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
Making the Case for a Cybersecurity Moon Shot
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
drmikelloyd
50%
50%
drmikelloyd,
User Rank: Author
2/26/2019 | 7:36:41 PM
Re: A network that understands hardness
Sure - how about:

Abandon the "permitted by default" network model.  Endpoints must prove to networks that they are ready to be exposed to anything beyond their immediate neighborhood.  Moderate access requires only basic proof of hygeine, while a new Internet-facing web server (or container) must demonstrate being hardened and ready before the flood gates are opened.
adamshostack
50%
50%
adamshostack,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/26/2019 | 6:58:42 PM
Re: A network that understands hardness
I think I see where you're going -- can you rewrite it as a moonshot goal?
drmikelloyd
50%
50%
drmikelloyd,
User Rank: Author
2/25/2019 | 8:43:26 PM
Re: A network that understands hardness
Right - there is a big distinction between general purpose endpoints and special purpose "things".  Laptops get patched regularly, and have decent internal firewalls.  That said, the market for network firewalls has not gone away - it's interesting to look at reasons why. 

Laptops are great and all, but they aren't where most of the value resides.  Data centers are fragile in one way - huge uptime pressure, and an unwillingness to patch.  IoT devices are fragile in a completely different way - they lack a decent patching infrastructure, and are generally designed to a pricepoint, not about flexible response to a changing security landscape.

My response to your moonshot question comes from a point of view that "between" still matters.  Security tech is either placed on endpoints, or between them.  The endpoint security products face challenges (too many agents, not to mention endpoints that aren't built to accomodate agents - does your fridge?).  That's why there is still a large challenge space around "between" controls.  It's the old debate - shiould the network just be dumb pipes, or should it provide intelligent services and controls?

I'm suggesting a moonshot for a network that can enforce intelligent controls *between* endpoints as the way forward.  This is a moonshot because today, endpoints do not have to play along, or follow any hygeine standards, or register what kind of object they are.  We've stacked up some ways to lock down laptops, and messed around with MDM, but what about all the things that are neither?
adamshostack
50%
50%
adamshostack,
User Rank: Apprentice
2/25/2019 | 6:09:50 PM
Re: A network that understands hardness
Hi thanks Mike!

 

Is this still a problem? I was under the impression that most mainstream systems were fairly firewalled these days, but perhaps I'm thinking more of desktops and less of IoT?

 

Adam
drmikelloyd
50%
50%
drmikelloyd,
User Rank: Author
2/20/2019 | 2:39:43 PM
A network that understands hardness
Nice question, Adam.  How about a project to ensure a machine directly exposed to the Internet does not immediately succumb to all the known "background radiation" out there? 

There are a range of possible implementations (proactive vs reactive hardening).  But similar to your goal of "email payloads should never be detonated", I'm thinking "maintain a living battery of tests that must pass as basic hygeine before a machine can be exposed widely".  It's not NAC - it's more like the inverse.  NAC says you can't even access a local network unless you're "clean" to a specified level.  This project flips that, to say the level of hardening required depends on breadth of exposure to others.

The moonshot aspect of this is to teach the network (where access policy is enforced) about the quality or hardness of each endpoint.  In an IoT future, this may be essential - consumer IoT is too weak to be treated like other endpoints.
schopj
50%
50%
schopj,
User Rank: Strategist
2/19/2019 | 4:31:31 PM
Moonshot
Getting Microsoft to log at least as much as Sysmon and to start better protecting those logs so they cant be easily deleted, or if they can, can also be easily recovered.  I shouldnt have to install a third party app, or any app, just to get detailed logs monitoring process hashes and who started what from what program, or any of the other things that advanced logging applications log.  It is an MS operating system and it should log everything that is done on it, period.  


US Turning Up the Heat on North Korea's Cyber Threat Operations
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  9/16/2019
Fed Kaspersky Ban Made Permanent by New Rules
Dark Reading Staff 9/11/2019
NetCAT Vulnerability Is Out of the Bag
Dark Reading Staff 9/12/2019
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
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
The State of IT Operations and Cybersecurity Operations
Your enterprise's cyber risk may depend upon the relationship between the IT team and the security team. Heres some insight on what's working and what isn't in the data center.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-16395
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
GnuCOBOL 2.2 has a stack-based buffer overflow in the cb_name() function in cobc/tree.c via crafted COBOL source code.
CVE-2019-16396
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
GnuCOBOL 2.2 has a use-after-free in the end_scope_of_program_name() function in cobc/parser.y via crafted COBOL source code.
CVE-2019-16199
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
eQ-3 Homematic CCU2 before 2.47.18 and CCU3 before 3.47.18 allow Remote Code Execution by unauthenticated attackers with access to the web interface via an HTTP POST request to certain URLs related to the ReGa core process.
CVE-2019-16391
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
SPIP before 3.1.11 and 3.2 before 3.2.5 allows authenticated visitors to modify any published content and execute other modifications in the database. This is related to ecrire/inc/meta.php and ecrire/inc/securiser_action.php.
CVE-2019-16392
PUBLISHED: 2019-09-17
SPIP before 3.1.11 and 3.2 before 3.2.5 allows prive/formulaires/login.php XSS via error messages.