Read time: 5 minutes
This article originally appeared in Security Magazine in June 2023
Does this mean organizations should abandon cybersecurity awareness training? Certainly not. Training provides value and can't hurt organizational security posture. However, the fundamental mathematics remain unforgiving: defenders must be right every time, while attackers need only one success among thousands of attempts.
No amount of security awareness training can achieve perfect human performance. When organizations flood employees with thousands of phishing emails requiring only one or two clicks for success, the training-centric approach reveals its limitations.
The cybersecurity community's obsession with phishing as the primary "human factor" represents a critical blind spot. While phishing attacks and insider threats make compelling television drama, they obscure more subtle yet consequential human-driven vulnerabilities.
Consider these overlooked scenarios that cause real breaches:
Configuration Errors occur when overworked IT team members lack proper training or time to secure new systems correctly. A misconfigured server created under deadline pressure can expose entire network segments.
Asset Management Failures happen when devices installed temporarily during crisis response get forgotten in daily operational chaos. Many IT professionals cite device inventory as among their greatest challenges.
Process Gaps emerge when security policies don't account for operational realities, forcing workarounds that create unintended vulnerabilities.
These human factors rarely appear in training curricula despite causing significant organizational exposure.
Perhaps the most overlooked human factor involves vulnerability management itself. More than 60% of breaches trace to unpatched vulnerabilities—not exotic zero-days, but months- or years-old vulnerabilities with readily available patches.
Why do these vulnerabilities persist? The top reasons cited are resource constraints and disruption fears. Yet current data reveals that over 98% of patches never require rollback, meaning less than 2% cause meaningful disruption.
This disconnect between perception and reality creates irrational fear that prevents aggressive patching schedules, enabling unnecessary attack exposure. The human psychology driving excessive caution represents a critical vulnerability that training programs don't address.
The actual human factors affecting cybersecurity extend far beyond click-through rates on phishing simulations:
Operational Pressure forces IT teams to prioritize immediate fires over long-term security maintenance. When every day brings new crisis response requirements, vulnerability management becomes a lower priority despite its critical importance.
Resource Constraints leave security and IT teams understaffed relative to their responsibilities. Even well-intentioned professionals struggle to maintain comprehensive security when stretched beyond capacity.
Knowledge Gaps occur when complex security technologies outpace available training and expertise. Organizations deploy sophisticated tools without ensuring teams can configure and maintain them effectively.
Communication Breakdowns between security and operational teams create gaps where critical vulnerabilities fall through organizational cracks.
Traditional cybersecurity training serves organizational leadership better than actual security. It provides two benefits executives find irresistible: compliance box-checking and liability protection.
When breaches occur, it's politically difficult to explain that $20 million in recovery costs resulted from an 18-month-old unpatched vulnerability or a misconfigured server. It's far more palatable to blame "careless employees clicking bad links despite mandatory training."
This narrative shift—"We did everything required and were still victimized"—protects executive reputations while obscuring the systemic issues that actually enable successful attacks.
At IT Agent, we see the real human factors affecting cybersecurity daily. Our vulnerability management platform addresses the psychological barriers to effective patching by providing intelligence that enables confident decision-making rather than fear-based delays.
When IT teams have access to real-world data about patch behavior and vulnerability exploitation patterns, they can make rational decisions about risk management. This approach addresses the human tendency toward excessive caution that leaves organizations vulnerable.
Addressing actual human factors requires moving beyond training toward systemic improvements:
Resource Alignment ensures security and IT teams have adequate staffing and time to perform essential functions without constant crisis response mode.
Process Integration embeds security considerations into operational workflows rather than treating them as separate compliance activities.
Tool Optimization provides technology that works with human psychology rather than against it, reducing cognitive load while improving security outcomes.
Communication Improvement creates clear channels between security and operations teams that prevent critical vulnerabilities from falling through organizational gaps.
The addiction recovery community recognizes that admitting problems exist represents the essential first step toward resolution. The cybersecurity community needs similar honesty about human factors.
The problem cannot be solved solely through awareness training. The people responsible for network operations and protection are human—they make mistakes, face time constraints, and typically receive little appreciation until something goes wrong.
Instead of defaulting to training solutions that shift responsibility to end users, organizations should ask their security and IT teams what they need to prevent attacks effectively—then provide those resources.
This might include:
Adequate staffing to handle both routine maintenance and crisis response
Modern tools that work efficiently within existing workflows
Clear processes that integrate security with operational requirements
Executive support for necessary security measures that might temporarily impact operations
True cybersecurity improvement requires honest assessment of human factors beyond phishing susceptibility. Organizations must address the systemic issues that prevent security teams from performing effectively rather than assuming training can overcome all human limitations.
When cybersecurity professionals have the resources, tools, and organizational support needed to do their jobs effectively, security improves dramatically. When they're forced to operate under impossible constraints while being blamed for inevitable human errors, security suffers regardless of training investment.
The human factor in cybersecurity isn't primarily about employee awareness—it's about creating organizational conditions where security professionals can succeed. This requires moving beyond training theater toward genuine investment in the people and processes that actually protect organizational assets.
Organizations that recognize this distinction and invest accordingly will achieve better security outcomes than those that continue believing complex human and organizational challenges can be resolved through quarterly training modules.
The choice isn't between training and other solutions—it's between addressing superficial symptoms and tackling fundamental causes. Until the cybersecurity community makes this distinction, human factors will continue enabling the very breaches that training programs claim to prevent.
Powerful, self-serve product and growth analytics to help you convert, engage.
Dive into the heart of innovation with our 'Coding Chronicles' blog section. Explore a rich tapestry of articles, tutorials, and insights that unravel.
