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

8/30/2010
09:56 AM
John H. Sawyer
John H. Sawyer
Commentary
50%
50%

Make Security About Security, Not Compliance

The lack of follow-through and belief in any type of lifecycle for security is one that really bothers me when working with clients who are looking only to meet the minimum compliance requirements.

The lack of follow-through and belief in any type of lifecycle for security is one that really bothers me when working with clients who are looking only to meet the minimum compliance requirements.If you're a security consultant, you've probably experienced at some point, or will in the future, a client that wants you to perform a penetration test or wireless survey in order to check off a box to make the auditors happy. While you'll be happy to do it because you're getting paid, the unfortunate thing you'll come to realize is this is the only time they think about security. After the penetration test is performed, they'll work to correct the issues found and then they're done thinking about security until the following year.

What's wrong with this picture? Heartland Payment Systems comes to mind. They suffered a huge breach in 2008 at a time when they were considered PCI-compliant with the PCI DSS. And I'm guessing they checked off all the little boxes on their PCI compliance checklist saying they met the requirements but never bothered to be sure they were actually secure.

While that's probably the last time Heartland will make this mistake, it's the problem that many security professionals cite with compliance--companies assume being compliant means they are secure--and as we've seen numerous times, that's not the case. Security needs to be baked into IT and business operations from the start, and security needs to be something ongoing and not just a concern when it's time to fill out the auditors' checklists.

So what can be done? Well, obviously, having a penetration test done every month is unreasonable and costly, but what about the other tasks that are only required a few times or less each year? The requirement for quarterly wireless scanning is one example. Instead of performing a wireless survey every few months, the PCI DSS states that a wireless intrusion detection system can be put in place as long as it is properly configured to send alerts to staff.

Often small companies shy away from the wireless IDS option because of the cost, but cost doesn't have to be the limiting factor. For example, low-cost DIY options exist such as the free and open source software Kismet. Combined with consumer-grade hardware, Kismet can be configured as a distributed wireless IDS. The drones can monitor for new wireless networks and wireless attacks, then report the information back to a central Kismet console.

Of course, there are plenty of commercial solutions from companies like AirMagnet, AirTight Networks, and Cisco, but they often come with a hefty price tag that small companies can't afford.

My best advice for companies seeking compliance is to not get stuck thinking inside the box. In other words, think creatively to solve the compliance riddle while making sure that it's bringing you closer to being secure -- and not just closer to the final check box on your checklist.

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
I 'Hacked' My Accounts Using My Mobile Number: Here's What I Learned
Nicole Sette, Director in the Cyber Risk practice of Kroll, a division of Duff & Phelps,  11/19/2019
TPM-Fail: What It Means & What to Do About It
Ari Singer, CTO at TrustPhi,  11/19/2019
Ransomware Surge & Living-Off-the-Land Tactics Remain Big Threats
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  11/19/2019
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
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-2019-19227
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
In the AppleTalk subsystem in the Linux kernel before 5.1, there is a potential NULL pointer dereference because register_snap_client may return NULL. This will lead to denial of service in net/appletalk/aarp.c and net/appletalk/ddp.c, as demonstrated by unregister_snap_client, aka CID-9804501fa122.
CVE-2019-10203
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
PowerDNS Authoritative daemon , all versions pdns 4.1.x before pdns 4.1.10, exiting when encountering a serial between 2^31 and 2^32-1 while trying to notify a slave leads to DoS.
CVE-2019-10206
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
ansible-playbook -k and ansible cli tools, all versions 2.8.x before 2.8.4, all 2.7.x before 2.7.13 and all 2.6.x before 2.6.19, prompt passwords by expanding them from templates as they could contain special characters. Passwords should be wrapped to prevent templates trigger and exposing them.
CVE-2018-10854
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
cloudforms version, cloudforms 5.8 and cloudforms 5.9, is vulnerable to a cross-site-scripting. A flaw was found in CloudForms's v2v infrastructure mapping delete feature. A stored cross-site scripting due to improper sanitization of user input in Name field.
CVE-2019-13157
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-22
nsGreen.dll in Naver Vaccine 2.1.4 allows remote attackers to overwrite arbitary files via directory traversal sequences in a filename within nsz archive.