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.

News & Commentary

08:00 AM
Jim Hodges
Jim Hodges
News Analysis-Security Now

Security, Cloud & the SBC

Despite all the current hype surrounding 5G at the moment, it's cloud and security technologies that are fundamentally driving business growth opportunities for communications service providers.

It's hard to deny that 5G has garnered the greatest number of headlines in the first three months of 2017. This was certainly the case at Mobile World Congress (MWC) 2017 a few weeks ago, and the fever pitch of 5G announcements is unlikely to abate anytime soon.

However, my experience at MWC was that while 5G was the "sound bite" leader, behind this backdrop, cloud and security technologies are fundamentally driving business growth opportunities for communications service providers (CSPs). As a result, I was pleasantly surprised at just how quickly these technologies are maturing, as well the high levels of resiliency that existing products have also shown. Let me explain.

Given the whirlwind of cloud R&D that has taken place over the past 12 months, while some challenges remain, in my opinion, the cloud is now recognized as the foundational architecture that will fuel current and future CSP growth prospects. However, while I believe the cloud is now mature enough to support large-scale cross-domain deployments, it is not a static architecture, it is an evolving architecture that will morph in response to new technology requirements. The evidence of this trait was readily apparent at MWC and in other recent discussions I had with vendors and CSPs alike. As a result, I view the dynamic world of the cloud as continuing to redefine a number of key existing network functions.

A number of network functions stand out. The first is the session border controller (SBC). It's probably not a surprise that SBCs are retaining and even gaining relevancy in the cloud domain when you break down the capacities they support and the edge realm in which they operate. SBCs, since inception, were designed to be application-aware, manage both the control-plane and media-plane and enforce security policies at the network edge, so it only makes sense they will have a key role to play in the cloud. However, in order to stay relevant, SBCs are quickly moving to support virtualization configurations and optimized performances of the virtualized media plane to enable large-scale access and peering services rollout.

However, virtualization is not enough, given complex cloud operational requirements. Therefore, as we move to a more distributed cloud edge model, SBCs are being asked to manage a greater number of more complex services – including cloud-native services. This was evident at MWC, with a number of fixed and mobile use cases and demonstrations that focused on leveraging the additional software intelligence of a new generation of cloud vSBCs vs. taking existing products and renewing them to become cloud-optimized.

In terms of specific use cases, on the fixed side, it's clear that virtualizing enterprise services is driving software intelligence to the edge to reduce latency budgets and to also provide end users with greater control on a much larger scale. This means that even established core functions such as IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS), once virtualized, will also be pushed to the edge to work closely with this latest generation of cloud vSBC. This may not sound like a major change, but from a business perspective, in my view, it is a profound development since it facilitates a harmonized managed service delivery model that doesn’t currently exist.

Essentially, since vSBC and vIMS software-based virtual network functions (VNFs) can be spun up anywhere in the cloud (either centralized core or distributed edge), it becomes possible to orchestrate and seamlessly integrate a suite of services such as WebRTC in-browser communications and unified communications (UC) that were previously constrained by the network boundary and silos in which they executed.

Since the cloud is a software fabric, the notion of boundaries and hence limitations are greatly reduced. In turn, this opens the door for vSBC-equipped networks to manage the orchestration and lifecycle of these services since they support elastic scale on both the control and media plane independently, which is critical to provide the flexibility to harmonize these services and meet low-latency performance targets. This ability to elastically scale and execute services as a single fabric is key to monetization and, in my view, a key reason the managed services model continues to evolve and gain market momentum.

The caveat here, of course, as also quietly discussed in the halls at MWC, is the requirement to adopt a new security model. The greatest challenge I see here is that pre-cloud security implementation was more straightforward in that there were well-defined perimeters where defenses and countermeasures should be placed. In reality, as with the breaking down of services barriers, this is no longer the case, since software VNFs as potential intrusion points are fluid in terms of running in the core or at the edge.

However, thankfully the latest generation of vSBCs now reaching the market supporting pure software implementations are well positioned to play an even stronger role in securing the cloud on both the control and media planes. This was also noted at MWC with a must greater business focus of leveraging the vSBC to support hosted security as a service (SECaaS) add-ons for a wide variety of applications including voice-over-LTE-as-a-service (VoLTEaaS).

The concept that is now emerging to support these services is that vSBC as part of this harmonized service model will work closely with analytics and vIMS to manage application performance, and simplify the ability to introduce on-demand cloud-native value added services (VAS), while also leveraging advanced packet filtering capabilities to mitigate the threat of DDoS attacks.

Looking ahead, I believe the push to support 5G and artificial intelligence (AI) will further enhance the role of vSBCs and their value proposition in executing services and securing the cloud in whatever manifestation(s) the cloud has assumed at that point in time.


Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 9/25/2020
Hacking Yourself: Marie Moe and Pacemaker Security
Gary McGraw Ph.D., Co-founder Berryville Institute of Machine Learning,  9/21/2020
Startup Aims to Map and Track All the IT and Security Things
Kelly Jackson Higgins, Executive Editor at Dark Reading,  9/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
Special Report: Computing's New Normal
This special report examines how IT security organizations have adapted to the "new normal" of computing and what the long-term effects will be. Read it and get a unique set of perspectives on issues ranging from new threats & vulnerabilities as a result of remote working to how enterprise security strategy will be affected long term.
Flash Poll
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How IT Security Organizations are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
The COVID-19 pandemic turned the world -- and enterprise computing -- on end. Here's a look at how cybersecurity teams are retrenching their defense strategies, rebuilding their teams, and selecting new technologies to stop the oncoming rise of online attacks.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, when determining the common dimension size of two tensors, TFLite uses a `DCHECK` which is no-op outside of debug compilation modes. Since the function always returns the dimension of the first tensor, malicious attackers can ...
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, a crafted TFLite model can force a node to have as input a tensor backed by a `nullptr` buffer. This can be achieved by changing a buffer index in the flatbuffer serialization to convert a read-only tensor to a read-write one....
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In tensorflow-lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, if a TFLite saved model uses the same tensor as both input and output of an operator, then, depending on the operator, we can observe a segmentation fault or just memory corruption. We have patched the issue in d58c96946b and ...
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 1.15.4, 2.0.3, 2.1.2, 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, saved models in the flatbuffer format use a double indexing scheme: a model has a set of subgraphs, each subgraph has a set of operators and each operator has a set of input/output tensors. The flatbuffer format uses indices f...
PUBLISHED: 2020-09-25
In TensorFlow Lite before versions 2.2.1 and 2.3.1, models using segment sum can trigger writes outside of bounds of heap allocated buffers by inserting negative elements in the segment ids tensor. Users having access to `segment_ids_data` can alter `output_index` and then write to outside of `outpu...