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

5/24/2010
10:30 AM
Adrian Lane
Adrian Lane
Commentary
50%
50%

What Oracle Gets In The Secerno Buy

One key takeaway from Oracle's acquisition of Secerno is that the database giant now has a database activity monitoring (DAM) solution, closing a big gap in its current security capabilities.

One key takeaway from Oracle's acquisition of Secerno is that the database giant now has a database activity monitoring (DAM) solution, closing a big gap in its current security capabilities.Following up on Kelly Jackson Higgins' post, "Oracle to Buy Database Firewall Vendor Secerno," I wanted to expand on some of the newsworthy items from this acquisition.

Secerno can monitor database query traffic and block queries that do not fit the acceptable query profile. For Oracle, this is an important advancement, as a database firewall can act as temporary threat protection, blocking specific attacks until database patches can be applied. Oracle customers have a very tough time keeping up to date with patches, lagging months behind the latest and greatest for fear the patch will break operations. This will relieve some of the burden to patch databases out of cycle -- before patches have been fully vetted.

One of the first things you notice in the Oracle FAQ (PDF) is that Oracle positions the Secerno product as a database firewall, creating some confusion and causing people to say, "Wait a minute, I thought Secerno was an activity monitoring vendor."

Secerno does, in fact, sell a DAM platform, one that can also be used as a firewall to block activity. Just like Web application firewalls, the Secerno product can be deployed either out-of-band to provide monitoring only, or put in-line as a proxy to intercept and block unwanted activity. This optional deployment model is often marketed as a "database firewall" to stress the capability to block -- not just learn and record events.

The Secerno product does not embed within Oracle or deploy an agent; rather, it is standalone product. Most customers use the appliance, but a virtual appliance is an option. This means product integration issues for Oracle or for the customer will be minimal. You can deploy the monitoring product without supporting Oracle products, such as Oracle Data Vault, Audit Vault, or turning on Oracle Audit. This saves time, reduces complexity, and will keep your Oracle licensing costs down.

I should also clarify the "whitelisting" reference in Kelly's article: Most firewalls and intrusion detection systems (IDS) block on signature-based detection, looking for malicious patterns within all incoming packets. Some, like Palo Alto Networks, work by allowing or white listing approved applications, then blocking all others. Secerno is closer to the latter and works by analyzing the SQL query construct, or literally the structure of the SQL query language. Creating a profile of valid queries, Secerno will only pass queries with the right structure. This is not content monitoring, not traditional behavioral monitoring, not context monitoring, and not even attribute-based monitoring, but looking at the query language itself.

Because of this difference in analysis techniques, I have been calling Secerno's technology "query whitelisting" to differentiate them from other database firewall products. For blocking, this method of analysis has fewer side effects on operations because it is less likely to block legitimate queries.

Another key piece of information everyone was looking for in Oracle's announcement was the purchase price. I politely asked several people at Oracle, Secerno, and the investment community if they could share a ballpark financial figure; they all declined. The Oracle team had strictly insisted that the details be kept confidential, and nothing has leaked out. Typically, I can provide a very good purchase price estimate because I already know the firm's revenues and am aware of the tone of the negotiations.

Not this time. What's more, several of us who cover DAM disagree on Secerno's revenues: One peer placed a low estimate at $7 million, while the high water mark in the group was $17 million. Estimating the purchase price would be a guess multiplied by another guess and, therefore, pretty much worthless. I will update this post should I get a specific and verifiable amount.

Oracle has a broad range of security products and features already in place, but they were pretty much only for Oracle database users. Further, activity monitoring, real-time analysis, and blocking were significant missing pieces. Despite heterogeneous database support for Oracle Audit Vault, Oracle is not viewed as a heterogeneous provider of database security and compliance products. The Secerno acquisition is a good fit because it fills the technology gaps and provides cross-platform support.

The short-term advantage for Oracle customers is as an alternative to patching: They can temporarily block database attacks until patches can be verified and rolled into production. The long-term value is a heterogeneous security platform to protect most production databases, and a low impact way to collect SQL activity for compliance.

Ironically, this is one of the few times database operation teams will have their jobs made easier by a security product. All in all, this was a very good move by Oracle.

Adrian Lane is an analyst/CTO with Securosis LLC, an independent security consulting practice. Special to Dark Reading. Adrian Lane is a Security Strategist and brings over 25 years of industry experience to the Securosis team, much of it at the executive level. Adrian specializes in database security, data security, and secure software development. With experience at Ingres, Oracle, and ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
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
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-2019-6852
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
A CWE-200: Information Exposure vulnerability exists in Modicon Controllers (M340 CPUs, M340 communication modules, Premium CPUs, Premium communication modules, Quantum CPUs, Quantum communication modules - see security notification for specific versions), which could cause the disclosure of FTP har...
CVE-2019-6853
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
A CWE-79: Failure to Preserve Web Page Structure vulnerability exists in Andover Continuum (models 9680, 5740 and 5720, bCX4040, bCX9640, 9900, 9940, 9924 and 9702) , which could enable a successful Cross-site Scripting (XSS attack) when using the products web server.
CVE-2013-2092
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
Cross-site Scripting (XSS) in Dolibarr ERP/CRM 3.3.1 allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML in functions.lib.php.
CVE-2013-2093
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
Dolibarr ERP/CRM 3.3.1 does not properly validate user input in viewimage.php and barcode.lib.php which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands.
CVE-2015-3166
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-20
The snprintf implementation in PostgreSQL before 9.0.20, 9.1.x before 9.1.16, 9.2.x before 9.2.11, 9.3.x before 9.3.7, and 9.4.x before 9.4.2 does not properly handle system-call errors, which allows attackers to obtain sensitive information or have other unspecified impact via unknown vectors, as d...