Attacks/Breaches
10/31/2012
07:45 PM
50%
50%

Automation Demands Tighter VM Security

Plan to let hypervisors spin up new virtual machines on their own? Then you'd better lock them down.

From a security standpoint, basic server hypervisors have a lot of intrinsic strength. They work at a very low level within a given piece of hardware. They're hardened and task-specific, and the code base is relatively small. And it's a good thing, because the hypervisor enjoys a privileged degree of access to guest operating systems, especially via OS-native virtual machine tools, which allow the hypervisor all sorts of power. Compromising the hypervisor gives complete and total access to all of the data structures that comprise the system itself. But when we asked about hypervisor security, only 64% of respondents to our survey cited concern about this issue. That leaves a staggering 36%--greater than one-third of respondents--who have their heads in the sand. If a system runs code, it can be compromised, and if that code is running everywhere, there's a huge incentive to break it. There have been no fewer than 10 major hypervisor vulnerabilities disclosed this year alone, affecting a variety of platforms. Exploits range from remote code execution vulnerabilities (the most severe) to denial of service, and while VMware has yet to disclose a remote code execution vulnerability, it's only a matter of time. Earlier this year, for example, outdated source code for VMware's ESX hypervisor was posted.

We still see companies with a long way to go to integrate hypervisor awareness into their overall security mandates. The good news is that vendors have been preparing for this eventuality for some time, as we discuss in our full report. Also, about half of survey respondents (48%) have a hypervisor-aware security product in place. An additional 32% plan to adopt one.

Go to the main story:
A Shaky Virtual Stack

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading Tech Digest, Dec. 19, 2014
Software-defined networking can be a net plus for security. The key: Work with the network team to implement gradually, test as you go, and take the opportunity to overhaul your security strategy.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2010-5075
Published: 2014-12-27
Integer overflow in aswFW.sys 5.0.594.0 in Avast! Internet Security 5.0 Korean Trial allows local users to cause a denial of service (memory corruption and panic) via a crafted IOCTL_ASWFW_COMM_PIDINFO_RESULTS DeviceIoControl request to \\.\aswFW.

CVE-2011-4720
Published: 2014-12-27
Hillstone HS TFTP Server 1.3.2 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (daemon crash) via a long filename in a (1) RRQ or (2) WRQ operation.

CVE-2011-4722
Published: 2014-12-27
Directory traversal vulnerability in the TFTP Server 1.0.0.24 in Ipswitch WhatsUp Gold allows remote attackers to read arbitrary files via a .. (dot dot) in the Filename field of an RRQ operation.

CVE-2012-1203
Published: 2014-12-27
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in starnet/index.php in SyndeoCMS 3.0 and earlier allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of administrators for requests that add user accounts via a save_user action.

CVE-2012-1302
Published: 2014-12-27
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in amMap 2.6.3 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) data_file or (2) settings_file parameter to ammap.swf, or (3) the data_file parameter to amtimeline.swf.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Join us Wednesday, Dec. 17 at 1 p.m. Eastern Time to hear what employers are really looking for in a chief information security officer -- it may not be what you think.