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
Hacking Back & the Digital Wild West
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
este1976
50%
50%
este1976,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/10/2018 | 10:45:21 PM
Re: prevention better than prosecution
Good analysis and wonderful say sir. Your in-depth post has cleared my many doubts. Of course, prevention is better than prosecution.
macker490
50%
50%
macker490,
User Rank: Ninja
3/10/2018 | 8:48:51 AM
prevention better than prosecution
Prevention is better than Prosecution

The Internet has been described as a "Fool's Paradise" from time to time.   I always liked that characterization.

The troubles on the net today largely originate in a general failure to authenticate.

Consider for example the troubles with fraudulent 1040 tax forms.    Or the new mortgage loan scams.  or the grand-daddy of them all: e/mail "phishing" (BEC).

For prevention we need to turn to the work of Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman.    These gentlemen understood this issue and knew what they needed to do.   What we need to do is to understand our part in their work: authentication.

When my daughter sat down in the office at the Credit Union to open a new account: that is when the Credit Union -- and my daughter -- should have authenticated the keys needed -- for her online interface(s).

This will need to be incorporated into systems as packaged technology.

We are talking about Public Key Cryptology: PGP, PKI, SSL, TLS, X.509 GnuPG ... it's "out there" -- but to make it work it is necessary to authenticate the keys.

I could give you the "fingerprint" for my key: 4DEA0DAD.  and you could download it from the servers.   But you still wouldn't know who I am.  Once you find a way to identify me and verify the fingerprint on my key THEN you can SIGN my key.   This will make my key VALID in your system meaning you are satisfied that you know who I am.    This doesn't happen with X.509: it's too easy for anybody to acquire an x.509 certificate -- and -- generally -- users have no idea what the certificates are supposed to look like or what data they should contain.

That doesn't matter: HERE -- but -- at the Credit Union or with my tax software and such : yes, it does matter.

Note: the most important aspect of PKI/PGP/GnuPG --- is AUTHENTICATION.

what was the cost of hacking last year:   I'm remembering $600B - .8% of GDP
dave.dittrich
50%
50%
dave.dittrich,
User Rank: Apprentice
3/6/2018 | 1:08:14 AM
"Active Response Continuum" is a better phrase, better model, than "active defense"
I fully agree with Levi, that current proposals to modify existing computer crime statutes are insufficiently nuanced, insufficiently framed, and not ready to move forward. He is right that the consequences of allowing the private sector to become too agressive, too casually, will likely make the situation for law enforcement more difficult rather than easier. I published my own analysis of the ACDC Act 2.0 (and proposals to improve it) along the lines of Levi's suggestions. You can find that analysis on Medium (search for "Medium Dittrich Active Defense Certainty Act", since URLs are not allowed in comments) and read about the Active Response Continuum (search "Dittrich Active Response Continuum").

I believe the end goal here should be to facilitate victims' reporting of meaningful evidence of computer crimes in a timely manner to law enforcement, to better enable the U.S. government to use its sovereign levers of power (diplomacy, intelligence, military, economic sanctions and law enforcement, DIME-LE for short) to pursue criminal actions and violations of international norms and laws against foreign and domestic actors. The private sector does not have the authorities, nor the "whole of government" options, necessary to reduce international incidents like those Levi listed.

There are many examples of corporations using civil legal process (e.g., botnet "takedowns" using temporary restraining orders) within the U.S. justice system. When and if a victim determines that the situation is sufficiently grave to justify violating domestic laws and taking aggressive uncooperative actions on systems not under their authority, outside of civil or criminal legal process, they already have the option under U.S. law to make an affirmative defense for their actions. The idea in the ACDC Act of forcing a harmed intermediary to bring suit in civil court for damages resulting from an entity taking ill considered "active defense measures" seems to me to be unfair and unecessary.


COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/3/2020
Pen Testers Who Got Arrested Doing Their Jobs Tell All
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  8/5/2020
New 'Nanodegree' Program Provides Hands-On Cybersecurity Training
Nicole Ferraro, Contributing Writer,  8/3/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal, a Dark Reading Perspective
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
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-2020-15820
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains YouTrack before 2020.2.6881, the markdown parser could disclose hidden file existence.
CVE-2020-15821
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains YouTrack before 2020.2.6881, a user without permission is able to create an article draft.
CVE-2020-15823
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
JetBrains YouTrack before 2020.2.8873 is vulnerable to SSRF in the Workflow component.
CVE-2020-15824
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains Kotlin before 1.4.0, there is a script-cache privilege escalation vulnerability due to kotlin-main-kts cached scripts in the system temp directory, which is shared by all users by default.
CVE-2020-15825
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-08
In JetBrains TeamCity before 2020.1, users with the Modify Group permission can elevate other users' privileges.