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.

IoT
7/29/2020
02:00 PM
Connect Directly
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

Technical Challenges of IoT Cybersecurity in a Post-COVID-19 World

Effective management of vulnerabilities can be done only when information about supply chain dependencies is accurate and recent.

Day-to-day business activities have changed pervasively and quickly because of the pandemic, and many experts already have written about the impact on the security world. Most of those have focused on organizational and process changes, so let's focus on the actual technical consequences and challenges.

When looking at today's hardware and software ecosystem for manufacturers of connected products for the Internet of Things (IoT), it's obvious that dependencies are everywhere. As recently as 10 years ago, it wasn't uncommon to write your own real-time operating system (RTOS) for embedded applications or write your own code that handles cryptographic processing, but this is rarely the case today. Developers rely on abstractions that are given to them, be it an operating system, an Internet Protocol (IP) stack, cryptographic functionality, or communications handling such as marshalling. These dependent components in turn can have dependencies on other, smaller components and so a dependency tree can typically be seen that famously and quickly can grow scarily large.

In times of economic crisis and hardship, some of the businesses that supply these components inevitably will fail. Even if suppliers continue their operation, products that are less successful economically might be discontinued. While entirely expected when viewed through a security lens, this can quickly become a large problem: If any dependency contains a security vulnerability and that dependency is not receiving patches or updates anymore, any component that relies on that dependency might also contain a vulnerability.

Usually, this is not an immediate problem because it can take months or years until such vulnerabilities are discovered — maybe by coincidence or by someone probing for exactly that kind of issue. However, because of the sheer complexity of systems, it is highly probable that such a scenario eventually will happen. For example, low-level components that are buried deep in the dependency tree can be excruciatingly painful to detect and replace while still maintaining the same functionality. For manufacturers of connected IoT products, it is key to focus on their supply chain and increase the ability to break their products down into their respective components. Effective management of vulnerabilities can be done only when information about supply chain dependencies is accurate and recent.

A second side effect of the pandemic is the massively increased reliance on cloud-based communication systems. It is unthinkable to conduct business effectively and in compliance with the current legal restrictions without holding a videoconference, sharing a document, or presenting a slide set remotely. The systems used to perform those tasks, however, are largely following the same basic principles that typical client-server architectures have been following for roughly 20 years. While the cryptographic transport protocols have improved significantly since SSLv2, there still is a disparity in the level of trust between client and server: Clients are typically considered entirely untrusted while servers hold all the secrets and relay data securely. While this is easiest for the implementors of backend infrastructure, such a design is something which is fundamentally unpleasant from a security point of view.

Ideally, a document should only be shared with the intended recipient. There is no legitimate need for the infrastructure that relays the data to be able to peek into documents, following the principal of least privilege. That ability, therefore, should also not be present in back-end infrastructure. Code is written by people, and people make mistakes. As we have seen many times, malice doesn't need to be present for back-end providers to "lose" their customers' data. The less back-end access to data, the less data a provider can lose if there's an oversight.

Conclusion
We expect two developments to rise in importance in the near future. First, implementors and developers will need to thoroughly analyze their supply chains and quickly identify technical debt incurred by unmaintained software — before potential critical vulnerabilities manifest within them. Second, to protect businesses and corporate secrets, it is imperative that new systems are migrated to designs in which true end-to-end encryption is present everywhere. Neither of these issues will be easy to solve. However, when manufacturers, developers, and architects work together on these security aspects, they can help ensure that security implications of an unprecedented crisis can be mitigated before starting to cause issues in the future.

Related Content:

 

 

Register now for this year's fully virtual Black Hat USA, scheduled to take place August 1–6, and get more information about the event on the Black Hat website. Click for details on conference information and to register.

As the Principal Security Advisor for UL in Frankfurt, Germany, Dr. Bauer has a Ph.D. in computer science and has more than 10 years of experience in the field of IT security. In particular, he has worked in both IoT and IIoT ecosystems. Dr. Bauer has expert knowledge of ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
When It Comes To Security Tools, More Isn't More
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  1/11/2021
US Capitol Attack a Wake-up Call for the Integration of Physical & IT Security
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  1/11/2021
IoT Vendor Ubiquiti Suffers Data Breach
Dark Reading Staff 1/11/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
2020: The Year in Security
Download this Tech Digest for a look at the biggest security stories that - so far - have shaped a very strange and stressful year.
Flash Poll
Assessing Cybersecurity Risk in Today's Enterprises
Assessing Cybersecurity Risk in Today's Enterprises
COVID-19 has created a new IT paradigm in the enterprise -- and a new level of cybersecurity risk. This report offers a look at how enterprises are assessing and managing cyber-risk under the new normal.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-21243
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
OneDev is an all-in-one devops platform. In OneDev before version 4.0.3, a Kubernetes REST endpoint exposes two methods that deserialize untrusted data from the request body. These endpoints do not enforce any authentication or authorization checks. This issue may lead to pre-auth RCE. This issue ...
CVE-2021-21244
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
OneDev is an all-in-one devops platform. In OneDev before version 4.0.3, There is a vulnerability that enabled pre-auth server side template injection via Bean validation message tampering. Full details in the reference GHSA. This issue was fixed in 4.0.3 by disabling validation interpolation com...
CVE-2020-24638
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
Multiple authenticated remote command executions are possible in Airwave Glass before 1.3.3 via the glassadmin cli. These allow for a user with glassadmin privileges to execute arbitrary code as root on the underlying host operating system.
CVE-2020-24639
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
There is a vulnerability caused by unsafe Java deserialization that allows for arbitrary command execution in a containerized environment within Airwave Glass before 1.3.3. Successful exploitation can lead to complete compromise of the underlying host operating system.
CVE-2020-24640
PUBLISHED: 2021-01-15
There is a vulnerability caused by insufficient input validation that allows for arbitrary command execution in a containerized environment within Airwave Glass before 1.3.3. Successful exploitation can lead to complete compromise of the underlying host operating system.