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.

Application Security

11/1/2017
04:18 PM
Curtis Franklin Jr.
Curtis Franklin Jr.
Curt Franklin
50%
50%

WannaCry Was an Avoidable Mess for NHS

A new report says that the UK's NHS could have avoided WannaCry entirely. Is it possible to secure a network from the ravages of bottom-line focused management?

How much security can technology provide? More to the point, how much insecurity can technology overcome? It's the kind of question that makes entrepreneurs dream and executives worry.

The great divide between technology and practice has been newly illuminated by a report on the National Audit Office's investigation of the WannaCry attack that hit the National Health Service. Here's the shocking news: It could have been stopped.

Now, anyone who followed WannaCry, how it spread and what it did, knows that millions of organizations around the world were not hit by the attack because of the operating systems they use or precautions they had taken. In the case of the NHS, it turns out that they were vulnerable and knew they were vulnerable at least a year before WannaCry.

The service had begun to respond, but the response was a variation on the old management favorite, "We'll fix it when we eventually replace the systems now using vulnerable software." Unfortunately for the NHS and at least a few thousand of its patients, WannaCry didn't wait for "eventually."

A decision to remediate by replacement, and wait until the normal refresh cycle plays out to replace, is a management decision, not a security team decision. And it is, let me emphasize, a decision based on money. Most security decisions are, at their core, motivated by money, but in this case it was a gamble that was lost in very public fashion.

Let's all admit something: If we knew -- really knew -- that every piece of hardware and software attached to the network was fully patched and up to date, and that every application was written to best practices standards for robust, secure behavior, then there is a great deal of funding currently sent to security spending that could go elsewhere. A non-trivial fraction of our total security spending goes to papering over holes that we are confident exist in our applications and infrastructure.

In talking with engineers, developers and security researchers it has become obvious that there is a great deal of development going on that is intended to, in blunt terms, protect us from ourselves. We want to be secure, but we don't want any "friction" in our transactions. We want our systems to be safe, but we don't want to take the time to test systems for security. We want to have secure applications, but we demand that they be updated hourly while hoping they'll be safe.

Throughout all of this we have to come face to face with the limits of technology. Security systems are becoming more capable, more flexible and faster, but they are constantly running up against failures in policy, process and human behavior. The day may come when scientists give enterprise networks at least a temporary advantage over the criminals who want to get in. I'm not convinced that we will ever have designs that keep us in front of short-sighted decision-making and ill-considered behavior for any meaningful length of time.

Related posts:

— Curtis Franklin is the editor of SecurityNow.com. Follow him on Twitter @kg4gwa.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-37742
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-30
app/View/Elements/GalaxyClusters/view_relation_tree.ctp in MISP 2.4.147 allows Stored XSS when viewing galaxy cluster relationships.
CVE-2021-37743
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-30
app/View/GalaxyElements/ajax/index.ctp in MISP 2.4.147 allows Stored XSS when viewing galaxy cluster elements in JSON format.
CVE-2021-37746
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-30
textview_uri_security_check in textview.c in Claws Mail before 3.18.0, and Sylpheed through 3.7.0, does not have sufficient link checks before accepting a click.
CVE-2020-26563
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-30
ObjectPlanet Opinio before 7.13 allows reflected XSS via the survey/admin/surveyAdmin.do?action=viewSurveyAdmin query string. (There is also stored XSS if input to survey/admin/*.do is accepted from untrusted users.)
CVE-2021-37606
PUBLISHED: 2021-07-30
Meow hash 0.5/calico does not sufficiently thwart key recovery by an attacker who can query whether there's a collision in the bottom bits of the hashes of two messages, as demonstrated by an attack against a long-running web service that allows the attacker to infer collisions by measuring timing d...