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.

Security Management //

Cloud

2/20/2019
06:00 AM
Joe Stanganelli
Joe Stanganelli
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%

Digital Transformation With Cloud: Answering Risks With Algorithms

Cloud projects are big. Huge. So it's not perpetuating FUD to point out that cloud transformation still bears security and data-stewardship risks. But what appears too big a challenge for mere man might be no match for machine.

Digital transformation almost always demands cloud transformation. Even in 2019, however, cloud initiatives carry security risks that can't be ignored; cloud is simply too big for mere humans to tend to.

At least, without the help of machine learning.

"One of the biggest risks digital businesses face today is lack of visibility within their hybrid environments," Chris Smith, head of Global Security Services at CenturyLink, tells Security Now. "Today's IT departments are tasked to do more with fewer resources."

Sure, the whole point of digital transformation is to be able to do more with less, but you still need something in the way of OPEX and keeping the lights on. Many digital-transformation initiatives attract funding and other resources only for "sexy" parts, however -- with little regard for the behind-the-scenes stuff that makes the magic happen. Cloud transformation, therefore, necessitates cloud-security transformation. Otherwise, warns Chris Richter, an independent advisor for cybersecurity startups, CISOs and their brethren will lag.

"If [a company is] moving to the cloud, they need to look at the applications that are moving to the cloud and ensure that what's going there is secure," says Richter. "While the innovators in organizations are pushing for digital-transformation, data-driven services [like cloud], security to go along with it is falling behind in keeping up."

It's my third party so I'll cry
The same goes for third parties. Cloud has so penetrated the enterprise market that, as the US Department of Treasury has pointed out, we have been seeing the entirety of an enterprise's critical functions get outsourced -- at times without proper risk assessment, auditing, due diligence, or even contractual safeguards. Sometimes, too, the first-party organization may get the wool pulled over its eyes by cloud vendors who over-promise and under-deliver -- particularly if those vendors also offer encryption services that dictate that they control the cryptography keysto the client's data instead of the client him/her/itself.

And all of these problems are exponentiated when fourth parties (third parties' subcontractors) get introduced, making for yet more potential attack vectors and data exposures, yet more due diligence to be conducted, and yet more jurisdictional and regulatory headaches based on the digital transformation extending to data geography.

This is particularly problematic when the third-party cloud transformation extends into functions that are customer-facing and/or involve customer data, exposing the first-party organization to yet greater and more costly risk. Repeatedly, third-party data exposures and breaches have been a top cloud-transformation concern among IT pros -- and, repeatedly, third-party (and first-party) data exposures and breaches happen in cloud environments. The past two years in particular have seen numerous headline-splashing incidents of AWS cloud S3 buckets left unsecured -- a non-default setting, meaning that an administrator almost certainly had to purposely go out of their way to screw things up.

People problems
Effectively, this all comes down to human error. Security experts point out that human decisionmakers are too quick to assume such things as that their contractors are trustworthy, that their on-prem security measures automatically translate to effective cloud security, or that nobody will take advantage of their opsec flubs. There are even instances where mathematically challenged teams have so mismanaged their cloud resources as to effectively create their own DIY ransomware-as-a-service.

"It's not for lack of trying [or] laziness; it's just the fact that they are moving so fast that they overwhelmed with the vulnerabilities that emerge," said Richter as he highlighted the benefits of machine learning to help ease the security pains of digital transformation. "We need to get to the point where humans are removed from the configuration question. Humans can be used to validate and authenticate an infrastructure, but we need to get much better at using machines [and] artifical intelligence to lock down [and check] an environment -- because most of these vulnerabilities if not all of them... can be traced back to mistakes that a human made." (See: Unknown Document 739480.)

Of course, employees resist digital-transformation efforts precisely because of their potential to leverage automation to eliminate jobs. Gartner, however, recommends cybersecurity and data-privacy AI tools to aid in digital transformation efforts as "augmented intelligence" -- aiding human efforts without wholesale replacing the human. (See: Privacy & AI Changing the Digital Transformation Game and Cybersecurity AI: Addressing the 'Artificial' Talent Shortage .)

Here, though, the issue rather becomes one of trusting a third-party product instead of a third-party service. Ultimately, humans must be accountable.

Richter acknowledges the point, but points out that the human decisions of managing cybersecurity risk in digital transformation should remain at a high level only -- leaving the nitty-gritty day-to-day operations to the machines. And, indeed, some companies are offering specialty automation and machine-learning tools specifically as cloud-security solutions. Meanwhile, tech pundits like writer Wayne Rash argue that, despite the risks, cloud vendors are probably better able to handle your data and infrastructure than you are. (See: Sophos & Akamai Target Cloud Security With Acquisitions.)

After all, Jeff Bezos didn't unsecure all those S3 buckets.

Related posts:

— Joe Stanganelli is managing director at research and consulting firm Blackwood King LC. In addition to being an attorney and consultant, he has spent several years analyzing and writing about business and technology trends. Follow him on Twitter at @JoeStanganelli.

 

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
COVID-19: Latest Security News & Commentary
Dark Reading Staff 8/14/2020
Lock-Pickers Face an Uncertain Future Online
Seth Rosenblatt, Contributing Writer,  8/10/2020
Hacking It as a CISO: Advice for Security Leadership
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  8/10/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
7 New Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities That Could Put Your Enterprise at Risk
In this Dark Reading Tech Digest, we look at the ways security researchers and ethical hackers find critical vulnerabilities and offer insights into how you can fix them before attackers can exploit them.
Flash Poll
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
The Changing Face of Threat Intelligence
This special report takes a look at how enterprises are using threat intelligence, as well as emerging best practices for integrating threat intel into security operations and incident response. Download it today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-17475
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of authentication in the network relays used in MEGVII Koala 2.9.1-c3s allows attackers to grant physical access to anyone by sending packet data to UDP port 5000.
CVE-2020-0255
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2020-10751. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2020-10751. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2020-10751 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-14353
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2017-18270. Reason: This candidate is a duplicate of CVE-2017-18270. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2017-18270 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to prevent accidenta...
CVE-2020-17464
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: none. Reason: This candidate was withdrawn by its CNA. Further investigation showed that it was not a security issue. Notes: none.
CVE-2020-17473
PUBLISHED: 2020-08-14
Lack of mutual authentication in ZKTeco FaceDepot 7B 1.0.213 and ZKBiosecurity Server 1.0.0_20190723 allows an attacker to obtain a long-lasting token by impersonating the server.