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.

Partner Perspectives  Connecting marketers to our tech communities.
10/15/2015
10:25 AM
Ted Gary
Ted Gary
Partner Perspectives
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
50%
50%

Asset Segmentation: The Key To Control

Automated asset segmentation and classification helps focus strong security controls where they are needed most.

Segmentation, an established concept, continues to deliver value across multiple disciplines. We are all likely familiar with the concept of market segmentation that is defined in Wikipedia as “a marketing strategy which involves dividing a broad target market into subsets of consumers, businesses, or countries who have, or are perceived to have, common needs, interests, and priorities, and then designing and implementing strategies to target them.”

In IT, network segmentation is well known to increase network performance and security by isolating one network segment (zone) from others. For example, PCI (payment card industry) data within a network must be separated from the rest of the network to limit unauthorized access to credit card data.

When it comes to security and compliance, not all assets pose equal risk. Assets should be segmented into virtual groups based on attributes such as data classification, regulatory requirements, and business criticality. Ideally, multiple criteria can be applicable to the same asset to support specific security policies -- for example, segmenting assets by data classification and geography to meet local data protection regulations such as HIPAA in the United States.

Segmentation Must Inform Security Controls

Determining which security controls should be applied to which assets is a decision that must balance the cost of administering the controls (there is no free lunch) with the need to enable the business (or at least not disable it). For example, a security policy for standard endpoints could require a monthly vulnerability scan, a basic configuration audit that checks for password strength, and remediation of critical vulnerabilities and misconfigurations within 30 days, yet still allow users to install software and write data to USB devices. However, the security policy for endpoints used by finance personnel could require weekly vulnerability scans, strict configuration audits, and remediation of all critical and high vulnerabilities and misconfigurations within seven days. Additionally, when indicators of compromise are discovered that pertain to higher risk assets, higher priority alerts should be triggered to raise the visibility for security monitoring staff.

The benefits of tailoring security controls to specific asset segments include:

  • Risk-based security that applies stronger controls to assets that contain or can access critical data and to assets associated with mission critical services. Hopefully, users of these critical assets will understand and accept the rationale for having their systems “locked down” to protect sensitive data and services.
  • Prioritization of security staff resources. Frequently, security staff resources are spread across implementing and managing preventive controls and across proactive monitoring that demands timely investigation of indicators of weakness. Asset segmentation helps staff focus their time on what matters most.
  • Automated analysis and reporting. Robust segmentation can prioritize weaknesses by grouping assets based on criteria such as regulatory requirements, vulnerability criticality, and the availability of an exploit. This analysis increases staff efficiency by focusing them on high-risk asset groups. Additionally, automated reporting leverages asset segmentation to send information pertaining to specific assets to the responsible parties.

Manual Segmentation Will Fail

Manually assigning assets to segments is doomed to failure because people are notoriously poor at performing classification. Most people don’t like to perform classification, so the unwritten “five-second rule” often applies: If people can’t classify something within five seconds, they tend to resort to the first item in a pick list. When asked to classify assets using multiple criteria such as geography, operating system, and business service, the five-second rule is virtually sure to reduce the quality of the classification. Even with good intentions, people often inaccurately classify items; it is just too easy to make a mistake. The bottom line is that classification must be automated to provide accurate results.

Automated asset segmentation and classification helps focus strong security controls where they are needed most and increases staff efficiency when investigating weaknesses and incidents.

Ted Gary is Tenable's Sr. Product Marketing Manager for Tenable's SecurityCenter Continuous View product. He is responsible for translating the rich features of SecurityCenter into solutions for compelling problems faced by information security professionals. Ted has nearly ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Can Your Patching Strategy Keep Up with the Demands of Open Source?
Tim Mackey, Principal Security Strategist, CyRC, at Synopsys,  6/18/2019
Florida Town Pays $600K to Ransomware Operators
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  6/20/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Building and Managing an IT Security Operations Program
As cyber threats grow, many organizations are building security operations centers (SOCs) to improve their defenses. In this Tech Digest you will learn tips on how to get the most out of a SOC in your organization - and what to do if you can't afford to build one.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2019-12928
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-24
The QMP migrate command in QEMU version 4.0.0 and earlier is vulnerable to OS command injection, which allows the remote attacker to achieve code execution, denial of service, or information disclosure by sending a crafted QMP command to the listening server.
CVE-2019-12929
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-24
The QMP guest_exec command in QEMU 4.0.0 and earlier is prone to OS command injection, which allows the attacker to achieve code execution, denial of service, or information disclosure by sending a crafted QMP command to the listening server.
CVE-2019-12936
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-23
BlueStacks App Player 2, 3, and 4 before 4.90 allows DNS Rebinding for attacks on exposed IPC functions.
CVE-2019-12937
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-23
apps/gsudo.c in gsudo in ToaruOS through 1.10.9 has a buffer overflow allowing local privilege escalation to the root user via the DISPLAY environment variable.
CVE-2019-12935
PUBLISHED: 2019-06-23
Shopware before 5.5.8 has XSS via the Query String to the backend/Login or backend/Login/load/ URI.