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.

Risk

9/11/2019
10:00 AM
Tony Surak
Tony Surak
Commentary
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail vvv
50%
50%

Firmware: A New Attack Vector Requiring Industry Leadership

It's time for cybersecurity manufacturers and solution providers to step up and show leadership in addressing firmware security. Read why and how.

Awareness of cybersecurity danger has skyrocketed in recent years. In 2004, the entire global cybersecurity market totaled $3.5 billion — by 2014, it exceeded $120 billion. However, almost all this attention has been on attack vectors such as software, applications, infrastructure, and human/social behavior. Firmware — code that is loaded onto a device when it's built and is mostly hidden from the end user — is a dangerous new attack vector. It is largely firmware concerns that are driving the debate around devices made by the Chinese firm Huawei.

The emergence of firmware as a new attack vector has reignited an age-old debate within industry: Who's responsible for addressing device cybersecurity? Is it the device manufacturer, or is it the company purchasing the device? This "chicken or the egg" debate has hampered cybersecurity for too long. Unaddressed, it could also torpedo the emergence of the Internet of Things (IoT), which is expected to produce billions of Internet-connected devices run by firmware — cameras, printers, speakers, appliances.

The government's answer to the question of responsibility is becoming quite clear. In the face of increasingly aggressive and sophisticated cyberattacks, there has been a focus on securing the Department of Defense (DoD) supply chain. This means the cybersecurity practices of contractors have come under more intense review. The mechanism for doing so is through Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplements, or DFARs.

DFAR 252.204-7012 pertains to regulations around how contractors must safeguard covered defense information, and how they need to report cyber incidents. To enforce these requirements, the DoD has launched its Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) initiative, which will require contractors achieve certification by late 2020 to participate in the national defense supply chain.

These regulations also reflect an increasing willingness of government to hold companies responsible for cybersecurity vulnerabilities in their products. For example, Cisco recently agreed to pay $8.6 million to settle litigation claiming the company violated the False Claims Act by not addressing vulnerabilities in its video surveillance products sold to the US government. The company ignored the warnings of an internal whistleblower and continued to sell the product for years before revealing the potential cybersecurity holes publicly.

Of course, the threat extends beyond government networks to private industry and academia as well. Recently, I was speaking with Bill Priestap, former assistant director of the FBI's counterintelligence division, at a recent cyber summit held in Baltimore, Maryland. He shared with me the following quote:

Nation state adversaries are employing a variety of means to try to gain insight into our companies and research institutions, and today our approach to protecting proprietary information must be more comprehensive. Among other things, this involves understanding and addressing supply chain risks, including those associated with firmware.

The counter narrative from the industry regarding taking on such cybersecurity responsibility has been the difficulty and additional cost. Many cybersecurity products involve technology from multiple firms, increasing the complexity of the challenge. Firmware images and libraries are often delivered as binaries for insertion into software, meaning there is no access to the source code. In the business-to-government space, additional quality assurance time and costs need to be borne without a guarantee of resulting business.

There is some validity to these arguments, but times have changed and companies must step up and accept responsibility for the cybersecurity of their offerings. It's become the table stakes for doing business.

Leading companies can also view increased firmware security as a differentiator. New technology startups have emerged, some headed by former intelligence personnel, that simplify and automate the firmware analysis process. File systems can be extracted and scans run to detect things like backdoor accounts, out of date software and potential zero-day vulnerabilities. Companies have better technology today to inspect and validate the components provided by their vendors.

It's time for cybersecurity manufacturers and solution providers to step up and show leadership in addressing firmware security. Better tools are available, and government regulation is increasingly making it mandatory. Embracing the challenge head on will increase confidence in IoT devices, be better for their bottom lines and ensure the continued growth of the cybersecurity industry overall.

Related Content:

Check out The Edge, Dark Reading's new section for features, threat data, and in-depth perspectives. Today's top story: "Security Pros' Painless Guide to Machine Intelligence, AI, ML & DL."

Tony Surak has co-founded and/or operated a number of startup companies including network equipment company Synaptyx, software development services firm GlobalLogic and database product company FoundationDB. He also serves as a board member for Attila Security and ReFirm ... View Full Bio
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Why Cyber-Risk Is a C-Suite Issue
Marc Wilczek, Digital Strategist & CIO Advisor,  11/12/2019
DevSecOps: The Answer to the Cloud Security Skills Gap
Lamont Orange, Chief Information Security Officer at Netskope,  11/15/2019
Attackers' Costs Increasing as Businesses Focus on Security
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  11/15/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Navigating the Deluge of Security Data
In this Tech Digest, Dark Reading shares the experiences of some top security practitioners as they navigate volumes of security data. We examine some examples of how enterprises can cull this data to find the clues they need.
Flash Poll
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Rethinking Enterprise Data Defense
Frustrated with recurring intrusions and breaches, cybersecurity professionals are questioning some of the industrys conventional wisdom. Heres a look at what theyre thinking about.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-5118
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-18
A Security Bypass Vulnerability exists in TBOOT before 1.8.2 in the boot loader module when measuring commandline parameters.
CVE-2019-12422
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-18
Apache Shiro before 1.4.2, when using the default "remember me" configuration, cookies could be susceptible to a padding attack.
CVE-2012-4441
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-18
Cross-site Scripting (XSS) in Jenkins main before 1.482 and LTS before 1.466.2 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML in the CI game plugin.
CVE-2019-10764
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-18
In elliptic-php versions priot to 1.0.6, Timing attacks might be possible which can result in practical recovery of the long-term private key generated by the library under certain conditions. Leakage of a bit-length of the scalar during scalar multiplication is possible on an elliptic curve which m...
CVE-2019-19117
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-18
/usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/autoupgrade.lua on PHICOMM K2(PSG1218) V22.5.9.163 devices allows remote authenticated users to execute any command via shell metacharacters in the cgi-bin/luci autoUpTime parameter.