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.

Database Security
Authentication
Mobile
Privacy
Compliance
Careers and People
Identity & Access Management
Security Monitoring
Advanced Threats
Insider Threats
Vulnerability Management
Comments
Threat Intelligence Sharing: The New Normal?
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
cybersavior
50%
50%
cybersavior,
 User Rank: Strategist
6/23/2017 | 11:38:43 AM
Comment:
The hardship in "crowdsourcing" threat intelligence is this.  On one hand, a corporation doesn't want to share intimate details of attacks and vectors it has seen (and perhaps suffered from).  It's not something you advertise.  On the other hand, it's natural to want similar data from other companies to use to advantage. 

Until a dedicated exchange or forum exists (besides the existing tools that mesh subscriber detections today) that anonymizes the reporting entity sources, we won't see any real open collaboration.  The fundamental problem in this interchange model is that the closer you get to anonymity the farther you get from assurance and authenticity.  Meaning, the reliability of threat articulation from an anonymous source is less than a vetted representative from "MegaCorp, LLC" proper.  This could be overcome by a intermediate, sanctioned broker to ensure the reporting entity is genuine.

Until the exchange mechanism is sexy and "now" it won't work either.  The threat intelligence collaboration and sharing service needs to solidly be edgy social media.  Think "HackedIn" and not some cold, corporate or government offering that reads like RFC's and NIST documentation.

Until the threat intelligence interchange is highly automated, it won't be accepted.  MegaCorp is not going to dedicate service agents or ongoing labor to the contributions nor consuming content.  If the end-all solution doesn't facilitate fast-flux transactions in both directions and provide actionable output that itself can be automated, it won't be widely adopted.
RetiredUser
100%
0%
RetiredUser,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/24/2017 | 6:20:43 PM
Re: Comment:
I have to agree.  Coming from the healthcare industry (currently) we see great value in partnerships with other medical organizations, from pharmacy to radiology to hospitals.  By setting up "health information exchanges" (HIE) with vetted partners, we feel confident the data we exchange is mostly clean, true and of interest.  This is key for me especially since the data I share and receive is tech-related.

A similar model for threat intelligence is really crucial.  Where HIEs are trying to save lives by increasing access to health data, corporations could be saving millions/billions/trillions of dollars for their customers by keeping major corps up-to-date with exploits as they are discovered - immediate and before any other groups outside the initial penetrator(s) are aware.     
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 2:45:45 PM
Re: Comment:
"health information exchanges"

I see your point. Health organization would want to do this since it reduces workload for the organization itself, and it is just sensitive information not anything related to threats.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 2:48:02 PM
Re: Comment:
"A similar model for threat intelligence is really crucial"

I agree, automation would really help. I am not sure if any organization would bear the initial setup cost, unless there is sum subsidy it is most likely not going to happen.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 6:36:08 PM
Re: Comment:
Of course, there is an economic cost and economic value to everything, monetary or not -- consumer privacy included. At the end of the day, those interests still need to be balanced appropriately lest there be significant customer backlash.
WoW100
50%
50%
WoW100,
 User Rank: Apprentice
7/8/2017 | 5:10:48 AM
Re: Comment: Social Media
I think the same, the intelligence sharing can really help some poor countries, so i support it.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 2:39:55 PM
Re: Comment:
"a corporation doesn't want to share intimate details of attacks and vectors"

That makes sense, it is going to be hard to share the threats that the company encountered and  what they did about it. 
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 2:42:27 PM
Re: Comment:
"MegaCorp is not going to dedicate service agents or ongoing labor to the contributions nor consuming content."

That makes sense. At the same time, if thread management is already done sharing information would not be taking that much time. I see your point tough.
DanelleA058
50%
50%
DanelleA058,
 User Rank: Apprentice
6/28/2017 | 8:50:49 PM
Re: Comment:
Thank you for reading my article. 

Agree with the comments you made. Context is everything with threat intel, along with automation. 

I talk about the need for these three elements here-- sharing, processing and responding here:  https://www.darkreading.com/attacks-breaches/hacking-forward-with-weaponized-intelligence-/a/d-id/1326955?
  1. Sharing: There must be a way for organizations to share meaningful threat intelligence using a common format that makes things easy to understand and correlate based on common factors such as industry, but that does not reveal the contributor's confidential information. If there is no trust within the system, it simply will not succeed.
  2. Processing: As inbound volumes of threat intelligence increase there's a real risk of being overwhelmed by big data, meaning users of threat intelligence will be right back where they started, ignoring signals because of an abundance of false positives. Making threat intelligence actionable means processing the data in more practical ways, including tracking indicators of compromise to see not just how they start, but to understand how they play out using new methods like breach simulations.
  3. Responding: The true value of actionable threat intelligence is not simply in distinguishing real threats from false positives, but in speeding incident response time. The longer a threat goes undisrupted, the greater the chance for damage; once a hacker reaches the target, the more damage they can do. Security teams must learn to act, but automation must be a part of the solution in order to cut response times from days and months down to minutes and seconds.
Dr.T
50%
50%
Dr.T,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 2:38:02 PM
Threat Intelligence Sharing: The New Normal
I would like it not to be a new normal but given the situation, threat intelligence sharing would be quite helpful for the communities.
Joe Stanganelli
100%
0%
Joe Stanganelli,
 User Rank: Ninja
6/26/2017 | 6:34:10 PM
Fin Svcs
To be sure, the financial-services sector in particular has -- after an all too long period of siloed silence -- been heartily embracing threat sharing. These days, in fact, the talk seems to be less about "old-style" threat sharing and more about an elevated approach they dub "collaborative defense" -- with organizations working together on problems.

