Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Operations

9/30/2019
09:00 AM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

8 Microsegmentation Pitfalls to Avoid

Don't fall victim to these common mistakes on the path to developing better security boundaries and limiting the blast radius of security incidents.
Previous
1 of 9
Next

The practice of microsegmentation takes the principles of least privilege to their logical conclusion by atomizing the isolating techniques of network segmentation. Security architects use microsegmentation to create security boundaries that can extend all the way into individual workloads by controlling East-West, or server-to-server, traffic flows between applications. The bulkheads put up through microsegmentation make it possible to better limit lateral movement of attackers, even in a cloudy world with no perimeter.

But the practice can be tricky to get right, and many experts warn that the journey to effective microsegmentation is fraught with pitfalls. Here are a few suggestions about how to avoid the mistakes en route to effective microsegmentation.

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio

Previous
1 of 9
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
ArielZ999
50%
50%
ArielZ999,
User Rank: Author
11/7/2019 | 4:55:18 AM
Micro-segmentation is scary
From my experience the truth is that simple segmentation and zoning is very hard in todays environments - people are struggling to separate PROD from DEV in anything but non trivial environments. let alone doing smth that is even close to micro.
The biggest mistake that people make, imho, is that they try to move from 0 to 100 and the comlexity vs. the marginal benefit over a much more modest segmentation goals is what kills the project, unfortunatelly for many years in an organization, once they fail it will take them a long time to try again. And frankly for most organizations it seams so "unachievable" that they do not even start doing it. 
My recommendation is to define modest goals such as separate prod from dev and select ~10-20 of you most cirital apps to ring-fence this achievable especially if leveraging the modern micro-segmentation technologies and you will be in a much much better place from your risk perspective. 
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.