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
Context: Finding The Story Inside Your Security Operations Program
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
josh@idrra.com
50%
50%
[email protected],
User Rank: Apprentice
3/24/2015 | 11:00:24 AM
Re: Powerful Analysis
Yes, correct Marilyn.  Just like contributing to DarkReading. ;-)
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
3/24/2015 | 10:30:16 AM
Re: Powerful Analysis
Thanks, Josh. Like most things, I expect this is something that takes a little bit of practice, to get good at!
josh@idrra.com
50%
50%
[email protected],
User Rank: Apprentice
3/24/2015 | 10:24:13 AM
Re: Powerful Analysis
Thank you Marilyn for what is a great question.  In general, pitfalls that can impede or obstruct the narrative can vary widely, but a few common ones are:

* Lack of telemetry to support narrative-building

* Lack of intelligence/background contextual information regarding activity of interest

* Shortage of expertise require to design narrative-driven workflow

* Immature or unreliable methods for enrichment of data and addition of contextual information

The narrative would seem to be preferred over alerts for internal incidents (i.e., incidents within the organization).  Perhaps for external incidents (e.g., attacks on partners or third parties) where there is less control, less telemetry, and/or less influence, narratives wouldn't work so well.
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
3/24/2015 | 10:09:04 AM
Re: Powerful Analysis
Josh, what are some of the common pitfalls to watch out for when applying a narrative approach to security operations programs? And when does it not make sense to use this strategy?
josh@idrra.com
50%
50%
[email protected],
User Rank: Apprentice
3/23/2015 | 9:08:00 PM
Re: Powerful Analysis
Thank you for your comments and question.  I think that after detection, one needs to move to analysis/forensics, and then on to response.  What's cool about the narrative approach is that it gets us much further down the road of analysis/forensics than alerts do.  When the puzzle is partially or wholly assembled for us, some of the analysis/forensics that needs to be done is also done for us.  Helps to save time and reduce human error.
RyanSepe
50%
50%
RyanSepe,
User Rank: Ninja
3/23/2015 | 2:32:50 PM
Powerful Analysis
Great article! This type of thinking can be very beneficial in all aspects of life when trying to analyze a situation. It's not only the discovery phase however that may be difficult for a security program but the execution phase of what is done with that knowledge.

Do you recommend employing the same principles? Or how would you recommend proceeding after the detection phase?


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.