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.

Vulnerabilities / Threats

10/27/2016
05:40 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

How Clinton, Trump Could Champion Cybersecurity

The major party Presidential candidates, which both have experienced the aftermath of hacks and poor security practices of their own, could serve as 'poster children' and advocate for better cybersecurity, experts say.

If there was ever a time when Presidential candidates could serve as real advocates for cybersecurity, it would be now.

Both Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and Republican nominee Donald Trump this year each have had firsthand experiences at the hands of hackers - Clinton, with the email hacks and dumps of the Democratic National Committee and of her campaign manager John Podesta, and Trump, with his hotel chain's payment card breaches. Neither candidate has demonstrated savvy deployment of security of their own systems: Clinton has been under fire for her use of a personal email server and account while serving as Secretary of State, while security researchers revealed that Trump's own email servers used the outdated and no longer-supported Microsoft Windows 2003 Server software, as well as a flaw in his campaign's public website that left intern resumes exposed.

But in a year when cybersecurity has been a major mainstream newsmaker and the threat of more cyberattacks from Russia loom over the Presidential election, both Clinton and Trump have an opportunity to spin their missteps and real-world data breach experiences into fresh personal perspectives on lessons learned in the need for stronger security posture for the US government, private industry, and private citizens, security experts say.

"If they get religion on this topic, they could be poster children for all of us in becoming more" security-savvy, says Jack Danahy, co-founder and CTO of Barkly, a security software vendor. Clinton's use of a private email server, as well as former Secretary of State Colin Powell's use of personal email during his tenure, reflect the infamous security tradeoff theme of "convenience versus security," Danahy says.

Clinton and Trump have outlined their respective cybersecurity platforms, both of which are relatively slim when it comes to details.

"It's important that they both appreciate cybersecurity as a major factor in policy-making," says Michael Marriott, a research analyst with Digital Shadows. "They have to show an appreciation of the importance of the issue. But it's such a fast-moving area," which makes that challenging for politicians to keep up with, he notes.

Whoever becomes the next President of the US will have to strike a delicate balance between setting policy while not over-regulating, he says. They should avoid "being heavy-handed," Marriott says.

Black Hat Europe 2016 is coming to London's Business Design Centre November 1 through 4. Click for information on the briefing schedule and to register.

Here's a look at the cybersecurity platforms of Clinton and Trump:

Clinton

Hillary Clinton plans to "build on" President Obama's Cybersecurity National Action Plan (CNAP), a game plan unveiled early this year by Obama that added a federal chief information security officer (CISO), and plans for updating government agencies' IT infrastructures as well as beefing up their cybersecurity measures.

"She supports expanded investment in cybersecurity technologies, as well as public-private collaboration on cybersecurity innovation, responsible information sharing on cyber threats, and accelerated adoption of best practices such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology Cybersecurity Framework," according to Clinton's platform on technology. Efforts to reach a campaign spokesperson for more details were unsuccessful.

When it comes to the debate over privacy and US security interests, Clinton supports the USA Freedom Act as well as the concept of a national commission on digital security and encryption, a proposal by Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va. and Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Tex. The commission would unite both the tech community and law enforcement to determine how to balance national security and individual privacy interests.

Security technology-wise, Clinton supports multi-factor authentication practices and bug bounty programs as a way to root out vulnerabilities. "She will encourage government agencies to consider innovative tools like bug bounty programs, modeled on the Defense Department’s recent “Hack the Pentagon” initiative, to encourage hackers to responsibly disclose vulnerabilities they discover to the government," her platform says. "And she will bolster the government’s ability to test its own defenses by increasing the capacity of elite, cleared government red teams to help agencies find and fix vulnerabilities before hackers exploit them."

Trump

Republican candidate Trump plans to set up a cyber review team comprised of military, law enforcement, and private industry members, to assess US cyber defenses and weaknesses. "The Cyber Review Team will provide specific recommendations for safeguarding different entities with the best defense technologies tailored to the likely threats, and will followed up regularly at various Federal agencies and departments," according to Trump's cybersecurity vision statement posted on his website. "The Cyber Review Team will establish detailed protocols and mandatory cyber awareness training for all government employees while remaining current on evolving methods of cyber-attack."

The Justice Department will create Joint Task Forces that coordinate cyber threat response among federal, state, and local law enforcement, and the US Cyber Command will be reviewed by the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with the "focus on both offense and defense."

Trump also calls for developing "offensive" capabilities in cybersecurity. "Develop the offensive cyber capabilities we need to deter attacks by both state and non-state actors and, if necessary, to respond appropriately," according to his statement.

