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.

Comments
How A Little Obscurity Can Bolster Security
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
<<   <   Page 2 / 3   >   >>
samenk
100%
0%
samenk,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/17/2014 | 7:39:10 PM
Re: slows down an attack -- so it helps
Great article here, Corey! Security by obscurity should only be used as a method to delay and/or discourage the attackers from compromising our security; nothing more. "Security by Obscurity is no security at all." I agree, however, I do think offers some level of security and should be utilized, but should never be fully relied upon. In most cases, security engineers would utilize obscure measures as first layer(s) of security; if the attacker does uncover the inconspicuous security measure, he is sure to meet a tougher one, such as encryption, or authentication.
mwalker871
50%
50%
mwalker871,
User Rank: Guru
4/17/2014 | 3:18:48 PM
Re: Security v. Obscurity
Sure, don't give anything away.
Don't pick names easy to guess or commonly used. Passwords are just the final threshold.

However, if your domain can be enumerated, the ship has sailed.

Which is more important?
CNACHREINER981
50%
50%
CNACHREINER981,
User Rank: Author
4/17/2014 | 1:44:48 PM
Re: Security v. Obscurity
I can see that point. So many have relied ONLY on security by obscurity (which IS bad) for protection that it is probably good to hammer that idea out of a Infosec neophyte's head... However, I still think the more exprienced infosec folk, who realize that their primary defense needs to be true secure design, can add some obscurity to the mix too... ^_^
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Strategist
4/17/2014 | 1:39:22 PM
Re: Custom platforms another example of security by obscurity
One site I converted to WordPress previously ran on a CMS of sorts that you could edit by going to www.mydomain.com/data/ - no password required, pure security by obscurity. So compared with that, WordPress was certainly a huge improvement.
mwalker871
50%
50%
mwalker871,
User Rank: Guru
4/17/2014 | 1:28:27 PM
Security v. Obscurity
Better to deride obscurity than end up back where we started: Obscurity is Security
CNACHREINER981
50%
50%
CNACHREINER981,
User Rank: Author
4/17/2014 | 1:27:16 PM
Re: slows down an attack -- so it helps
Yep... we agree. The best security is securely designed systems, but there is no point in making those systems easy to find. ^_^

 

Corey
CNACHREINER981
50%
50%
CNACHREINER981,
User Rank: Author
4/17/2014 | 1:25:49 PM
Re: Custom platforms another example of security by obscurity
I absolutely agree... However, to be devils advocate to this point (and my own article), I think this will only be the case if you have security conscious and trained folks creating the custom systems. Since they are blackboxes, custom systems are more difficult for an attacker to enumerate. However, the arguement against them is sometimes the folks creating custom systems aren't necessarily the best secure coders or designers. Because of its popularity and past issues, Wordpress has had to spend time and money learning about secure design... Another example is when non-cryptologists try to roll their own encryption. It usually ends in disaster..

However, it's kind of like the hidden rock WITH the combination lock example. If you have folks who are experts at secure design, and you use them to create a custom system, you have the benefit of both layers. The secure design limits the true vulnerabilities in the system, and the fact that it's custom adds that extra layer that makes it hard (and thus less ROI for the attacker) to figure out!

Cheers,

Corey
CNACHREINER981
50%
50%
CNACHREINER981,
User Rank: Author
4/17/2014 | 1:19:48 PM
Re: Know your risks first
That is an excellent point! When relying on someone elses' systems (the cloud) obscurity is NOT good. We need transparency in what tactics and strategies our external partners are using to protect out data...

But in that sense, the external partner becomes an extension of ourselves. I wouldn't argue we obscure things from trusted parties, only from truly untrusted attackers.

Thanks for you thoughts!

Corey
kobrien82
50%
50%
kobrien82,
User Rank: Apprentice
4/17/2014 | 12:55:03 PM
Know your risks first
Interesting article, Corey. Something to consider here is that there is a distinction between obscurity, where you rely upon the use of an unknown or custom system to trip up a tracker, and a defensive posture where you don't emit system details without cause.

However, it's also worth looking at what risks you're protecting against. If you're describing a strategy for protecting your servers, it makes total sense to not expose your Apache patch level; if you're looking at an infosec program for your data stored in a public cloud platform (say, Google Apps) from leak, obscurity isn't nearly as sensible a strategy. In general terms, outsider threat is defended against via (amongst other things) an approach of least information exposure; insider risk is mitigated by clarity and classification that helps avoid unintentional breach or leak. 
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Strategist
4/17/2014 | 10:49:36 AM
Custom platforms another example of security by obscurity
There's also some security benefit from using a custom platform, such as a homegrown content management system instead of WordPress. WordPress has the advantage of being tested constantly by those trying to break it (maliciously or not), so security flaws tend to be found and patched -- which is good as long as you can keep up with the patches. Even then, hackers know that the login url is likely to be www.somedomain.com/wp-admin/ so they can throw brute force attacks against that and other known addresses like the one for sending trackbacks. A custom system may have more latent flaws, but they won't be as widely known as with a popular open source software platform.
<<   <   Page 2 / 3   >   >>


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 7/2/2020
Ripple20 Threatens Increasingly Connected Medical Devices
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  6/30/2020
DDoS Attacks Jump 542% from Q4 2019 to Q1 2020
Dark Reading Staff 6/30/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Cybersecurity Incident Response Programs Work (and Why Some Don't)
This Tech Digest takes a look at the vital role cybersecurity incident response (IR) plays in managing cyber-risk within organizations. Download the Tech Digest today to find out how well-planned IR programs can detect intrusions, contain breaches, and help an organization restore normal operations.
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-2020-9498
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
Apache Guacamole 1.1.0 and older may mishandle pointers involved inprocessing data received via RDP static virtual channels. If a userconnects to a malicious or compromised RDP server, a series ofspecially-crafted PDUs could result in memory corruption, possiblyallowing arbitrary code to be executed...
CVE-2020-3282
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
A vulnerability in the web-based management interface of Cisco Unified Communications Manager, Cisco Unified Communications Manager Session Management Edition, Cisco Unified Communications Manager IM &amp;amp; Presence Service, and Cisco Unity Connection could allow an unauthenticated, remote attack...
CVE-2020-5909
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
In versions 3.0.0-3.5.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, when users run the command displayed in NGINX Controller user interface (UI) to fetch the agent installer, the server TLS certificate is not verified.
CVE-2020-5910
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
In versions 3.0.0-3.5.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, the Neural Autonomic Transport System (NATS) messaging services in use by the NGINX Controller do not require any form of authentication, so any successful connection would be authorized.
CVE-2020-5911
PUBLISHED: 2020-07-02
In versions 3.0.0-3.5.0, 2.0.0-2.9.0, and 1.0.1, the NGINX Controller installer starts the download of Kubernetes packages from an HTTP URL On Debian/Ubuntu system.