What does the SCADA water pump attack mean to your business…

The ability to attack, compromise, and cause damage has existed since the utility industry began connecting these systems on the Internet.  Examples, including the European nation that was attacked 24+ months ago, are easy to locate.  Yesterday an attack (more proof of concept than anything it could have really been) occurred.  The current public awareness of cyber attacks, the nation state theater risks, and transparency of this action has raised the resulting awareness beyond the closed professional circles within Information Security.    There is a number of interesting writeups and I would suggest carefully reading a few for a balanced perspective.  Two that I would recommend include:

• Wired
• Reuters

What this means for your Utility company is that the abstract threat modeling exercise that considers these attack vectors should be conducted more thoroughly with real risk and mitigation decisions progressing up to the Board of Directors.

As for everyone else who is a customer of such utility companies, the BCP/DR plans should be updated to reflect the possibility of such a loss of services.  Business enterprise information security / risk management programs (+vendor management) should elevate utility service providers (including cellular operators).  These actions should directly impact the annual/ongoing risk assessments and establish an expectation of security assessment and assurance on a regular basis from these service providers.

It is an interesting quandry that Cloud service providers are vetted and assessed more rigorously than that of Utility service providers, the original cloud.

Thoughts .. challenges?

James DeLuccia iV

Other thoughts?

James

Convergence Risk: Google Chrome and Extensions, at BlackHat 2011

Interesting quotes from guys that demonstrated attack vectors in Google’s Chrome during Blackhat 2011:

“The software security model we’ve been dealing with for decades now has been reframed,” Johansen said.  “It’s moved into the cloud and if you’re logged into bank, social network and email accounts, why do I care what’s stored in your hard drive?”

• An important illumination regarding the shifting of the risk landscape.  How the user interfaces with data and the system has changed and challenges the current technology controls relied upon to safeguard the intellectual property.
• What is the effective rate of end-point security (malware / phishing agents, anti-virus) on this new user case?
• What is being deployed and effective – policy, procedure, technology, a hybrid?

“While the Chrome browser has a sandboxing security feature to prevent an attack from accessing critical system processes, Chrome extensions are an exception to the rule. They can communicate among each other, making it fairly easy for an attacker to jump from a flawed extension to steal data from a secure extension.”

• Speaks to the issue of convergence of apps that are emerging on iPhones, Androids, respective tablets, TVs, browsers, operating systems, etc…  Similar to the fragmentation attacks of the past – where packets would be innocent separate, but when all received they would reform to something capable of malicious activity.

Interesting extension of risk here is that the platform and / or devices may be trusted and accepted by enterprises, but it is these Apps / Widgets / Extensions that are creating the security scenarios.  This requires a policy and process for understanding the state of these platforms (platforms here including all mobile devices, browsers, and similar App-Loadable environments) beyond the gold configuration build.

Another article on the Google Chrome extension risk described above.

Thoughts?

James DeLuccia

#RSAC Panel on Cloud – security and privacy

Security, Privacy, and liability are top issues for #Cloud security and a popular topic at #RSAC (RSA SFO 2011 Conference)  The first session today was moderated by Drue Reeves (Gartner), Michelle Dennedy (iDennedy), Tanya Forsheit (InfoLawGroup LLP), Archie Reed (HP), and Eran Feigenbaum (Google).  A great discussion and lots of interesting points, and I would highlight ideas for managing security pragmatically for organizations.  Below are my notes.  Apologies for broken flows in logic, as I was trying to capture ideas put forward by panel I sometimes got lost in discussion.

Customers cannot rely only on provider to ensure data confidentiality and compliance, but are seeking assurances.

Cloud-Risks

• Erin Feigenbaum (Google) – Customers want more transparency in general in the Cloud.  Google is seeing smaller companies move into the cloud and we see that the service and type of cloud sought varies.  Some clouds vary in ability to serve (Gmail in 2010 had uptime of 99.984%).
• Panel – Due diligence is necessary for both sides of the customer-cloud provider model.  As such must  and get a fair assessment of is happening today for both sides – to know what is happening today.  Understanding what the customer is doing individually to create an ‘honest conversation’.  Create a performance and services assessment of internal (corporate data center and software services) delivery and then determine what Cloud providers meet the current and future state target.  Understanding what is essential to your business is critical to having reasonable expectations and having a proper cost/benefit return.

Legal, procurement, internal audit, business, and technology team members must get together to determine what is important and rate these items.  This then can allow for a better data set identification and procurement of service providers.

• The end result is the business needs to determine what are their risk tolerance – such as what are they willing to accept.  The universe of Cloud providers allows businesses to identify those that can meet and demonstrate adherence to the criteria that matters to the business.

