It was a long time ago. I was doing data security market support for IBM. I thought of my job as helping IBM customers keep their computers safe, use them safely, and use them to protect their contents (from accidental or intentional modification, destruction, or disclosure). There were a manager and three professionals doing this work.
There was another security group in IBM, much larger, responsible for how IBM's intellectual and other property was protected. They were piloting their first "security awareness" program. As a courtesy, they invited me to sit in on one of the pilot sessions. Their intent was, that if the pilot program was successful, they would make it mandatory for all employees.
The program was motivated in part by a major breach of intellectual property. A competitor had called to tell us that someone had just offered them the design of what was to become one of IBM's most profitable products, a new disk drive, code named WINCHESTER, which was to launch an entire industry. The design was offered to the competitor for $50,000 and that price included monthly updates for a year.
Not only was IBM's general management upset but the competitor was equally so. His position was that he could absorb full development cost and still compete. What he could not do was compete with a mutual competitor who got the design for a pittance. That if IBM could not keep its own secrets, the next time he was offered such a deal, he would take it.
While the perpetrators were caught and the design documents were recovered, the lesson was not lost on IBM management. They were going to ensure that the problem was fixed. The pilot program was to be part of the fix.
I sat through the program not once, but twice. When I was asked if I had any reaction, I said that the course was a great lesson in how to commit fraud and intellectual property theft, that it was a good description of the problem but was likely to make it worse rather than better.
When asked what I would recommend, I suggested that the program be shortened perhaps to as little as fifteen minutes and that the message be shortened to what we expected the managers, professionals, and other employees to do.
IBM actually had a robust system for classifying and handling data. It defined how data was to be classified, labeled, and handled. Most of the documents created were public. Indeed, at the time IBM was one of the largest publishers in the world, second perhaps only to the US Government Printing Office. Other documents were classified and labeled as "For Employee Use Only," along with two levels of "confidential." Confidential meant that use of a document was to be on a "need to know only" basis. Each level was defined by the controls that were intended for that level. The highest level, "Registered Confidential," was intended for a only a very small number of documents, those whose disclosure might affect profitability, and where the controls included limiting and numbering every copy, keeping them under lock and key, and logging every use.
What IBM really needed was for every employee to classify and label documents properly, know the procedures for every class that they were likely to handle, and follow the procedures. That meant that most employees needed to be trained only on public and employee use only, a smaller number on confidential and "need to know," and only a tiny number on how to recognize, classify, and handle the "crown jewels."
It was much easier to teach this. Not only did this focus increase the effectiveness of the program but it greatly reduced its cost. Keep in mind that this was in an era when most information was still stored on cheap paper rather than on expensive computer storage media. The more sensitive the data, the less likely it was to be in a computer. It was very different from today where we use little expensive paper, and store the most sensitive data in cheap computer storage.
The lessons for today are very different but the emphasis of awareness training should be the same. Focus on behavior, what we need for people to do. Focus on roles and applications. Leave descriptions of the environment, the threat sources and rates, the attacks, the vulnerabilities, the problem, to the specialists. Awareness training should be about the solution, not the problem.