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
Why Automation Will Free Security Pros to Do What They Do Best
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
ssmall
ssmall,
User Rank: Apprentice
9/10/2018 | 6:02:37 PM
Automation can be great, but it's no quick fix...
Nice article, Roy. Automation and orchestration are indeed 'hot' topics at the moment and are helping many organizations address issues faster and more consistently than they were before. The topics are perhaps also premier candidates for leading the latest round of fads in industry marketing.

Some caveats worth mentioning: new buyers of security automation products may find themselves experiencing sticker shock or falling victim to a still-maturing product space. Many vendor products are prohibitively expensive to the organizations that might benefit most (i.e., the long tail) and too often lock-in users with proprietary workflow formats. That said, automation is worth exploring—and perhaps adopting—for many organizations. My organization has realized numerous benefits to date.

An additional note of caution: I see many organizations rushing to automate workflows without first running the numbers; and, while automation has many benefits, it is first and foremost a matter of economics. Deciding what could, should, and will be slated for automation is an issue of resource management and optimization, whether those resources are people hours, pay-by-use cloud services, or particular team members with in-demand skills and limited availability.

Finally, organizations new to automation need to recognize that deploying new automation workflows is, in many ways, similar to deploying a new "product"—in that the workflows may (in more ways than expected) require additional support resources and know-how for testing, monitoring, and maintenance.


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
Incorporating a Prevention Mindset into Threat Detection and Response
Threat detection and response systems, by definition, are reactive because they have to wait for damage to be done before finding the attack. With a prevention-mindset, security teams can proactively anticipate the attacker's next move, rather than reacting to specific threats or trying to detect the latest techniques in real-time. The report covers areas enterprises should focus on: What positive response looks like. Improving security hygiene. Combining preventive actions with red team efforts.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-1809
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
Access of Uninitialized Pointer in GitHub repository radareorg/radare2 prior to 5.7.0.
CVE-2022-31267
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
Gitblit 1.9.2 allows privilege escalation via the Config User Service: a control character can be placed in a profile data field, such as an emailAddress%3Atext '[email protected]\n\trole = "#admin"' value.
CVE-2022-31268
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
A Path Traversal vulnerability in Gitblit 1.9.3 can lead to reading website files via /resources//../ (e.g., followed by a WEB-INF or META-INF pathname).
CVE-2022-31264
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
Solana solana_rbpf before 0.2.29 has an addition integer overflow via invalid ELF program headers. elf.rs has a panic via a malformed eBPF program.
CVE-2022-31259
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
The route lookup process in beego through 1.12.4 and 2.x through 2.0.2 allows attackers to bypass access control. When a /p1/p2/:name route is configured, attackers can access it by appending .xml in various places (e.g., p1.xml instead of p1).