<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Question of Low Priced PCI Assessments</title>
	<atom:link href="http://spiresecurity.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=15" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://spiresecurity.com/?p=15</link>
	<description>Risk and Cybersecurity Analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Aug 2013 23:28:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ulf Mattsson</title>
		<link>http://spiresecurity.com/?p=15&#038;cpage=1#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Ulf Mattsson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 21:34:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=15#comment-5</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Have you seen this blog related to “Heartland&#039;s new E3 solution” and “Format and Datatype Preserving Encryption” at &lt;a href=&quot;http://securosis.com/blog/format-and-datatype-preserving-encryption/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;http://securosis.com/blog/format-and-datatype-preserving-encryption/&lt;/a&gt; ?
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Have you seen this blog related to “Heartland&#8217;s new E3 solution” and “Format and Datatype Preserving Encryption” at <a href="http://securosis.com/blog/format-and-datatype-preserving-encryption/" rel="nofollow">http://securosis.com/blog/format-and-datatype-preserving-encryption/</a> ?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete</title>
		<link>http://spiresecurity.com/?p=15&#038;cpage=1#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:19:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=15#comment-4</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Branden -

Hmmm, I am not familiar with the variance in hourly rates among the different QSAs, but if it is anything like the audit world I came from, it is not uncommon to have hourly rates vary significantly such that effort (hours) is very similar even though cost may be much lower.

In any case, I hope you agree that my Return-on-Security-Investment approach outlined in the final paragraph is the important one.

Pete
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Branden -</p>
<p>Hmmm, I am not familiar with the variance in hourly rates among the different QSAs, but if it is anything like the audit world I came from, it is not uncommon to have hourly rates vary significantly such that effort (hours) is very similar even though cost may be much lower.</p>
<p>In any case, I hope you agree that my Return-on-Security-Investment approach outlined in the final paragraph is the important one.</p>
<p>Pete</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Branden Williams</title>
		<link>http://spiresecurity.com/?p=15&#038;cpage=1#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Branden Williams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:39:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://spiresecurity.com/blog/?p=15#comment-3</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Thanks for the kind words!

The assumption, which is not well articulated, is that you get what you pay for.  If you pay $1 Million for a PCI Assessment, does that get you something more than a $50K one?  I would certainly hope so, but is that extra $950K worth the money spent?  Probably not.  There has to be a middle ground somewhere (there is).

The real catch is if you go into an assessment expecting every gap to be correctly identified by your QSA, you can bet that the low cost bid is not be motivated to do the same amount (think effort) of work and digging as the one with a more reasonable bid.

Thanks again for the comments!
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the kind words!</p>
<p>The assumption, which is not well articulated, is that you get what you pay for.  If you pay $1 Million for a PCI Assessment, does that get you something more than a $50K one?  I would certainly hope so, but is that extra $950K worth the money spent?  Probably not.  There has to be a middle ground somewhere (there is).</p>
<p>The real catch is if you go into an assessment expecting every gap to be correctly identified by your QSA, you can bet that the low cost bid is not be motivated to do the same amount (think effort) of work and digging as the one with a more reasonable bid.</p>
<p>Thanks again for the comments!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
