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
NotPetya: How to Prep and Respond if You're Hit
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
RobEnns
50%
50%
RobEnns,
User Rank: Author
7/13/2017 | 2:56:59 PM
Re: What about replicated COOP scenarios
Very good question, interested in the same.
matt.trevors
50%
50%
matt.trevors,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/12/2017 | 12:13:55 PM
We need to stop confusing end users
We in the security community have a very difficult time conveying the importance of various strategies and tactics to end users when it comes to securing their infrastructure.  I believe it in part is because we aren't promoting a unified message. Instead, we tell them what we "think" are the right things to do.  Instead, why don't you preach about the adoption of existing well-documented strategies and tactics?  For instance, you could have pointed end users to the Center for Internet Security Critical Security Controls (formerly SANS 20) which would include standing up an incident response plan, patching boxes, and backing up high-value assets.  Also, you could have pointed people to NIST 800-61 Computer Security Incident Handling Guide which would give them a good idea of how to stand up incident response capabilities for their organization (planning, detection & analysis, containment, eradication, recovery, and post-incident activities).  Finally, you are dancing around the NIST Cybersecurity Framework which includes functions, categories, and subcategories that describe how to identify, protect, detect, respond, and recover.  

As a community, we need to get better at getting our message across or things are never going to get better.  To do that, we all need to get on the same page and back published standards.  If you don't agree with the standards, most encourage community feedback.
randyfromsd
50%
50%
randyfromsd,
User Rank: Apprentice
7/11/2017 | 4:23:26 PM
Re: What about replicated COOP scenarios
Isolate the backup target from the network - make shares hidden so they aren't easily accessible - restrict user accounts - implement local\offsite backup.
jenshadus
50%
50%
jenshadus,
User Rank: Strategist
7/10/2017 | 8:35:09 AM
What about replicated COOP scenarios
Just curious of how a malware attack would affect an active-active DR scenario.  If the malware can infect a primary target, I would think it would affect the backup environment.  And what would this do to the backup recovery plans?  Sounds like the best bet is to still use tape backup.


Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
Black Hat Q&A: Hacking a '90s Sports Car
Black Hat Staff, ,  11/7/2019
The Cold Truth about Cyber Insurance
Chris Kennedy, CISO & VP Customer Success, AttackIQ,  11/7/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
7 Threats & Disruptive Forces Changing the Face of Cybersecurity
This Dark Reading Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at the biggest emerging threats and disruptive forces that are changing the face of cybersecurity today.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-16863
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
STMicroelectronics ST33TPHF2ESPI TPM devices before 2019-09-12 allow attackers to extract the ECDSA private key via a side-channel timing attack because ECDSA scalar multiplication is mishandled, aka TPM-FAIL.
CVE-2019-18949
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
SnowHaze before 2.6.6 is sometimes too late to honor a per-site JavaScript blocking setting, which leads to unintended JavaScript execution via a chain of webpage redirections targeted to the user's browser configuration.
CVE-2011-1930
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
In klibc 1.5.20 and 1.5.21, the DHCP options written by ipconfig to /tmp/net-$DEVICE.conf are not properly escaped. This may allow a remote attacker to send a specially crafted DHCP reply which could execute arbitrary code with the privileges of any process which sources DHCP options.
CVE-2011-1145
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
The SQLDriverConnect() function in unixODBC before 2.2.14p2 have a possible buffer overflow condition when specifying a large value for SAVEFILE parameter in the connection string.
CVE-2011-1488
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-14
A memory leak in rsyslog before 5.7.6 was found in the way deamon processed log messages are logged when $RepeatedMsgReduction was enabled. A local attacker could use this flaw to cause a denial of the rsyslogd daemon service by crashing the service via a sequence of repeated log messages sent withi...