Perimeter
5/10/2011
11:44 AM
Commentary
Commentary
Commentary
50%
50%

A National Monitoring Infrastructure

It's theoretically possible, but who could orchestrate such a huge collaborative endeavor, and would it be possible to bring both private and public data under government oversight?

I recently had the opportunity to read Edward G. Amoroso’s book, entitled ""Cyber Attacks: Protecting National Infrastructure"," about the concept of a national-level infrastructure for the collection, correlation, monitoring (which he calls awareness) of, and response to cybersecurity incidents. As I read the four chapters, I found myself doing a little correlation of my own and drew several parallels to the Enterprise Security Information Management (ESIM) sector.

What Amoroso is describing is essentially a "master ESIM infrastructure" -- taking feeds from both public- and private-sector entities with the goal of centralizing data from the citizenry, business community, and government for the purpose of large-scale trending and worm detection. The idea sounds like a good one, but I have serious doubts about the ability to manage an infrastructure of such monstrous scale.

Although an effort of this design would be useful, it is very unlikely that a nation’s citizenry would trust the government enough to allow for the collection of data from its personally owned technology products. Enterprise customers have their own problems to worry about at a macro level without even considering participating at a super-macro-level for a national monitoring infrastructure. Compliance mandates, impending audits, and organizational security concerns will almost certainly trump national defense -- especially since many organizations consider the defense of the nation to be the problem of the elected government.

If the national-level collection infrastructure were limited to a cybersecurity mandate, however, military branches, in addition to government and intelligence agencies, could wield a national ESIM to better defend their interests. Once implemented, this national ESIM could expand to encompass public utilities and the military industrial base of defense contractors and SIs with which it partners to further national interest. Really, any organization or vendor with ties to government’s defense could be directed to submit to a national ESIM mandate in the best interest of the country’s defense. A major obstacle to hurdle is that many departments, divisions, and federal entities rely on their own ESIM deployments to manage the cybersecurity concerns within their own small spheres of control.

Unfortunately, not all of these deployed products are capable of promiscuously interoperating with one another -- many contain proprietary data stores and formats with no common interface for data sharing. Technical issues aside, the political power plays around information sharing among government entities has never been an easy bridge to cross. Each organization really cares only for its own sphere of control, and sees the request for information from external agencies as an invasion of their sovereign fiefdom.

Perhaps the only way that a national ESIM infrastructure could work is if such an endeavor were mandated by the government and its purview assigned to a coordinating body, such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) -- a thought that would make those already concerned with the power wielded by the agency exponentially more nervous. Unfortunately, one organization would need to coordinate everything, and DHS might be the only agency that could wrangle the disparate pieces of government into submitting to such a plan. Even with DHS in charge, I wouldn’t anticipate a massive rip-and-replace of existing ESIM products, but the agency could dictate that vendors share information between one another or risk being replaced.

Andrew Hay is senior analyst with The 451 Group's Enterprise Security Practice and the author of three network security books. Follow him on Twitter: http://twitter.com/andrewsmhay.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Title Partner’s Role in Perimeter Security
Considering how prevalent third-party attacks are, we need to ask hard questions about how partners and suppliers are safeguarding systems and data.
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-2174
Published: 2015-05-24
Cisco TelePresence T, TelePresence TE, and TelePresence TC before 7.1 do not properly implement access control, which allows remote attackers to obtain root privileges by sending packets on the local network and allows physically proximate attackers to obtain root privileges via unspecified vectors,...

CVE-2015-0713
Published: 2015-05-24
The web framework in Cisco TelePresence Advanced Media Gateway Series Software before 1.1(1.40), Cisco TelePresence IP Gateway Series Software, Cisco TelePresence IP VCR Series Software before 3.0(1.27), Cisco TelePresence ISDN Gateway Software before 2.2(1.94), Cisco TelePresence MCU Software befor...

CVE-2015-0722
Published: 2015-05-24
The network drivers in Cisco TelePresence T, Cisco TelePresence TE, and Cisco TelePresence TC before 7.3.2 allow remote attackers to cause a denial of service (process restart or device reload) via a flood of crafted IP packets, aka Bug ID CSCuj68952.

CVE-2015-1894
Published: 2015-05-24
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM InfoSphere Optim Workload Replay 2.x before 2.1.0.3 allows remote attackers to hijack the authentication of arbitrary users for requests that insert XSS sequences.

CVE-2015-1895
Published: 2015-05-24
IBM InfoSphere Optim Workload Replay 2.x before 2.1.0.3 relies on client-side code to verify authorization, which allows remote attackers to bypass intended access restrictions by modifying the client behavior.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Join security and risk expert John Pironti and Dark Reading Editor-in-Chief Tim Wilson for a live online discussion of the sea-changing shift in security strategy and the many ways it is affecting IT and business.