Perimeter
Guest Blog // Selected Security Content Provided By Sophos
What's This?
2/17/2012
09:09 AM
Dark Reading
Dark Reading
Security Insights
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Nortel Networks: Wolf In The Henhouse, Guard Dog Fast Asleep

Keeping stock and patent price at premium trumps disclosure at Nortel Networks

If you’re a wolf that wants to go undetected in hunting for hens or their eggs on a midnight raid of Farmer Brown’s nearby chicken coop, you generally have only two choices. Try slipping by the sleeping guard dog and hope you don’t get caught, or walk right up to and past his vigilant counterpart, all the while knowing full well he’s not going to wake the sleeping farmer. Not with a bark, a howl, or even a growl. If you’re lucky, your first choice may work. Or you can attempt the second approach and be guaranteed the opportunity to wipe the coop clean of both hens and their eggs.

That’s the analogy I summoned in reading about the recent Wall Street Journal report that hackers, reportedly from an IP address located in China, breached bankrupt Nortel Networks security as far back as 2000 and stole seven passwords from the company's top executives -- including the CEO -- which granted them widespread access to the entire Nortel network.

Citing Brian Shields, a former Nortel employee who led an internal investigation into the security breaches, the Journal reported the security breaches dated as far as back as at least 2000, and malware planted by the hackers made it possible to steal intellectual property, including technical papers, R&D reports, business plans, employee emails, and other documents.

Shields, who worked for Nortel for 19 years, claims that the company discovered the hack in 2004 when it was determined that some PCs were regularly sending sensitive data to an IP address based in Shanghai.

Nortel responded by changing affected passwords, but wound down an internal investigation into the breach after six months due to a lack of progress. Shields claims that he made recommendations to management about how to better protect the company's networks, but he was ignored.

The timing of this disclosure -- Nortel recently receiving clearance by the Department of Justice to sell $4.5 billion worth of patents to Apple, Microsoft and RIM -- is not only revealing but also problematic. Would any of these companies have paid so much for the patents if they’d known the data was likely compromised? And even more troubling, if the patents were known to have been potentially stolen or compromised, wouldn’t they (e.g., Nortel) have to have reported that? I’ll grant you any bills, much less legislative enforcement around data breach disclosures laws, at least in 2000, were still years away, still, why was Nortel’s accountability and due diligence to shareholders and employees alike MIA, even DOA?

One possible source of subterfuge may well have been stock price itself.

As reported by Brian Prince in Dark Reading, who interviewed Jacob Olcott, a principal in cybersecurity practice at security analysis firm Good Harbor Consulting, “the average investor is starting to understand the link between network security and future revenue. The more a company can keep attackers out of its networks, the better chance it can deliver business. Nortel investors may be asking themselves whether the decade of intellectual property and trade secret theft helped drive the company out of business.”

In other words, keep the breach out of the headline and glare (e.g. “the CNN moment”) and the stock price remains stable, business goes on as usual and no one is the wiser.

As a veteran security professional who’s seen my share of companies play (or try to play) their get-out-of-jail card when their hands have been caught in the proverbial cookie jar I think Nortel’s response to its known breach is shameful. It doesn’t even look like they really cared. Not about their reputation or the integrity of their intellectual property and not even to their suitors who probably went into the patent acquisition process with their respective eyes and balance sheets wide open, unknowingly dealing with a player who kept all the cards close to the vest and a deck that was always stacked in its favor.

Look, I’ve never been much for more government intervention in our lives and by no means am I letting Nortel off the hook here, (and with former Nortel CEO Frank Dunn currently being tired for fraud, that’s never going to be an option, anyway). However, it’s my sincere hope that the data breach disclosure laws already codified on a state by state basis (46 at last count) and the federal data protection laws making their way through Congress will force companies both privately-held and publicly-traded to step up to the plate, be accountable and take responsibility when breaches happen.

Much like a dependable guard dog that always sleeps with one eye open, ready to lock up with and turn aside a stealth wolf in order to protect his valued charges.

Chester Wisniewski is a senior security adviser at Sophos Canada.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
rsodhi945
50%
50%
rsodhi945,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/20/2012 | 4:52:26 AM
re: Nortel Networks: Wolf In The Henhouse, Guard Dog Fast Asleep
Enjoyed your guard dog analogy and the importance of holding ourselves individually and professionally to a higher level of ethics and practice.-Š We must continue new crucial conversations in our organizations; especially around "internal investigation into the security breaches"-Š Organizations must add security breach analysis and audits to the weekly staff meeting agenda.-Š When we learn about these events, we must overcome our fears by being transparent; by reporting breaches.-Š This may lead to greater regulatory body compliance reporting but will lead to new learnings by our stakeholders and customers we serve and the-Šaverage investor will start-Š"to understand the link between network security and future revenue".-Š

One area of concern or worry.-Š How do we assure safety exists within the chicken coop before we assign the guard dog?-Š It's time for us to add incident management and data protection to our working weekly agendas.
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Cartoon
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-6306
Published: 2014-08-22
Unspecified vulnerability on IBM Power 7 Systems 740 before 740.70 01Ax740_121, 760 before 760.40 Ax760_078, and 770 before 770.30 01Ax770_062 allows local users to gain Service Processor privileges via unknown vectors.

CVE-2014-0232
Published: 2014-08-22
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in framework/common/webcommon/includes/messages.ftl in Apache OFBiz 11.04.01 before 11.04.05 and 12.04.01 before 12.04.04 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via unspecified vectors, which are not properly handled in a (1)...

CVE-2014-3525
Published: 2014-08-22
Unspecified vulnerability in Apache Traffic Server 4.2.1.1 and 5.x before 5.0.1 has unknown impact and attack vectors, possibly related to health checks.

CVE-2014-3563
Published: 2014-08-22
Multiple unspecified vulnerabilities in Salt (aka SaltStack) before 2014.1.10 allow local users to have an unspecified impact via vectors related to temporary file creation in (1) seed.py, (2) salt-ssh, or (3) salt-cloud.

CVE-2014-3587
Published: 2014-08-22
Integer overflow in the cdf_read_property_info function in cdf.c in file through 5.19, as used in the Fileinfo component in PHP before 5.4.32 and 5.5.x before 5.5.16, allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (application crash) via a crafted CDF file. NOTE: this vulnerability exists bec...

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Three interviews on critical embedded systems and security, recorded at Black Hat 2014 in Las Vegas.