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.

Cloud Security

12/26/2017
08:55 AM
Curtis Franklin
Curtis Franklin
Curt Franklin
50%
50%

Cloud Security Is a Shared Responsibility

In the answer to a question from a recent webinar, editor Curtis Franklin looks at who's responsible for data security in the cloud.

Here at Security Now, webinars are interactive affairs. In our most recent webinar, we had some great questions, including a couple that we couldn't answer in the time allowed. Here's the first of the questions along with our answer for everyone in the community to see.

In our Look Forward to CyberSecurity in 2018, Gary asked:

If we are going to move more critical applications and the data accessed, produced and stored -- will encryption capabilities become critical? And would anyone really outsource this function to AWS? Many people think AWS and Azure are taking responsibility for your apps and data when you move them to the cloud -- are they really going to "add this" via their service offerings?

The question of who takes responsibility for your applications and data is a critical issue when moving to a cloud infrastructure. Cloud providers have tried to bring some discipline to the question of who's responsible for what through the shared responsibility model of security. Stated most succinctly, this states that the cloud provider is responsible for the security of the cloud infrastructure (including the services and applications they're contracted to provide) while the customer is responsible for the security of the data that runs through the infrastructure.

Amazon was the first major cloud provider to publish a formal statement of their policy on AWS. Their language draws a distinction between the security of the cloud and the security of what's in the cloud. It's a useful distinction that helps clarify the pieces that fall under each definition.

Of course, Amazon has not been alone in drawing the distinction: Microsoft has also released information on the shared security model as applied to Azure. Google also has a paper explaining their security model, though it goes into more detail on the tools they provide to help customers with their responsibilities.

When you strip away all the explanations and jargon, the lesson to be learned in all of these papers and posts is that going to the cloud doesn't mean that you can forget about security. No cloud provider is stepping up to assume responsibility for your data's security -- that's still your job.

The fact that it's your job means that you may need to bring new tools and strategies to bear on data that no longer lives within the cozy confines of your network boundary. These tools, which range from micro-segmentation to CASB, should be deployed in consultation with your cloud provider so that you're certain neither of you is stepping on the other's toes in the name of security.

If you're interested in the other questions and answers from the webinar, as well as the editors' takes on the stories we're likely to be talking about in 2018, it's not too late to listen to the webinar. You've got time to ask your own questions, too -- just leave them as comments to this article or the next article answering questions from the event. And keep your eyes open for our next editorial webinar, coming to Security Now in January 2018!

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
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/3/2020
'BootHole' Vulnerability Exposes Secure Boot Devices to Attack
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  7/29/2020
Average Cost of a Data Breach: $3.86 Million
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  7/29/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
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
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
The Threat from the Internetand What Your Organization Can Do About It
This report describes some of the latest attacks and threats emanating from the Internet, as well as advice and tips on how your organization can mitigate those threats before they affect your business. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-18112
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-05
Affected versions of Atlassian Fisheye allow remote attackers to view the HTTP password of a repository via an Information Disclosure vulnerability in the logging feature. The affected versions are before version 4.8.3.
CVE-2020-15109
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
In solidus before versions 2.8.6, 2.9.6, and 2.10.2, there is an bility to change order address without triggering address validations. This vulnerability allows a malicious customer to craft request data with parameters that allow changing the address of the current order without changing the shipm...
CVE-2020-16847
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
Extreme Analytics in Extreme Management Center before 8.5.0.169 allows unauthenticated reflected XSS via a parameter in a GET request, aka CFD-4887.
CVE-2020-15135
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
save-server (npm package) before version 1.05 is affected by a CSRF vulnerability, as there is no CSRF mitigation (Tokens etc.). The fix introduced in version version 1.05 unintentionally breaks uploading so version v1.0.7 is the fixed version. This is patched by implementing Double submit. The CSRF...
CVE-2020-13522
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-04
An exploitable arbitrary file delete vulnerability exists in SoftPerfect RAM Disk 4.1 spvve.sys driver. A specially crafted I/O request packet (IRP) can allow an unprivileged user to delete any file on the filesystem. An attacker can send a malicious IRP to trigger this vulnerability.