Perimeter
2/6/2013
12:38 PM
Adrian Lane
Adrian Lane
Commentary
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Restarting Database Security

Why companies ask for a database security program

"How do we put together a database security program?"

That has been the most common database security question I've received in the past nine months. I've been surprised by the number of firms that have asked for my assistance with setting up a database security program -- mostly because large firms are the ones that already have parts of a program in place. More to the point, both large and midsize firms, which have at one time bought database security products and have some database security processes, see they have a problem. The motivation for today's post is not just to relay the trend, but why companies are asking the question.

I've been talking publicly -- occasionally preaching -- about database security for the past 12 years. Database security platforms are no longer merely tools but fully mature, mainstream products. In all honesty, I thought in the evolution of database security that we were past the point of program setup, but I was wrong for a number of reasons: There are teams that broke up or stopped doing what they did due to budget. There are companies that had it, got acquired, and the parent neither had a database security program nor do existing processes from smaller firms work with the much larger parent.

In some cases companies have database security, but it's only implemented within a subset of business lines or limited to specific geographies. Some firms have database security only within one group (security, DBAs, ops), with the program limited to what the group does best (i.e.: DBAs do patching). Many limit security to specific database platforms (e.g.: Oracle experts handle Oracle, but nobody addressed MySQL, Sybase, or other platforms). And finally, companies relaxed security constraints, a little bit at a time, and then found they went too far.

And it's this latter trend that is worrisome. The trend with firms that have not been breached or suffered an "incident" is a slow and gradual pressure to relax controls. Users want additional privileges -- and they usually get what they want. DBAs don't like the hassle of providing, then revoking, privileges every few weeks. DBAs don't like having to log in under different credentials to perform granular tasks, or coordinate straightforward admin work across two or more people. It's easier to leave openings for tools and utilities that streamline tasks and make accessibility easier. It saves time and makes the job less aggravating.

Until they've been breached. Or data is exfiltrated. Or an employee abuses the database. Then everything changes.

For all of these reasons, companies need to reconsider database security. Most of the time, it's a small number of people within very large companies who understand they have a problem and are looking for guidance. They need consistency across the company. It's level-setting -- of getting everyone responsible for security and compliance on the same page about where they are and where they need to go.

So where do you start? What are the first steps in building a database security program? I'll answer that in an upcoming post.

Adrian Lane is an analyst/CTO with Securosis LLC, an independent security consulting practice. Special to Dark Reading. Adrian Lane is a Security Strategist and brings over 25 years of industry experience to the Securosis team, much of it at the executive level. Adrian specializes in database security, data security, and secure software development. With experience at Ingres, Oracle, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Partner Perspectives
What's This?
In a digital world inundated with advanced security threats, Intel Security seeks to transform how we live and work to keep our information secure. Through hardware and software development, Intel Security delivers robust solutions that integrate security into every layer of every digital device. In combining the security expertise of McAfee with the innovation, performance, and trust of Intel, this vision becomes a reality.

As we rely on technology to enhance our everyday and business life, we must too consider the security of the intellectual property and confidential data that is housed on these devices. As we increase the number of devices we use, we increase the number of gateways and opportunity for security threats. Intel Security takes the “security connected” approach to ensure that every device is secure, and that all security solutions are seamlessly integrated.
Featured Writers
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading's October Tech Digest
Fast data analysis can stymie attacks and strengthen enterprise security. Does your team have the data smarts?
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-2014-3409
Published: 2014-10-25
The Ethernet Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) handling feature in Cisco IOS 12.2(33)SRE9a and earlier and IOS XE 3.13S and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (device reload) via malformed CFM packets, aka Bug ID CSCuq93406.

CVE-2014-4620
Published: 2014-10-25
The EMC NetWorker Module for MEDITECH (aka NMMEDI) 3.0 build 87 through 90, when EMC RecoverPoint and Plink are used, stores cleartext RecoverPoint Appliance credentials in nsrmedisv.raw log files, which allows local users to obtain sensitive information by reading these files.

CVE-2014-4623
Published: 2014-10-25
EMC Avamar 6.0.x, 6.1.x, and 7.0.x in Avamar Data Store (ADS) GEN4(S) and Avamar Virtual Edition (AVE), when Password Hardening before 2.0.0.4 is enabled, uses UNIX DES crypt for password hashing, which makes it easier for context-dependent attackers to obtain cleartext passwords via a brute-force a...

CVE-2014-4624
Published: 2014-10-25
EMC Avamar Data Store (ADS) and Avamar Virtual Edition (AVE) 6.x and 7.0.x through 7.0.2-43 do not require authentication for Java API calls, which allows remote attackers to discover grid MCUser and GSAN passwords via a crafted call.

CVE-2014-6151
Published: 2014-10-25
CRLF injection vulnerability in IBM Tivoli Integrated Portal (TIP) 2.2.x allows remote authenticated users to inject arbitrary HTTP headers and conduct HTTP response splitting attacks via unspecified vectors.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Follow Dark Reading editors into the field as they talk with noted experts from the security world.