Efforts to reach a Trump spokesperson for more details on the scope of the offensive cybersecurity policy were unsuccessful.

Cyber War, What Is It Good For?

Clinton also has alluded to tougher response options by the feds to cyberattacks. In the first Presidential debate, she said the US needs to "make it very clear" to nations who engage in cyberattacks against the US that "the US has much greater capacity and we are not going to sit idly by and permit state actors to go after our information: our private-sector information or our public sector information," she said. "And we're going to have to make it clear that we don't want to use the kinds of tools that we have. We don't want to engage in a different kind of warfare. But we will defend the citizens of this country, and the Russians need to understand that."

It's unclear whether Clinton and Trump are truly advocating hacking back by the feds and or private industry, or just what the parameters would be. Hacking back is a controversial concept in the security industry, mainly because it is fraught with perils in accurate attribution and potential collateral damage.

"I'm uncomfortable with the thought of how individual businesses would take advantage of what they think is attribution to attack who they think" was behind a hack, Barkly's Danahy says.

Going on the offense as to retaliate with cyber attackers can quickly escalate, says John Bambenek, threat systems manager at Fidelis Cybersecurity. "Escalation is not linear," he says. Even if the US were to target the Russian government's systems, for instance, civilians could get caught in the cyber crossfire.

"I want them to talk about what we're going to do to defend the government" and critical infrastructure, he says.

Danahy also says the candidates should be focused on better securing technology infrastructure, noting that the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)'s massive breach should not have come as such a shock after the General Accounting Office's report that the agency had security weaknesses for years that had not been addressed.

"I'd hope we see an acknowledgement that there has to be increased investment in understanding where infrastructure is vulnerable and remediating it," he says.

"Both [Clinton and Trump] identified that they are going to take a look at infrastructure, systems and configurations and where vulnerabilities are," including critical infrastructure, which is great, he says.

Related Content:

Kelly Jackson Higgins is the Executive Editor of Dark Reading. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
macker490
100%
0%
macker490,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2016 | 6:51:10 AM
Cybersecurity as an Economic Problem
we need to view cybersecurity as an economic problem -- not as a technical one.

Bruce Schneier has also mentioned this.

as long as its cheaper to skip over security than to tie things down OEMs will continue to neglect -- yes I said NEGLECT -- security requirements -- and the customers will continue to suffer the consequences.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2016 | 11:12:55 AM
Re: Cybersecurity as an Economic Problem
@macker: You are exactly right.  Indeed, CISOs and others who work with InfoSec in their organizations have seen success internally by presenting cybersecurity and data privacy as issues of bottom-line issues of product/service quality.

Accordingly, so too should we think of cybersecurity and data privacy in the public sector.
Kelly Jackson Higgins
50%
50%
Kelly Jackson Higgins,
User Rank: Strategist
10/28/2016 | 11:32:58 AM
Re: Cybersecurity as an Economic Problem
Great point about the economic realities of this, @macker490. What types of economic pressures would make sense, do you think?
macker490
50%
50%
macker490,
User Rank: Ninja
10/29/2016 | 8:21:08 AM
Re: Cybersecurity as an Economic Problem
thanks, Kelly--

we face a Thorny Problem -- but, like most Thorny Problems, I think we can get at it by breaking it down into its components: OEM and Developers should be responsible for elements over which they have control.

Authentication is a key element -- which often doesn't get attention.   For example, if I download a Compiler and Library -- I really should satisfy myself that I have an authentic copy -- before putting it inservice.

this can be done by using PGP signatures, SHA-256 checksums -- and the like.   It's a bit of additional effort but to work with software, or firmware, -- or even e/mails, electronic 1040s, or EFT systems -- authentication is CRITICAL.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
10/29/2016 | 4:37:20 PM
Re: Cybersecurity as an Economic Problem
@macker: Indeed.  Too many people think encryption is the ultimate answer -- but encryption by itself usually isn't much of a solution (especially if the data is not encrypted at rest -- because hackers are ultimately getting inside access), and systems still get compromised with encryption.  Certificates and keys and other authentication methods are important...but so too with making sure the certificates/keys/authentication haven't been compromised themselves.  (Case in point: Aruba getting negative press earlier this year for using certificates that were known to be compromised.)
macker490
50%
50%
macker490,
User Rank: Ninja
10/31/2016 | 8:13:03 AM
Authentication as an Administrative Problem
i think it is important to recognize that authentication is an administrative problem -- not a technical one.