Of course, this is usually evangelized by and conducted through "non-profit" organizations that charge mega-large annual fees for membership. Threat sharing is big business.
HardenStance
50%
50%
HardenStance,
 User Rank: Strategist
6/28/2017 | 5:27:58 AM
Nice piece, couple of remarks
Couple of remarks.

First, thanks for a nice piece on a REALLY important area. 

We're at the foot of a mountain relative to where we need to be on threat intel sharing.

We need a lot more of it, although there's a significant risk that if the number of organizations facilitating it continues to proliferate we could end up with a sharing infrastructure that is too complex and unwieldy.

Thanks too for drawing attention to ISAO. I hadn't heard of that organization but they seem to be performing a useful function in recording and tracking the many threat sharing organizations.

Last, I've had an opportunity to meet with some of the leaders of the Cyber Threat Alliance in recent weeks. They seem to me to be pretty advanced in what they're doing and where they're going with the support of many of the big beasts of the cyber security vendor community.

Over time the market needs to evolve from one in which actors can differentiate according to what they know to one in which what's known is an increasingly level playing field and actors instead compete around how quickly, how universally and how effectively they are able to respond before, during and after an attack.

 

 

  
DanelleA058
50%
50%
DanelleA058,
 User Rank: Apprentice
6/28/2017 | 8:45:36 PM
Re: Nice piece, couple of remarks
Thank you for reading my article. I agree the Cyber Threat Alliance is doing great things and they do have a great set of participating security vendors. I should have included them in the article as well. 

Additionally, one of the interesting ways of operationalizing threat intelligence is via breach and attack simulations -- ie. by transforming indicators of compromise to breach methods to see how an attack might play out in an environment. I think this might address some of the issues you raised, which is how we can respond quicker to an attack. 
Agate
50%
50%
Agate,
 User Rank: Apprentice
11/29/2017 | 6:44:53 AM
Re: Nice piece, couple of remarks to from Agate
You are right.

But whithout international cooperation, what about a worlwide attack ?

Agate


Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
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
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
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
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
How Enterprises Are Assessing Cybersecurity Risk in Today's Environment
The adoption of cloud services spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in pressure on cyber-risk professionals to focus on vulnerabilities and new exposures that stem from pandemic-driven changes. Many cybersecurity pros expect fundamental, long-term changes to their organization's computing and data security due to the shift to more remote work and accelerated cloud adoption. Download this report from Dark Reading to learn more about their challenges and concerns.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-4875
PUBLISHED: 2022-01-21
IBM Cognos Controller 10.4.0, 10.4.1, and 10.4.2 is vulnerable to an XML External Entity Injection (XXE) attack when processing XML data. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to expose sensitive information or consume memory resources. IBM X-Force ID: 190838.
CVE-2020-4876
PUBLISHED: 2022-01-21
IBM Cognos Controller 10.4.0, 10.4.1, and 10.4.2 is vulnerable to an XML External Entity Injection (XXE) attack when processing XML data. A remote attacker could exploit this vulnerability to expose sensitive information or consume memory resources. IBM X-Force ID: 190839.
CVE-2020-4877
PUBLISHED: 2022-01-21
IBM Cognos Controller 10.4.0, 10.4.1, and 10.4.2 could be vulnerable to unauthorized modifications by using public fields in public classes. IBM X-Force ID: 190843.
CVE-2020-4879
PUBLISHED: 2022-01-21
IBM Cognos Controller 10.4.0, 10.4.1, and 10.4.2 could allow a remote attacker to bypass security restrictions, caused by improper validation of authentication cookies. IBM X-Force ID: 190847.
CVE-2021-4016
PUBLISHED: 2022-01-21
Rapid7 Insight Agent, versions prior to 3.1.3, suffer from an improper access control vulnerability whereby, the user has access to the snapshot directory. An attacker can access, read and copy any of the files in this directory e.g. asset_info.json or file_info.json, leading to a loss of confident...