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.

Attacks/Breaches

3/23/2016
10:30 AM
Preston Hogue
Preston Hogue
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail vvv
100%
0%

Think Risk When You Talk About Application Security Today

Security from a risk-based perspective puts the focus on component failures and provides robust security for the ultimate target of most attacks -- company, customer and personal data.

The definition of application security has not evolved in parallel with the current state of applications. Let me explain. Twenty years ago, applications mainly operated independently of the Internet. During this time, the process for securing apps was simply adhering to best practices for secure coding throughout the software development lifecycle. But, it’s no longer the late 90’s. While secure coding is still an essential foundation to application security, it’s only one piece of a much larger puzzle.

Security professionals must now expand our definition of application security to include a risk-based perspective that accounts for the vast number of threats we must defend against. In doing so, we’ll improve the security posture across all facets of our apps and their deployment, thereby safeguarding our data and businesses. Looking at app security from a risk-based perspective puts focus on component failures, and provides robust security for the ultimate target of most attacks—company, customer, and personal data.

Today’s attackers have a convenient route to data through the application, but a risk-based approach accounts for vulnerabilities that secure coding can’t protect against. This approach includes analyzing the exposed elements of an application, and then developing a holistic security strategy for that app in its entirety. Attackers only need one component of an app left unaccounted for in order to compromise it -- whether it’s a code vulnerability, compromised identity, network availability, weak encryption, or DNS. And once attackers are inside, the entire application, as well as the data it houses, will be affected.

Application availability is a great example of a threat beyond the scope of secure coding. Since most apps today are Internet-based, a volumetric DDoS attack can cripple, or even take them down, rendering even the most securely-written code useless. Another threat vector to consider is confidentiality. What happens when a password is stolen? The application can be compromised and its data exposed.

This situation will not get any easier. There are approximately one billion Web apps in existence today. The rapid growth of the Internet of Things—and the applications that go along with it—will lead to apps numbering in the billions, and it’s naive to think that all of them will be securely coded.

We must immediately rethink our definition of application security so we’re in a better position to effectively secure all the components that make up our apps, safeguard our data, and protect our businesses.  

Related Content: 

 

Interop 2016 Las VegasFind out more about security threats at Interop 2016, May 2-6, at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center, Las Vegas. Click here to register. 

Preston Hogue is the Director of Security Marketing Architecture at F5 Networks and serves as a worldwide security evangelist for the company. Previously, he was a Security Product Manager at F5, specializing in network security Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC). He ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Overcoming the Challenge of Shorter Certificate Lifespans
Mike Cooper, Founder & CEO of Revocent,  10/15/2020
7 Tips for Choosing Security Metrics That Matter
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer,  10/19/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-27605
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
BigBlueButton through 2.2.8 uses Ghostscript for processing of uploaded EPS documents, and consequently may be subject to attacks related to a "schwache Sandbox."
CVE-2020-27606
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
BigBlueButton before 2.2.8 (or earlier) does not set the secure flag for the session cookie in an https session, which makes it easier for remote attackers to capture this cookie by intercepting its transmission within an http session.
CVE-2020-27607
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
In BigBlueButton before 2.2.8 (or earlier), the client-side Mute button only signifies that the server should stop accepting audio data from the client. It does not directly configure the client to stop sending audio data to the server, and thus a modified server could store the audio data and/or tr...
CVE-2020-27608
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
In BigBlueButton before 2.2.8 (or earlier), uploaded presentations are sent to clients without a Content-Type header, which allows XSS, as demonstrated by a .png file extension for an HTML document.
CVE-2020-27609
PUBLISHED: 2020-10-21
BigBlueButton through 2.2.8 records a video meeting despite the deactivation of video recording in the user interface. This may result in data storage beyond what is authorized for a specific meeting topic or participant.