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

11/16/2010
06:52 AM
Rob Enderle
Rob Enderle
Commentary
50%
50%

Larry Ellison's Mistress, And Security As A Blame Game

Focus on security, not on finger-pointing

I've been covering the drama between Oracle, HP, and most recently, SAP, for several weeks now. At the heart of this drama was an incident where Oracle's CEO, Larry Ellison, allegedly discontinued an intimate relationship with an Oracle employee and appeared to have come close to losing his top job for a second time.

It is that experience that appears to have triggered much of the drama we now see, and it was caused by a security practice that put protection against blame above protecting their company.

I think it is once again time to reconsider the use of passwords and an increasing security practice to focus on assigning blame over protecting the company.

A lot of us have been struggling with why Larry Ellison is so upset with the firing of Mark Hurd by HP. This became even harder to understand when it was revealed that the HP board clearly believed that Hurd may have leaked information about the HP acquisition of EDS. After a lot of review, we discovered that Ellison had experienced a similar close call where an Oracle employee he was involved with filed a similar action and falsified the evidence. Apparently, it was a close thing.

However, the lesson has little to do with the affairs, but a lot to do with the falsified information. See, she apparently was able to log into an executive's email account and that is how she falsified the documentation that was supposed to validate her claim against Ellison;d she went to jail for it.

She was caught, but the fact that in a very secure organization like Oracle is reported to be, what she did should have been impossible. Yet we all know that in our own organizations it likely is not. It is that way because many of us have become more focused on avoiding blame than in real security.

Decades after the industry pronounced that passwords were inadequate when it comes to security end points, we still use them as our primary method of securing our sites. We fool ourselves into thinking that we have addressed the problem by changing them often and making them very complex with numbers, punctuation, capitals, and the avoidance of repeating patterns. All this did was apparently force people to write the passwords down and place them in unsecure locations -- notepads on desks, in drawers, in wallets, on cell phones, and even taped to the computers themselves.

In addition, we don't even remind people very often not to share them and, when they do, we tend to ignore the practice rather than penalize it. As a result, we wander around feeling like we did our jobs when, in fact, all we have done is create a personal defense when a password is compromised.

I was reminded of a quote today: "The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on," by Robert Bloch. Increasingly, I wonder if that is what security has become. No longer do we really try to secure our sites; instead, we put in place practices and rules that we inherently know employees won't follow so we can blame them in a breach.

Was it security's fault that Larry Ellison's pissed-off ex-girlfriend got access to an executive's email account and forged documents? Of course not. It was the fault of the person who committed the crime and the person who didn't properly secure a password. To me, that's BS.

If we carry a security title, then it is our job to do what is necessary to secure the company. If we can't, we should move into another line of work. We know employees can't remember complex passwords, ignoring how they document these passwords in my mind is negligent. Simple passwords remembered are often more secure than complex passwords that aren't secured, and passwords alone aren't secure enough.

We have to look at the entire solution because our job isn't to make sure someone else is blamed for a breach. Our job is to prevent the breach in the first place. And, frankly, at the end of the day, it is vastly more rewarding to know that those in your care are safe than it is in successfully avoiding the blame when they are not.

-- Rob Enderle is president and founder of Enderle Group. Special to Dark Reading.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Commentary
Cyberattacks Are Tailored to Employees ... Why Isn't Security Training?
Tim Sadler, CEO and co-founder of Tessian,  6/17/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
7 Powerful Cybersecurity Skills the Energy Sector Needs Most
Pam Baker, Contributing Writer,  6/22/2021
News
Microsoft Disrupts Large-Scale BEC Campaign Across Web Services
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  6/15/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-34390
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
Trusty TLK contains a vulnerability in the NVIDIA TLK kernel function where a lack of checks allows the exploitation of an integer overflow on the size parameter of the tz_map_shared_mem function.
CVE-2021-34391
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
Trusty TLK contains a vulnerability in the NVIDIA TLK kernel�s tz_handle_trusted_app_smc function where a lack of integer overflow checks on the req_off and param_ofs variables leads to memory corruption of critical kernel structures.
CVE-2021-34392
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
Trusty TLK contains a vulnerability in the NVIDIA TLK kernel where an integer overflow in the tz_map_shared_mem function can bypass boundary checks, which might lead to denial of service.
CVE-2021-34393
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
Trusty contains a vulnerability in TSEC TA which deserializes the incoming messages even though the TSEC TA does not expose any command. This vulnerability might allow an attacker to exploit the deserializer to impact code execution, causing information disclosure.
CVE-2021-34394
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-22
Trusty contains a vulnerability in all TAs whose deserializer does not reject messages with multiple occurrences of the same parameter. The deserialization of untrusted data might allow an attacker to exploit the deserializer to impact code execution.