Risk
11/25/2013
06:14 AM
Tim Wilson
Tim Wilson
Quick Hits
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

At AppSec USA, A Call For Continuous Monitoring

Speakers, experts at AppSec conference say periodic scanning for application vulnerabilities is no longer enough

NEW YORK, N.Y. -- The days of the once-a-year application vulnerability scan are over. The days of continuous application monitoring have begun.

That was the message delivered by speakers and other experts at the annual AppSec USA conference here last week. The conference, which focuses on application security and secure software development, featured some of the best-known experts in the field. One of their common themes: Application security vulnerabilities can come up at any time, even after software is vetted and deployed.

"Look at the world of health care," said Jeff Williams, CEO of application security vendor Aspect Security, in a presentation at the conference. "It's no longer enough, in many cases, to wait for the patient to come in once a year for a checkup. They're equipping the body with sensors that can measure blood sugar or heart rate, and then send you a warning. In some of those cases, your phone knows you're sick before you do.

"Application security needs to follow that same model. The once-a-year scan for vulnerabilities isn't working. Application security needs to happen continuously, in real time, and not just on some apps, but on a portfolio scale."

Williams advocated the use of vulnerability sensors, which enterprises can develop themselves, to help detect and warn security professionals and developers of newly discovered vulnerabilities in software.

"You can develop sensors to detect clickjacking vulnerabilities or injection vulnerabilities or just about anything," Williams said. "You can get your developers to build sensors directly into the application that will warn you when a vulnerability occurs, in real time."

Bala Venkat, chief marketing officer at application security vendor Cenzic, agreed that vulnerability scanning should be a continuous process. "Most enterprises do careful scanning during the predeployment process, but they stop there," he noted. "Once the application is in operation, they look for vulnerabilities only rarely or not at all. And that's why so many applications today have vulnerabilities that haven't been remediated."

Venkat advocates an ongoing approach to vulnerability scanning that includes analysis not only before deployment, but while the software is operating. "Some IT organizations are afraid to do this because they are worried that scans might affect the performance of an operating application or cause a service interruption. But the risks of not remediating a known vulnerability generally are far greater."

Veracode, another application security vendor, has implemented an internal process for application monitoring that requires developers not only to do a one-time check for security vulnerabilities, but to continuously monitor for problems throughout the life of the application.

"If you want developers to learn something about security, you have to make sure that you are continuously exposing them to the security issue," said Chris Eng, vice president of research at Veracode, who also spoke at the conference. "Otherwise, it's like teaching them a math concept that they learn once and never use again. It has to be part of the process."

"The technology for finding vulnerabilities is a lot better than it was even a couple of years ago," noted Robert Hansen, director of product management and technology evangelist at WhiteHat Security. "What we need to do is update the process to reflect that better technology."

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Add a Comment" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message. Tim Wilson is Editor in Chief and co-founder of Dark Reading.com, UBM Tech's online community for information security professionals. He is responsible for managing the site, assigning and editing content, and writing breaking news stories. Wilson has been recognized as one ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
marktroester
50%
50%
marktroester,
User Rank: Apprentice
12/2/2013 | 10:15:41 PM
re: At AppSec USA, A Call For Continuous Monitoring
Yes, the continuous monitoring topic was big at AppSecUSA. Some conversations extended the concept of monitoring to provide actionable information throughout the entire lifecycle. From providing developers support directly in the IDE, to helping drive the release management process with policy based guidance in the Continuous Integration and build environments, to identifying new vulnerabilities in production applications, the entire software lifecycle needs to be supported.

Mark Troester
Sonatype
@mtroester
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-5467
Published: 2014-08-29
Monitoring Agent for UNIX Logs 6.2.0 through FP03, 6.2.1 through FP04, 6.2.2 through FP09, and 6.2.3 through FP04 and Monitoring Server (ms) and Shared Libraries (ax) 6.2.0 through FP03, 6.2.1 through FP04, 6.2.2 through FP08, 6.2.3 through FP01, and 6.3.0 through FP01 in IBM Tivoli Monitoring (ITM)...

CVE-2014-0600
Published: 2014-08-29
FileUploadServlet in the Administration service in Novell GroupWise 2014 before SP1 allows remote attackers to read or write to arbitrary files via the poLibMaintenanceFileSave parameter, aka ZDI-CAN-2287.

CVE-2014-0888
Published: 2014-08-29
IBM Worklight Foundation 5.x and 6.x before 6.2.0.0, as used in Worklight and Mobile Foundation, allows remote authenticated users to bypass the application-authenticity feature via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2014-0897
Published: 2014-08-29
The Configuration Patterns component in IBM Flex System Manager (FSM) 1.2.0.x, 1.2.1.x, 1.3.0.x, and 1.3.1.x uses a weak algorithm in an encryption step during Chassis Management Module (CMM) account creation, which makes it easier for remote authenticated users to defeat cryptographic protection me...

CVE-2014-3024
Published: 2014-08-29
Cross-site request forgery (CSRF) vulnerability in IBM Maximo Asset Management 7.1 through 7.1.1.12 and 7.5 through 7.5.0.6 and Maximo Asset Management 7.5.0 through 7.5.0.3 and 7.5.1 through 7.5.1.2 for SmartCloud Control Desk allows remote authenticated users to hijack the authentication of arbitr...

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
This episode of Dark Reading Radio looks at infosec security from the big enterprise POV with interviews featuring Ron Plesco, Cyber Investigations, Intelligence & Analytics at KPMG; and Chris Inglis & Chris Bell of Securonix.