates, automate critical tasks, and ultimately strengthen their overall security posture.
References
- ‘The True Cost of Downtime (And How To Avoid It)’, Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2024/04/10/the-true-cost-of-downtime-and-how-to-avoid-it/?sh=6582ee9a5a1e
- ‘Average cost of a data breach in the United States from 2006 to 2023’, Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/273575/us-average-cost-incurred-by-a-data-breach/#:~:text=As%20of%202023%2C%20the%20average%20cost%20of%20a%20data%20breach%20in%20the%20United%20States%20amounted%20to%209.48%20million%20U.S.%20dollars%2C%20up%20from%209.44%20million%20U.S.%20dollars%20in%20the%20previous%20year.%20The%20global%20average%20cost%20per%20data%20breach%20was%204.45%20million%20U.S.%20dollars%20in%202023.
- ‘How to expand the maximum extension size limit at AD CS’, Source: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/troubleshoot/windows-server/certificates-and-public-key-infrastructure-pki/expand-maximum-extension-size-limit-ad-cs#data-stored-in-the-custom-extension-has-a-limit-of-4-kb
Disclosure: We might earn commission from qualifying purchases. The commission help keep the rest of my content free, so thank you!