example: if i want to sign my Tax return forms 1040 how does Intuit and then the IRS come to obtain a copy of my public key and verify it as authentic?

this is an administrative problem.  we have the technology but can we find the imperative to proceed?

hacking keeps getting worse; when is "enough is enough" ?
jcavery
50%
50%
jcavery,
User Rank: Moderator
10/31/2016 | 2:02:37 PM
Re: Authentication as an Administrative Problem
I think we have passed the "enough is enough" point already long ago, the problem is the same with cops and robbers, or crime in general. It won't ever end, we just have to do "the best we can" to improve the situation, to get as close to 100% as we can, as often as we can, and I think we are on that track technically speaking, @macker but you're absolutely right about the economic and budget decisions being made that are holding us back from progressing at our full potential. Hackers and bad guys don't have the same budget or legal restrictions, so it costs nothing to take a chance on a new hack, and move onto another one, yet the good guys have to spend the money and be sure the defenses work every single time, all the time.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
11/2/2016 | 6:12:03 AM
Re: Authentication as an Administrative Problem
@jcavery: Compelling points.  Accordingly, maybe the next step for enterprises is to start funding skunkworks projects in their security departments.
Joe Stanganelli
50%
50%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
11/2/2016 | 6:10:29 AM
Re: Authentication as an Administrative Problem
> this is an administrative problem.  we have the technology but can we find the imperative to proceed?

Fair points, but through this lens, almost every security problem is an administrative problem.
Joe Stanganelli
100%
0%
Joe Stanganelli,
User Rank: Ninja
10/28/2016 | 11:31:21 AM
Russian boogeymen.
> "But we will defend the citizens of this country, and the Russians need to understand that."

I'm getting pretty tired of this setting the Russians up as the strawman.  There is slim evidence at best (see, e.g., PBS Newshour's piece here: pbs.org/newshour/rundown/does-government-know-hacked-emails/ ) that Clinton's emails were hacked/leaked by a Russian -- and even if that was the case, there's a big difference between "a Russian" and "the Russians."  Russia has a LOT of hackers.  Not all of them work for Vladimir Putin.

Moreover, while Russia has certainly been protective, to a certain degree, of its cybercriminals, China as a whole is FAR more guilty of malevolently cyber-attacking US interests.  But where is the crying out against China here?

And what about Romania -- which is home to one of the phishing/hacking capitals of the world?  Or North Korea?  Or Iran?  Or Syria?

"The Russians," however, are easy boogeymen (or, if you prefer, bogeymen).  They long have been.  It's all political posturing (1) for the campaign, and (2) about who gets to do what in the Ukraine.
macker490
50%
50%
macker490,
User Rank: Ninja
11/1/2016 | 7:57:16 AM
beyond "Enough is Enough"
an essay on The Register this morning reports computers having been attacked in the medical NHS system:

disrupting DYN was, as the British would say "a damn nuisance".    messing with medical systems is beyond that.

I agree:    we are beyond "enough is enough".

in looking at responsibility I think we should focus on the idea that every "stakeholder" should take responsibility for that part of security that he/she has control over.

for example: if I'm going to install "System X" -- I need to check the SHA-256 checksums for the components from the vendor that I am going to install;   by providng these checksums the vendor warrants that he/she has not introduced anything improper and takes responsibility for his/her own work;

The vendor/developer will have used various compilers and libraries in developing his product -- and as a developer or distributor  he is reponnsible for checking the check-sums on the tools he/she uses for development;
Shantaram
50%
50%
Shantaram,
User Rank: Ninja
11/7/2016 | 5:50:55 AM
dog grooming
Thanks for this post!
Shantaram
50%
50%
Shantaram,
User Rank: Ninja
11/7/2016 | 5:51:53 AM
Re: dog grooming
Good post! Your site raising my mood every time! Thanks
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-2019-19037
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
ext4_empty_dir in fs/ext4/namei.c in the Linux kernel through 5.3.12 allows a NULL pointer dereference because ext4_read_dirblock(inode,0,DIRENT_HTREE) can be zero.
CVE-2019-19036
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
btrfs_root_node in fs/btrfs/ctree.c in the Linux kernel through 5.3.12 allows a NULL pointer dereference because rcu_dereference(root->node) can be zero.
CVE-2019-19039
PUBLISHED: 2019-11-21
__btrfs_free_extent in fs/btrfs/extent-tree.c in the Linux kernel through 5.3.12 calls btrfs_print_leaf in a certain ENOENT case, which allows local users to obtain potentially sensitive information about register values via the dmesg program.
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.