Focusing on the dataset is what matters and consideration of the period of time.  The dataset released to the cloud must meet your internal safeguard and risk tolerance criteria.

1. Set Principles first – save money, keep agility, achieve availability
2. Check application – is it generating revenue; does it create a loss of life scenario
3. Keeping it in-house does not eliminate the risk vs. having it in the cloud.

Must focus at the strategic level …

Shadow IT, an example:

• Shadow IT is a problem and is still ongoing.  A security survey with a bank in Canada where the marketing department did a survey in Salesforce.com.  The problem was using the system the data of private Canadian citizens was crossing the U.S. border – which is against the law.  This required a re-architecture effort to correct these activities.

There is a need for awareness and education on the implications of engaging cloud providers and how the flow of datasets impact the business’ legal obligations.

Consumer Technology in Business:

• Eran – 50% of people surveyed installed applications that are not allowed by their corporations and IT.  The consumerization of technology is creating complex and intertwined technology ecosystems that must be considered by the business, risk management, legal, and security.
• It is your responsibility to do the due diligence on what the cloud providers are doing to provide assurance, and work with those that provide such information.  The necessity is a balance between providing sufficient information security confidence and mapping out attack vectors for criminals.

Google Growth rate on Cloud:

• 3,000 new businesses are signing up on the Google cloud every day – impossible to respond uniquely to each one individually.

Data Location

• It is up to the customer on knowing what are the legal aspects and appropriate uses of the business data.  Understanding the transportation of sensitive data across borders is the business responsibility.
• It is up to the business to understand and act to protect the data of the business – pushing the information onto a Cloud provider is not a transfer of risk / ownership / responsibility.

If you had the chance today to rebuild your systems, would you do it the same way?

• Cloud does provide unique technologies beyond what you have already today.  Cloud providers today have allowed them to rebuild their centers that consider today’s technology data architecture and leverage new tech.

Points of reality and impossibility

• If an organization does not have deep Identity Access Management (IAM) it is poor to try and bolt this on while transitioning to the cloud.  Reasonable expectations must be had for both the consumer and of the cloud provider.

Liability and Allocation between Customers and Clouds

• Customers with data in their own data centers – they are basically self-insuring their operations.  When moving to the Cloud these customers are now transferring this a third party.  There is a financial aspect here.  How can liability be balanced between customer and service provider?
• When Customer absorbs all liability they are hesitant to put X data on Cloud.  If Cloud absorbs liability the cost will be to high.

Data in Space

• People are putting data on the cloud based on rash decisions without unique risk assessments on the data sets and providers.

Agreeing on Liability in the Cloud

• Organizations have been able to negotiate liability clauses with cloud providers.  Ponemon institute figures are used in determining the limit of liability and are a good way of coming to a proper number that is even with industry figures.  I.e., If Ponemon institute says cost of a breach per record is $224 and business has 20,000 employee records —> The limit of liability should equal the product of these two numbers, and this has proven to be a reasonable discussion with cloud providers.  Indemnification is generally a non-discussion point.
• The world will move into specialized applications and services.  These point organizations allows for specific legal and technology considerations that are appropriate for that niche.  This is seen at the contract level, notification levels, prioritization on RTR, and across many areas.

Everything is negotiable for the right amount of money or love – Eran

• Cloud providers do not like to do one-offs.  Cloud providers including Google will negotiate.

APPROACH to cleanse data with confidence

• Best tip is to encrypt data online… When de-provisioning systems and cleansing .. consider rewriting databases / applications / instances with clean values fully.  Is this a practical method of ensuring the data is satisfied.  How long should the data be in this state to ensure the data is pushed to other parallel instances?
• Are PCI, SIGS, and such standards for financial services appropriate for the Cloud provider?  The responsibility is always the data owner.  Internal controls must be migrated out to the cloud evenly as applied internally.  It is the business’ risk and responsibility.

Recommendations of the Panel

Archie Reed:  Everyone becomes a broker and recommend that IT teams to embrace this role.  Need to understand how to source, and the chemistry and structure of the IT organization needs to shift.  It will and must include working with the business to have such parties as legal, internal audit, and risk management.

Tanya Forsheit:  I would love to see standards developed and the customers participate in a meaningful way.  The provider side has thought through these seriously over the last few years.  The business to business relationship within the Cloud – Customer relationship is weak.  Be reasonable.

Eran: There is a paradigm shift from a server you can touch and be managed by an Admin that you hired vs. one that is acquired by a contract through a Cloud providers.  Google has over 200 security professionals.  Bank robbers go where the data is – the Cloud has the data.

