Perimeter
4/2/2010
01:42 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Share -- Or Keep Getting Pwned

Forget the bad guys: Sometimes it seems like the security industry doesn't trust itself. There's too much internal hoarding of intelligence for privacy or competitive reasons and too little sharing of information among researchers, victims, and law enforcement about real attacks. All this does is give the cybercriminals an edge.

Forget the bad guys: Sometimes it seems like the security industry doesn't trust itself. There's too much internal hoarding of intelligence for privacy or competitive reasons and too little sharing of information among researchers, victims, and law enforcement about real attacks. All this does is give the cybercriminals an edge.Take the attacks on Google, Adobe, Intel, and others out of China (a.k.a. "Operation Aurora"). McAfee and other security firms investigating victims' systems each had is own fiefdom of intelligence, occasionally publicly sharing bits of information, like the Internet Explorer zero-day bug used in many of the initial attacks. But did anyone have the whole picture of the attacks?

McAfee published some of its analysis of the malware it found in over a dozen (undisclosed) companies' systems, which was helpful. But McAfee admitted this week that it had misidentified some malware as part of the attack when in fact it was from a separate one. But it didn't go public with that information after Google blogged about "a separate cyber threat" targeting Vietnamese users around the world. Meanwhile, at least one security firm that had spent time analyzing it for clues under the assumption that it was part of the same series of attacks, Damballa, isn't sold that the attacks aren't related.

Maybe McAfee and Damballa should have talked once in a while.

Confused yet?

I understand the business reasons for jealously guarding the information security firms dig up. But with them typically working independently -- with the exception being some botnet-takedown collaboration -- and not sharing their knowledge along the way, it sometimes results in spinning wheels, confusion, and lost momentum. That in turn translates to more time and opportunity for the bad guys to get in or stay in, cash in, and get out.

And there's something really wrong when victim companies are afraid to report an attack to law enforcement. Of course they don't want to go public with a breach unless they have to by law, but many fear public exposure when they go to the feds. And those that have given breach information to the FBI, for instance, traditionally have gotten nothing in return, anyway. But the FBI says all of that is changing, and that they are providing feedback and intelligence to the victims. Whether that convinces wary victims to go to the bureau or not remains to be seen.

The big question here is this: is there anyone looking at the big picture of these real attacks? Connecting the dots, sifting through the chaff, and correlating trends among them should be a priority for victim organizations, researchers, forensics investigators, and law enforcement. Otherwise the bad guys who are infecting companies with banking Trojans, stealing their intellectual property, and converting their enterprise machines into bots, will just keep owning us.

-- Kelly Jackson Higgins, Senior Editor, Dark Reading Follow Kelly (@kjhiggins) on Twitter: http://twitter.com/kjhiggins Kelly Jackson Higgins is Executive Editor at DarkReading.com. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

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-2015-0547
Published: 2015-07-04
The D2CenterstageService.getComments service method in EMC Documentum D2 4.1 and 4.2 before 4.2 P16 and 4.5 before P03 allows remote authenticated users to conduct Documentum Query Language (DQL) injection attacks and bypass intended read-access restrictions via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-0548
Published: 2015-07-04
The D2DownloadService.getDownloadUrls service method in EMC Documentum D2 4.1 and 4.2 before 4.2 P16 and 4.5 before P03 allows remote authenticated users to conduct Documentum Query Language (DQL) injection attacks and bypass intended read-access restrictions via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2015-0551
Published: 2015-07-04
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in EMC Documentum WebTop 6.7SP1 before P31, 6.7SP2 before P23, and 6.8 before P01; Documentum Administrator 6.7SP1 before P31, 6.7SP2 before P23, 7.0 before P18, 7.1 before P15, and 7.2 before P01; Documentum Digital Assets Manager 6.5SP6 before P2...

CVE-2015-1966
Published: 2015-07-04
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in IBM Tivoli Federated Identity Manager (TFIM) 6.2.0 before FP17, 6.2.1 before FP9, and 6.2.2 before FP15, as used in Security Access Manager for Mobile and other products, allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via a crafte...

CVE-2015-4196
Published: 2015-07-04
Platform Software before 4.4.5 in Cisco Unified Communications Domain Manager (CDM) 8.x has a hardcoded password for a privileged account, which allows remote attackers to obtain root access by leveraging knowledge of this password and entering it in an SSH session, aka Bug ID CSCuq45546.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Marc Spitler, co-author of the Verizon DBIR will share some of the lesser-known but most intriguing tidbits from the massive report