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.

Time To Rethink Patching Strategies
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Page 1 / 2   >   >>
User Rank: Apprentice
12/26/2014 | 2:31:22 AM
Excellent Perspective of Patching
A well written article with a entirely fresh and different perspective of Patch Management , a pain point of many organizations. It is time we think of unconventional and out of the box strategies to close the gap between discovering a vulnerability and patching it up. 

In some cases internal fixing can also be recommended , instead of waiting for a fix by the Vendor themselves
User Rank: Author
12/23/2014 | 8:35:53 AM
Re: I wonder
@Whoopty -- you and me both.  I'm encouraged though.  I know with my Software Assurance program, I'm trying to address the issues by provide technologies, capabilities, tools, and infrastructure to those who are responsible with all aspects of software development. #thereIShope   :)
User Rank: Author
12/23/2014 | 8:33:19 AM
Re: Quality?
 @moarsauce123-- you  bring up both good and interesting points.  When a software breach hits home, meaning when our personal lives are impacted, you will start to see this mindshift... Actually, we are starting to see some signs of things shifting.. There has to be a greater emphasis on improving software quality, improving software development, and improving the tools that are used to analyze software for security and quaility issues.  They all go hand in hand.. Thanks for your response.   enjoy the holidays!!!
User Rank: Ninja
12/22/2014 | 12:25:50 PM
Re: I wonder
Thanks for replying. I hope there are some major improvements in security, especially when the potential for damage is so high if someone were to begin infecting IOT devices on a large scale. That and privacy concerns are some of the reasons I just don't touch wearables yet. I'm waiting for the one that champions my privacy over everything else. 
User Rank: Ninja
12/22/2014 | 12:11:24 PM
This is not the first request for better quality in software with the goal of better security. Yet, when looking at all the trendy IT jobs lists and predictions for 2015 and pay rates of IT jobs and whatever else gets analyzed and listed, one profession and area is always absent: Quality Assurance!

Plenty of companies consider it more important to release features than quality. When it comes down to cutting implementing a new feature or properly testing an already implemented feature, testing will ALWAYS be cut.

Any manager can easily make the case for hiring more developers, hiring more QA or BA (those who should request secure systems in the first place!) positions is much more difficult. Top management comprehends that more developers will crank out more code with more features that sales can sell to make money with. What they often do not comprehend is that it will cost a lot to fix all the untested stuff once it is deployed. It is as if the gazillion papers, studies, and books written about testing and fixing early in the process just do not exist.

Why is that? Well, there are two reasons:

- customers value features more than quality

- companies consider dealing with breaches to be less expensive than keeping quality and security high

Demanding that software vendors make better quality software should always come with the acceptance that there will be either less features or higher prices. Anything else is just wishful thinking. As long as customers are not willing to make that sacrifice and rather keep patching the patches I do not want to hear any complaints about quality and security. If you, the customer, do not value quality and security, then why should we, the vendors, spend time and money on it? There is just no return on investment and in the end we only make software so that we can sell it for cash (or in case of FOSS sell services).

As long as even massive breaches like those at TJ Maxx, Home Depot, Sony, Staples, etc. are nothing more than headlines for a few weeks and a blip in the footnotes of the quarterly report absolutely nothing will change. With revenue in the tens of millions spending a few million on apologies, free credit monitoring, and some petty fines is nothing else than cost of doing business, like renting retail space or paying for online ads.

