Perimeter
5/20/2009
05:11 PM
Sara Peters
Sara Peters
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Ruminating on CSI SX

Citizens of the Information Security Nation, to you I say Classify and inventory your data and assets! Tedium? Odium? Delirium? Yes, probably all three. But worth the trouble.

Citizens of the Information Security Nation, to you I say Classify and inventory your data and assets!

Tedium? Odium? Delirium? Yes, probably all three. But worth the trouble.Yesterday we wrapped up CSI SX, and learned about many far more exciting topics like the security challenges of Web 2.0, virtualization, cloud computing and more. Yet, at the root of nearly all the solutions to these thrilling challenges was the humble act of data classification and inventory--knowing what your data is, and where it is.

For example, we learned that the PCI Council continues to keep mum on the topic virtualization, and whether or not the technology intrinsicly violates a few requirements of the PCI DSS. The Council is leaving that issue to the discretion of the auditors; and it's the security manager's job to convince those auditors that your data center was virtualized in an intelligent, careful way that properly secures all payment card data... How can you prove that unless you've identified all that payment card data and know precisely where it all resides?

We learned that putting data in the cloud doesn't automatically transfer your e-discovery responsibilities to the cloud provider. So when the courts come a-lookin' for data--possibly including metadata and logs--it's your job to hand it over. How can you hand it over if you don't know where it is...and if it's not in your possession?

Aye, there's the rub.* The heart of the thing, again, is in inventory. The lesson here is that your inability to provide that data may be a reason to either keep out of the cloud entirely, or make an airtight service agreement with the cloud provider, so that you know precisely what liability, indemnity, litigation costs, etc. they intend to shoulder.

Then of course there's the possibility (even probability) that you're spending too much on security. What? Blasphemy! Bite your tongue, woman, les the CEO should hear you and slash my budget to the quick.

No, really. Why give everything in your business the security works? Not all those assets are all that important.

Yet, if you've thoroughly classified and inventoried all that data, you can isolate it and partition the royal jewels from the Cracker Jack decoder rings, then apply the security measures accordingly.

Many more thought-provoking topics were discussed during CSI SX--synergistic security, the questionable value of secure software development, the absence of logic, the effects of long times-to-fix, etc. I'll catch you up on them anon, once I'm finished with my trek through the Interop exhibition hall.

* I've recently been prone to quote from Hamlet's "To be or not to be" soliloquy in which he contemplates suicide. But don't let that worry you. I've just been running a bit Shakespearean lately. Sara Peters is Senior Editor at Dark Reading and formerly the editor-in-chief of Enterprise Efficiency. Prior that she was senior editor for the Computer Security Institute, writing and speaking about virtualization, identity management, cybersecurity law, and a myriad ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading December Tech Digest
Experts weigh in on the pros and cons of end-user security training.
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-2014-5426
Published: 2014-11-27
MatrikonOPC OPC Server for DNP3 1.2.3 and earlier allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (unhandled exception and DNP3 process crash) via a crafted message.

CVE-2014-2037
Published: 2014-11-26
Openswan 2.6.40 allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (NULL pointer dereference and IKE daemon restart) via IKEv2 packets that lack expected payloads. NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE 2013-6466.

CVE-2014-6609
Published: 2014-11-26
The res_pjsip_pubsub module in Asterisk Open Source 12.x before 12.5.1 allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (crash) via crafted headers in a SIP SUBSCRIBE request for an event package.

CVE-2014-6610
Published: 2014-11-26
Asterisk Open Source 11.x before 11.12.1 and 12.x before 12.5.1 and Certified Asterisk 11.6 before 11.6-cert6, when using the res_fax_spandsp module, allows remote authenticated users to cause a denial of service (crash) via an out of call message, which is not properly handled in the ReceiveFax dia...

CVE-2014-7141
Published: 2014-11-26
The pinger in Squid 3.x before 3.4.8 allows remote attackers to obtain sensitive information or cause a denial of service (out-of-bounds read and crash) via a crafted type in an (1) ICMP or (2) ICMP6 packet.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Now that the holiday season is about to begin both online and in stores, will this be yet another season of nonstop gifting to cybercriminals?