I can see why the thought of another c-level might appear unnecessary but who is responsible for security if not a CSO? The CIO? Well, the CIO already oversees everything IT -- and security isn't only tech-related. The CFO? Security should not be ruled by finance, otherwise money talks and security measures walk. The CEO? They have enough responsiblities already? And we know what happens when anything is ruled by committee! The problem with having a lower-level person rule security is it doesn't get enough visibility or leverage, and requests flounder. So I stick by that recommendation, a recommendation I picked up from many security professionals. And it's a great goal for security execs who aspire to the c-suite.