Welcome Guest. | Log In | Register | Membership Benefits

Strengthening Third-Party Contracts To Lower Breach Risks

FTC breach, contract deficiencies highlight importance of including security provisions within technology contracts

Feb 22, 2012 | 06:10 PM | 

By Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer
Dark Reading


Details emerged this week that showed that recent Anonymous hacks of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) websites could potentially have been prevented had the FTC not dispensed with security provisions in a contract with the third-party vendors who hosted the sites. As organizations continue to divide labor in IT—particularly in development of public-facing websites—the incident could prove a good lesson in the importance of shoring up contract language and SLAs to ensure third parties are not adding undue risks of data breaches in the future.

In the case of the FTC, the federal agency suffered two embarrassing breaches within the last two months. In January, Anonymous attacked the FTC’s OnGuardOnline.gov site and this month it again hacked the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection site. The websites in question were open to attack due to a failure to patch the server operating systems and applications associated with the site, a weakness that Anonymous took advantage of to publicize its distaste for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) backed by the federal government.

“Even more bothersome than your complete lack of competence in maintaining your own f***ing websites and serving the citizens you are supposed to be protecting, is the US federal government’s support of ACTA,” Anonymous wrote about its most recent attack.

The sites in question were developed by public relations firm Fleishman-Hilliard, which hosted the sites on resources provided by hosting and cloud services provider Media Temple. The two firms are currently duking it out in a very public finger-pointing spat reported by Ars Technica, which also brought to light the fact that the $1.5 million contract to develop the sites initially included security provisions during the acquisition process but then dropped those requirements.

According to John Nicholson, counsel for the global sourcing practice at Washington, D.C.-based law firm Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, these days such contract omissions are pretty rare, but they still happen.

“It's unusual, particularly these days when sensitivity to security and privacy is high, but gaps in functionality like this aren't unheard of,” he says. “When dealing with cloud / hosting agreements, any time the supplier isn't responsible for the end-to-end service, and the integration of all of the subsidiary functions provided by third parties, things like this can happen.”

Nicholson believes that while the FTC hacks were not necessarily as devastating as others elsewhere that exposed large repositories of personally identifiable information, they do highlight some of the issues posed by contracting for technology services.

“Given the way that functions at different levels of the stack are being disaggregated, it can be complicated to figure out who's responsible for what and where they are,” he says. “The physical servers hosting a site might be in a server-hotel data center run by one party, while the entity who is responsible for the websites themselves might be another party, and the websites might call to applications or databases that are hosted and managed by entirely different companies. Without someone responsible for the overall integration, things can slip through the cracks and important details can be missed.”

He believes that outsource projects need to include the same risk assessment considerations that any in-house IT project should be weighed against. The key, he says, is to think of the risks and tie them to requirements before the work is scoped.

“Security needs to be baked into the requirements for the service because the level of security you get is part of the cost-benefit/risk analysis for the deal. If you want a solution that is highly secure, there are design choices that need to be made that have cost implications, but they reduce overall risk,” Nicholson says. “On the other hand, if you're not that worried about security, or if the thing you’re dealing with doesn't need a lot of protection, then it doesn't make sense to pay for a Bradley Assault Vehicle when you need Volvo-level safety.”

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add Your Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.



Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

Dark Reading encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, Dark Reading moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. Dark Reading further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
Subscribe to RSS



Database Security Reports

report Securing The Data Warehouse
Many enterprises are building data warehouses to centralize the ever-increasing information flowing through their organizations into useful repositories. This makes good business sense, but it opens up a slew of concerns from a security standpoint. IT professionals can apply many of the same security best practices used with databases, but there are new lessons to be learned as well.

report Defend Your Data From Malicious Insiders
The biggest threat to your company?s most sensitive data may be the employee who has legitimate access to corporate databases but less-than-legitimate intentions. And while the incidence of insider data breaches has decreased, external attacks often imitate them--and do serious damage. Follow our advice to mitigate the risk.

report Ensuring Secure Database Access
Role-based access control based on least user privilege is one of the most effective ways to prevent the compromise of corporate data. But proper provisioning is a growing challenging, due to the proliferation of "big data," NoSQLdatabases, and cloud-based data storage.

Other reports from the Database Security Tech Center:

Related Content

Establishing a Strategy for Database Security is No Longer Optional
As databases continue to grow in size, complexity and importance, enterprises struggle to identify the most appropriate controls regarding their use and misuse. The report identifies best practices, including: Implementing database activity monitoring to mitigate the high levels of risk from database vulnerabilities, and address audit findings in areas such as database segregation of duties and change management; using data security measures, such as data masking and data encryption; and monitoring privileged-user access and access to critical data.

Database Activity Monitoring Is Evolving Into Database Audit and Protection
In this report, Gartner writes that "Database audit and protection (DAP) represents an evolutionary advance in database activity monitoring tools." DAP suites provide comprehensive, cross-platform support in heterogeneous database environments to protect sensitive data from inappropriate use. Organizations are increasingly concerned with optimizing database security and mitigating risks associated with database vulnerabilities.

Protecting Against Database Attacks and Insider Threats: Top 5 Scenarios
Data security presents a multi-dimensional challenge in today's complex IT environment. Multiple access paths and permission levels have resulted in a broad array of security threats and vulnerabilities. We invite you to read this new eBook: "Protecting against database attacks and insider threats" to learn the top five scenarios and essential best practices for preventing database attacks and insider threats.

Demo: Distributed Database Security with Real-time Monitoring and Audit Protection
Organizations across the globe continue to experience compromised data caused by malicious attacks, web application vulnerabilities or unauthorized changes. View this demo and learn how IBM InfoSphere Guardium? database activity monitoring can help protect your sensitive data in distributed DBMS environments with a holistic approach to data security and compliance.

Look Beyond Native Database Auditing To Improve Security, Audit Visibility, And Real-Time Protection
Today's attacks on enterprise databases are more sophisticated than ever, and they occur so fast that it's often difficult to stop them in real time. Despite significant efforts to protect enterprise databases, the number of records breached has grown each year - due to all types of internal and external attacks and violations of corporate policy.




Featured Webcasts
Featured Whitepapers
Featured Reports