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.

Perimeter

7/20/2009
03:31 PM
John H. Sawyer
John H. Sawyer
Commentary
50%
50%

Data Breach Laws Drive IR, Preparation Is Key

Fellow Dark Reading blogger Gadi Evron had an interesting take on the relationship between incident response and forensics in his post "Incident Response Is Not Forensics." I agree with him for the most part, but I don't think forensics is the most common course of action depending on who is responding to the incident.

Fellow Dark Reading blogger Gadi Evron had an interesting take on the relationship between incident response and forensics in his post "Incident Response Is Not Forensics." I agree with him for the most part, but I don't think forensics is the most common course of action depending on who is responding to the incident.With a sysadmin at the helm, evidence collection is often at the minimum because he or she wants the system back online ASAP. Not so with security professionals.

We as security professionals want to know the who, what, why, and when so we can prevent the problem from repeating itself. Much of the impetus to find out what happened is simply personal and professional curiosity, but that has been changing. In the U.S., nearly every state has a law requiring us to disclose information surrounding a data breach involving personal information; the affected individuals must be notified. So while Gadi's statements about getting the system back online immediately may be desirable from a business perspective, legal reasons could also impact our decisions. Similarly, the decision to bring a system back online should rest solely in the hands of business decision-makers, who must weigh the costs of lost business versus the legal requirement to perform a thorough investigation to see if personal information was accessed. I think the No. 1 problem facing security professionals and businesses is a lack of preparation. The pros dealing with an incident are not fully prepared to respond at the drop of a hat, and their environments aren't designed well enough to provide information quickly. What can they do to be better prepared? To start off, they need to have the tools, training, and know-how. The majority of good, solid incident response tools are free or relatively inexpensive (CAIN, Helix, etc.) -- you just need to have them ready to go and know how to use them efficiently and effectively when the time comes. The other step is preparing your environment. I discussed that last week, along with some links to Richard Bejtlich's Defensible Network Architecture 2.0. Being prepared with standard configurations that allow compromised hosts to be rebuilt goes a long way toward speeding incident response, as does having comprehensive centralized logging and full network monitoring. There are a lot of reasons that forensics seems to complicate the incident response process, but that doesn't have to be the case if you're prepared for the inevitable compromise.

John H. Sawyer is a senior security engineer on the IT Security Team at the University of Florida. The views and opinions expressed in this blog are his own and do not represent the views and opinions of the UF IT Security Team or the University of Florida. When John's not fighting flaming, malware-infested machines or performing autopsies on blitzed boxes, he can usually be found hanging with his family, bouncing a baby on one knee and balancing a laptop on the other. Special to Dark Reading.

 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/10/2020
Researcher Finds New Office Macro Attacks for MacOS
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  8/7/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: They said you could use Zoom anywhere.......
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-2020-14483
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
A timeout during a TLS handshake can result in the connection failing to terminate. This can result in a Niagara thread hanging and requires a manual restart of Niagara (Versions 4.6.96.28, 4.7.109.20, 4.7.110.32, 4.8.0.110) and Niagara Enterprise Security (Versions 2.4.31, 2.4.45, 4.8.0.35) to corr...
CVE-2020-11733
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
An issue was discovered on Spirent TestCenter and Avalanche appliance admin interface firmware. An attacker, who already has access to an SSH restricted shell, can achieve root access via shell metacharacters. The attacker can then, for example, read sensitive files such as appliance admin configura...
CVE-2020-13281
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
For GitLab before 13.0.12, 13.1.6, 13.2.3 a denial of service exists in the project import feature
CVE-2020-13286
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
For GitLab before 13.0.12, 13.1.6, 13.2.3 user controlled git configuration settings can be modified to result in Server Side Request Forgery.
CVE-2020-15925
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-13
A SQL injection vulnerability at a tpf URI in Loway QueueMetrics before 19.10.21 allows remote authenticated attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the TPF_XPAR1 parameter.