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.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
News
Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
News
Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "The truth behind Stonehenge...."
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Building the SOC of the Future
Building the SOC of the Future
Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-21321
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
fastify-reply-from is an npm package which is a fastify plugin to forward the current http request to another server. In fastify-reply-from before version 4.0.2, by crafting a specific URL, it is possible to escape the prefix of the proxied backend service. If the base url of the proxied server is &...
CVE-2021-21322
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
fastify-http-proxy is an npm package which is a fastify plugin for proxying your http requests to another server, with hooks. By crafting a specific URL, it is possible to escape the prefix of the proxied backend service. If the base url of the proxied server is `/pub/`, a user expect that accessing...
CVE-2021-21320
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
matrix-react-sdk is an npm package which is a Matrix SDK for React Javascript. In matrix-react-sdk before version 3.15.0, the user content sandbox can be abused to trick users into opening unexpected documents. The content is opened with a `blob` origin that cannot access Matrix user data, so messag...
CVE-2021-27730
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
Accellion FTA 9_12_432 and earlier is affected by argument injection via a crafted POST request to an admin endpoint. The fixed version is FTA_9_12_444 and later.
CVE-2021-25306
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-02
A buffer overflow vulnerability in the AT command interface of Gigaset DX600A v41.00-175 devices allows remote attackers to force a device reboot by sending relatively long AT commands.