I don't even think that legislation such as mandatory software warranties will change much. As long as the masses of customers embrace mediocre applications and consider a text based user name / password combo 'security' any well-meant demands for better quality are pointless, if not ridiculously removed from reality.
User Rank: Author
12/20/2014 | 10:21:52 AM
Re: Operating systems need to have built-in mechanisms
@Chris_Clay -- that would definitely help.  Access control policies, configuration management, and system hardening are all strategies that should be implemented correctly to fight against malware.  But keep in mind that there are other attack vectors as well that try to exploit poorly developed software.  Thanks for you comments 
User Rank: Apprentice
12/19/2014 | 4:50:56 PM
Operating systems need to have built-in mechanisms
Windows has software restriction policies, just as GNU/Linux has SELinux.  People need to start using these technologies to help fight malware.  It's easier to shortcut or disable these security mechanisms, but admins need to take the time to learn them and use them as designed.  This will help prevent the spread of malware at the OS level.  Operating systems are better than ever, but will only help to fight malware if we use them and set them up properly.
User Rank: Author
12/19/2014 | 2:04:02 PM
Re: Rethinking Patching Strategies
Check out Dan Geer's keynote from Blackhat. So...it's being discussed. 😄
User Rank: Ninja
12/19/2014 | 1:58:55 PM
Re: Rethinking Patching Strategies
@KevGreene_Cyber,... I think liability or holding a commercial company responsible for "their" products would be awesome... it has been done in other industries, automobile manufacturing (GM and Cheverolet have been sued), Smith & Wesson and Bushmaster have been successfully sued for deaths cause by their products, so the only question is who would be the governing\enforcement body?

If we leave it up to those companies would it be tough enough, probably not... and think of the amount of hissy-fits that would happen every minute if the government decided to regulate software development. I believe that it would have to be something like a cross between OWASP, NIST and PCI, and it would need to be fair enough that a small gaming company would be treated as fairly as a Microsoft or Oracle.

User Rank: Ninja
12/19/2014 | 1:53:16 PM
Re: I wonder
As a full stack developer turned security professional, I have to admit that much of the problem with secure coding practices is the classic "are you done yet" problem.

Many times, I would give an estimate of completion of a product, to design specs, with security and operations testing.  The management would give a blessing to the project upon those estimates.
Inevitably, a manager (or worse - marketing) person would tap me on the shoulder a third or half way through the project and ask if the timelines could be "compressed". 
In some cases, we would be half way through a project and the product manager would arbitrarily decide to push for a release of the project for a quick market win of some kind.

No matter how much I would jump up and down saying "NOOOOOOO", the decision for an earlier release would go forward with the expectation that any bugs would be resolved in a later patch release.

"Time to market" decision making has a colorful history of applying discounted attention to testing practices, including security testing.

(Disclaimer: This is assuming a development team that knows anything about secure design and coding practices.  I am certain there is a large number of developers out there that do not get proper training/education regarding secure development concepts.)
Page 1 / 2   >   >>

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
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
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
Current Issue
The Promise and Reality of Cloud Security
Cloud security has been part of the cybersecurity conversation for years but has been on the sidelines for most enterprises. The shift to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic and digital transformation projects have moved cloud infrastructure front-and-center as enterprises address the associated security risks. This report - a compilation of cutting-edge Black Hat research, in-depth Omdia analysis, and comprehensive Dark Reading reporting - explores how cloud security is rapidly evolving.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
PUBLISHED: 2023-02-03
An issue was found in MojoJson v1.2.3 allows attackers to execute arbitary code via the destroy function.
PUBLISHED: 2023-02-03
Buffer OverFlow Vulnerability in Barenboim json-parser master and v1.1.0 fixed in v1.1.1 allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the json_value_parse function.
PUBLISHED: 2023-02-03
A vulnerability was found in BDCOM 1704-WGL 2.0.6314. It has been classified as critical. This affects an unknown part of the file /param.file.tgz of the component Backup File Handler. The manipulation leads to information disclosure. It is possible to initiate the attack remotely. The identifier VD...
PUBLISHED: 2023-02-03
Buffer OverFlow Vulnerability in MojoJson v1.2.3 allows an attacker to execute arbitrary code via the SkipString function.
PUBLISHED: 2023-02-03
Buffer Overflow vulnerability in authfile.c memcached 1.6.9 allows attackers to cause a denial of service via crafted authenticattion file.