Risk
11/20/2013
09:06 AM
Ed Amoroso
Ed Amoroso
Commentary
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail

The New Security Architecture

Recent high profile attacks reflect a new reality in which perimeter-based security models are increasingly less effective in protecting key corporate assets and information.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Susan Fogarty
50%
50%
Susan Fogarty,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 5:21:27 PM
Re: Compliance vs. security
Ed, thanks so much for your response. I'm aware that the carriers are constantly monitoring their networks for developing threats. I guess I am surprised that we haven't seen as that much uptake in managed security services by enterprises so that they can take advantage of that. There seems like a lot of potential that could really be leveraged.
Ed Amoroso
50%
50%
Ed Amoroso,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 1:09:17 PM
Re: Compliance Testing Doesn't Go Away
Jerry, we actually agree on the first point, but perhaps it wasn't clear before. I was not suggesting that compliance and control testing should go away, but that these tactics alone are not a perfect reflection of your security posture and can distract a security team from critical priorities. For example, you can have the appropriate controls in place and functioning properly, but if an employee is caught by a phishing email and adversaries gain access to your network, they can work around all your controls. This is one reason why network visibility is so important. You need to understand what is going in and out of your network at all times because today's adversaries can adjust their tactics in real-time, so businesses need to have the ability to recognize those tactics and react quickly.
Ed Amoroso
50%
50%
Ed Amoroso,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 1:08:44 PM
Re: Compliance vs. security
Susan, for AT&T customers, our network is their first line of defense. In fact, we track hundreds of millions of security events every day to protect our network and our customers from malicious threats. The challenge for businesses is that Internet traffic comes into their corporate networks from a variety of sources, so it's important to have visibility into your organization's specific network. This level of visibility is also critical for detecting unauthorized access to your corporate assets.
Ed Amoroso
50%
50%
Ed Amoroso,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 1:07:39 PM
Re: Compliance vs. security
David, compliance is not going away and it's become part of the job for those of us responsible for protecting corporate networks. However, as Jerry points out below, controls are not 100% foolproof and are inadequate when it comes to dealing with a live adversary. Consequently, a business that passes all of its audits can still be extremely vulnerable to attack. I believe effective programs give high priority to security innovation and to developing a team that can mitigate threats in real-time.
Ed Amoroso
50%
50%
Ed Amoroso,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 1:04:12 PM
Re: Investment priorites
Marilyn, I think an important first step for senior management is ensuring that CSOs are bringing a solid foundation of networking and cybersecurity expertise to audit discussions. In the future, I expect we'll see more highly technical security professionals sporting PhDs and a deep understanding of networks, infrastructure, and devices. These technical experts know the importance of adopting threat detection and mitigation practices, rather than putting all the organization's time and energy into compliance.
BillatDellSoftware
50%
50%
BillatDellSoftware,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 10:29:35 AM
Re: Determining risk calue
Marilyn, Thanks for the tip on the Dave K article.  I really like the last line: "Over the longer term, the only alternative to risk management is crisis management, and crisis management is much more embarrassing, expensive and time consuming." 

We are providing Dave a review of our IAM business in a few weeks.  I'll be sure to bring this one up.  Thanks!

 
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
11/21/2013 | 10:15:11 AM
Re: Determining risk calue
These are all great questions about prioritizing assets and determining risk, Bill. Let's throw them out to the security community to see what risk management strategies and tactics are working and not working in their respective organizations.

Also want to point you to Dave Kearns' column: Understanding IT Risk Management In 4 Steps X 3, which outlines a risk management matrix that combines the probability of harm and the severity of harm. 
BillatDellSoftware
50%
50%
BillatDellSoftware,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/21/2013 | 8:25:04 AM
Determining risk calue
Ed, this is an excellent article insofar as it looks at the changing IT landscape and how that impacts security in the enterprise both today and in the future.  I work for Dell Software and spend a good deal of time speaking with customers who are experiencing very similar challenges.  One of the topics I would like to hear more about from you is how you go about prioritizing assets.  You mention in the article that you need to invest more to protect "high value" assets than you do for "lower value" assets.  How do you go about determining those risk values?  Do you allow the business to classify apps and content?  Do you have an automated tool that strives to check each document and assign risk to it?
Susan Fogarty
50%
50%
Susan Fogarty,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/20/2013 | 6:04:42 PM
Re: Compliance Testing Doesn't Go Away
Jerry, I like your analysis. The problem comes when companies equate compliance with security and think if they are complaint, then everything will be fine. But there are a lot of other protections that may be needed. A risk assessment should point those out.
JerryJ
50%
50%
JerryJ,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/20/2013 | 1:21:33 PM
Compliance Testing Doesn't Go Away
Ed, you wrote "...most basic tenet of today's corporate audit involves testing controls to ensure 100 percent compliance with corporate policy. This mentality needs to change..." It may be semantics, but I respectfully disagree. You always need to test controls. Too often, in my experience, an adversary has take advantage of a failed control that was thought to be in place. That said, you need to be certain you've selected and implemented the correct controls to begin with, recognizing that the technologies we deploy and the motives, skills and modus operandi of the adversary are ever evolving.

You finished your thought with "...so businesses can prioritize investments on protections that will yield the best possible security posture." This I agree with 100%. I was once on a panel speaking on risk management and was asked, "so does risk management eliminate the need for the compliance checklist?" My reply was, "No. Risk management is a way to prioritize the compliance checklist." I would also add that risk management is a way to evolve the compliance checklist.
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading December Tech Digest
Experts weigh in on the pros and cons of end-user security training.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-3407
Published: 2014-11-27
The SSL VPN implementation in Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) Software 9.3(.2) and earlier does not properly allocate memory blocks during HTTP packet handling, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (memory consumption) via crafted packets, aka Bug ID CSCuq68888.

CVE-2014-4829
Published: 2014-11-27
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM Security QRadar SIEM and QRadar Risk Manager 7.1 before MR2 Patch 9 and 7.2 before 7.2.4 Patch 1, and QRadar Vulnerability Manager 7.2 before 7.2.4 Patch 1, allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests tha...

CVE-2014-4831
Published: 2014-11-27
IBM Security QRadar SIEM and QRadar Risk Manager 7.1 before MR2 Patch 9 and 7.2 before 7.2.4 Patch 1, and QRadar Vulnerability Manager 7.2 before 7.2.4 Patch 1, allow remote attackers to hijack sessions via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2014-4832
Published: 2014-11-27
IBM Security QRadar SIEM and QRadar Risk Manager 7.1 before MR2 Patch 9 and 7.2 before 7.2.4 Patch 1, and QRadar Vulnerability Manager 7.2 before 7.2.4 Patch 1, allow remote attackers to obtain sensitive cookie information by sniffing the network during an HTTP session.

CVE-2014-4883
Published: 2014-11-27
resolv.c in the DNS resolver in uIP, and dns.c in the DNS resolver in lwIP 1.4.1 and earlier, does not use random values for ID fields and source ports of DNS query packets, which makes it easier for man-in-the-middle attackers to conduct cache-poisoning attacks via spoofed reply packets.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Now that the holiday season is about to begin both online and in stores, will this be yet another season of nonstop gifting to cybercriminals?