How do you respond to a vulnerability, how do you respond to a hack … ARE THESE the new / right questions to seek of Cloud providers?

Michelle Dennedy: Leverage and plan for a loss with cloud providers.

Drue:  There are risks you can identify to mitigate risks on the technology side, and there are financial tools (insurance, etc…) that must be deployed.

Question and Answer:

• Cloud providers have the opportunity to have a dashboard to track and demonstrate controls.  These are hard we know.
• FedRamp and continuous auditing is a future component of the Cloud providers (that some) will adhere to and demonstrate.

An engaging panel and some interesting and useful points raised.  Welcome any feedback and expansions on the ideas above,

James DeLuccia

#BsidesSF notes from panel with Richard Bejtlich and Travis Reese

#BsidesSF session on with Richard B. and T of Mandiant covered a lot of very interesting points.  Specifically covered APT, China, Seriousness of attacks, marketing FUD, and kinetic vs cyber war fare.  I posted messages as they came up during the meeting and have copied them below in their entirety.

.    One man artisans are not posting high-res graphics b/c of copied versions appearing .. all lvls of biz at risk #BsidesSF #RSAC 10 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    RT @ira_victor: #BSidesSF: many attax not persitant, Chinese malware dies when plug pulled. They like PlausDeniability #RSAC 16 minutes ago via Tweet

.    The technology that the developing world governments want to acquire is sitting around the U.S. and other countries #BsidesSF 17 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    Are DDoS attacks serious attacks .. ala APT? .. Sure.. since “advanced” definition matches safeguards seriuosness @bsidesSF #RSAC 25 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    “advanced” is the level required to exploit and defeat security systems #BsidesSF <– attacks do not need to be complex to work 26 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    RT @mirmirage: Hacked BBC streaming sites serve up malware http://reg.cx/1MP6 #security #RSAC <– 1. Identify big usr base 2. Add malware 30 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    RT @chenxiwang: There are much easier compnts to attck in a sys than going after the Crypto system. #RSAC <– Req residual risk visibility 32 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    #BsidesSF panel is a great blend of research based responses and a roasting of companies w/ poor PR / marketing 34 minutes ago via TweetDeck

.    About 50 commercial victims to cyberattack were seen by Mandian. A large # was utilities. #bsideSsf 39 minutes ago via Echofon

.    Panel: u have to have some level of respect to what is being executed by china. They are getting same quality of SigInt as U.S. #bsideSsf 40 minutes ago via Echofon

.    Our culture is an affront on Chinese “network sovereignty”, such as Justin Bieber. #bsideSsf panel on #cyberwar 42 minutes ago via Echofon

Chinese believe we are already in a #cyberwar and that the U.S started it. #bsideSsf panel 44 minutes ago via Echofon

Expanded thoughts to consider also include:

The concept of APT and Advanced attacks is glamorous, but upon review it is commonly found that ‘simple’ attacks were the root cause of the breach.  Caution should be applied that an attack and a breach are just that – respect the past and the simple attacks, while managing the more complex approaches to espionage and data level attacks.

What is valuable?

The technology that the developing world governments want to acquire is sitting around the U.S. and other countries undefended and exposed.  Simpler to leap frog by building from these established systems (read: Utility companies, Manufacturing, etc…)

Great discussions and activity only wish could capture more of the discussions,

James DeLuccia IV

Study Highlights Surprising Attitudes on Compliance, Standards Adoption, and Challenges Meeting PCI DSS Requirements

A new survey was revealed on January 12 2011 by Cisco conducted by “InsightExpress of 500 information technology decision-makers to uncover and qualify current sentiment on PCI Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) five years after the standard emerged”.  Now surveys are great barometers of what is happening beyond our own organization’s and I encourage everyone to check out the findings.  As with all such research, be aware of statistical kung fu before running with these figures.

The link to the full release is here.

Two statistics that were of particular interest to me were:

• 70% of respondents believe they are more secure as a result of PCI DSS.  This is intriguing as most professionals would state that PCI aspects should be “spokes in a greater wheel”, and not the whole program.  Perhaps respondents felt at a macro level all boats (or needles if one is looking at a information security dashboard) rose with the tide.
• “57% of respondents were satisfied with their current virtualization security posture.” – To me this is striking that there is such a great deal of confidence around an area that has great complexity.  This is also encouraging, in that such great focus and energy exists around virtualization that is being addressed at the proper levels.

As we draw closer to RSA, I suspect there will be a bounty of great papers and studies to be consumed.  I will do my best to highlight those that were interesting.

Best,

James DeLuccia