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

// // //
11/8/2017
01:30 PM
Simon Marshall
Simon Marshall
Simon Marshall

SlashNext Seeks an End to the Sandbox

Sandboxing isn't effective in the modern world, according to startup SlashNext. But what, precisely, comes next?

The first two phases of threat detection development have been highly successful in their time. First, signatures of common attacks were used to close the door. Then sandbox identified threats in a virtual environment and locked them out. But those two technologies are now past their consume-by date.

According to Jack Miller, chief information security officer at SlashNext, a Pleasanton, Calif.-based firm, they're flawed. Few people would argue with that, but the risk seems to lie in continued use of them as security challenges evolve. So, will those technologies be superseded any time soon?

"Yes, [but] while our current network approach will not eliminate the need for an endpoint agent or an email solution, eventually those solutions will be built using the same detection methods that we are using on the network."

By early 2014, the firm claims, both signatures and sandboxes were consistently failing to detect polymorphic malware (which morphs several times during its lifetime to evade detection) and exploits. Apparently, because these technologies were not really designed to detect social engineering, phishing and callback attacks, targets were left wide-open. Social engineering and phishing attacks represent about 45% of all Internet access threats, nearly twice the number for malware and viruses, according to the regular Verizon Data Breach Digest.

"We realized that while tools will sometimes miss attacks, the top researchers would always find them eventually," said Miller. "So, we built a system that mimicked how teams of the top security researchers perform their analysis."

This system plays into the current trend of human judgement playing an equal role to security technologies which remove time-consuming crunch work. SlashNext has just launched a new approach which uses "reasoning engines" -- not machine learning -- which it claims are the equivalent of virtual analyst teams, operating in a specific forensic domain. The engines learn like humans, automating the detection process and providing its carbon-based counterparts with enough evidence to make a final decision about whether a suspected threat is likely real or not.

In a typically human activity, team members get together to vote on the evidence, and interestingly, are asked to make a black or white yes/no conclusion. "Because we have so many virtual teams looking at so many different forensic aspects of the session, we are able to increase each false negative rate for each domain, effectively lowering our false positive rate knowing that even if some of the domains miss the attack, others will still catch it," explains Miller.

He says that because analysis is performed across initial and subsequent sessions, even if an attack is missed first time, teams will be able to catch it in a later lifecycle. Analysts learn and adapt to new threats, while the number of false positives is reduced.

The concept uses an omnichannel tactic, specifically tackling attacks initiated by phishing, rather than malware itself. The idea is to cut the effectiveness of a single threat that multiplies its chance of success by initiating through multiple devices. If person A is induced to offer up bank login details through a false web page on a PC, SlashNext detects it and provides blocking here, and also to person B who is using their mobile device.

SlashNext is pitting this technology directly against current sandbox virtual machines which it finds unsuitable for several reasons; examples are that sandboxes are difficult to maintain a single software profile that matches the configuration of all deployed devices in an enterprise. Malware objects delivered by an encrypted network stream can't be extracted and examined. They're limited because as they observe what an object does, they're only useful for files such as .EXE, .PDF or .DOC.

Malware has also developed to the point where it can identify that it is in a sandbox environment, and therefore 'decides' not to execute, evading the sandbox which believes it is therefore a benign file.

SlashNext netted an A Series round in April of $9 million after selling the technology on a limited basis two years ago.

Related posts:

— Simon Marshall, Technology Journalist, special to Security Now

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
I Smell a RAT! New Cybersecurity Threats for the Crypto Industry
David Trepp, Partner, IT Assurance with accounting and advisory firm BPM LLP,  7/9/2021
News
Attacks on Kaseya Servers Led to Ransomware in Less Than 2 Hours
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  7/7/2021
Commentary
It's in the Game (but It Shouldn't Be)
Tal Memran, Cybersecurity Expert, CYE,  7/9/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Incorporating a Prevention Mindset into Threat Detection and Response
Threat detection and response systems, by definition, are reactive because they have to wait for damage to be done before finding the attack. With a prevention-mindset, security teams can proactively anticipate the attacker's next move, rather than reacting to specific threats or trying to detect the latest techniques in real-time. The report covers areas enterprises should focus on: What positive response looks like. Improving security hygiene. Combining preventive actions with red team efforts.
Flash Poll
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2022-1813
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-22
OS Command Injection in GitHub repository yogeshojha/rengine prior to 1.2.0.
CVE-2022-1809
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
Access of Uninitialized Pointer in GitHub repository radareorg/radare2 prior to 5.7.0.
CVE-2022-31267
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
Gitblit 1.9.2 allows privilege escalation via the Config User Service: a control character can be placed in a profile data field, such as an emailAddress%3Atext '[email protected]\n\trole = "#admin"' value.
CVE-2022-31268
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
A Path Traversal vulnerability in Gitblit 1.9.3 can lead to reading website files via /resources//../ (e.g., followed by a WEB-INF or META-INF pathname).
CVE-2022-31264
PUBLISHED: 2022-05-21
Solana solana_rbpf before 0.2.29 has an addition integer overflow via invalid ELF program headers. elf.rs has a panic via a malformed eBPF program.