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

12/7/2017
02:35 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
Google+
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Rutkowska: Trust Makes Us Vulnerable

Offensive security researcher Joanna Rutkowska explains why trust in technology can put users at risk.

BLACK HAT EUROPE - London, UK - When a technology is described as "trusted" - for example, a trusted third party or trusted computing base - many people get the impression it's secure. Joanna Rutkowska, CEO and co-founder of Invisible Things Lab and the Qubes OS project, believes this is misleading.

"In computer security, 'trusted' means this piece of code, or whatever is being trusted, is capable of destroying my whole security integrity," she said in her keynote entitled "Security Through Distrusting" here today at Black Hat Europe. She says we have too much trust in technology and this trust is leaving us vulnerable to attack.

"When I call something 'trusted' I really mean something negative," she continued. "I don't want things to be trusted."

Rutkowska emphasized the differences in calling technology "trusted," "secure," and "trustworthy." When something is secure, it's difficult to penetrate but not necessarily benign: even malicious things such as malware, backdoors, and botnets, can be secure, for example.

We need technology that is trustworthy: both secure and good for users, according to Rutkowska. However, the meaning of "good" varies across groups: corporate IT teams, for example, may have different standards than activists. "Trustworthy is really a very context-specific adjective," she noted.

Rutkowska argued that security professionals can - and should - minimize their trust in modern technologies, many of which could put users at risk. She presented several examples of how current technology leaves users vulnerable and how they could potentially be made secure.

As an example, she pointed to persistent laptop compromises. A laptop's motherboard has several elements and microcontrollers, most of which contain firmware that is kept on persistent, or flash, memory. There are lots of places on a typical motherboard to persist malware and store secrets, she explained, and security professionals can't do anything about it.

Rutkowska proposed moving certain elements such as flash memory outside the motherboard as a solution to eliminate the possibility of this threat. This could prevent firmware infections, eliminate a place to store stolen data, and provide a reliable way to verify firmware.

Another example is administrative access. "Administrators essentially own the software," she explained in an interview with Dark Reading. "It's very hard to protect against malicious administrators stealing user data … they should not have access to employees' documents."

In her keynote, Rutkowska proposed a symmetric situation in which administrators can modify policy and install software, but can't access users' data. This is "not so easy to implement in practice," she continued. "Once you get the ability to modify software, as in applications or operating system configuration, it's difficult to prevent [someone] from stealing that data."

There are tradeoffs when you start to distrust technology, she pointed out. The biggest is a tradeoff on usability, she explained, but distrusting can also lessen developer resources and make it difficult to add new features. It can also affect hardware resources and cost.

Trusting the Distrusting Model

Rutkowska's perspective on distrusting technology comes from years of experience. "I've been an offensive security researcher for a number of years," she says. "When you spend all these years working on attacks, [it affects] your mindset … I'm thinking how to minimize the amount of things and code we need to trust."

This mindset led to the creation of Qubes, a free open-source operating system Rutkowska founded on the principle of security by compartmentalization, or isolation. It uses virtualization, which its developers consider the "only practically viable approach" to implementing strong isolation" while also being compatible with existing applications and drivers.

Recently, Rutkowska has begun adding corporate features like remote management, into Qubes, which has been an OS project geared toward end-users. One of her priorities for corporate users is providing tools to more easily deploy and partition virtual machines. The challenge is integrating business capabilities while maintaining the distrust model, which she calls a "slow and difficult process."

She believes the distrusting model should be rolled out slowly among organizations and begin with small groups of users. A few of Qubes' corporate users are interested in introducing the OS to teams like IT personnel or developers before beginning a broader rollout.

Rutkowska says some security researchers have rejected her idea of security through distrusting.

"A number of security researchers, in my opinion, like looking for bugs in software so much, they dislike this approach," she explains. "For me, I say, don't prioritize looking for bugs in the browser. Assume it has bugs and operate under the condition there are bugs there."

Related Content:

Kelly Sheridan is the Staff Editor at Dark Reading, where she focuses on cybersecurity news and analysis. She is a business technology journalist who previously reported for InformationWeek, where she covered Microsoft, and Insurance & Technology, where she covered financial ... View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Oldest First  |  Newest First  |  Threaded View
How Attackers Could Use Azure Apps to Sneak into Microsoft 365
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  3/24/2020
Malicious USB Drive Hides Behind Gift Card Lure
Dark Reading Staff 3/27/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
6 Emerging Cyber Threats That Enterprises Face in 2020
This Tech Digest gives an in-depth look at six emerging cyber threats that enterprises could face in 2020. Download your copy today!
Flash Poll
State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
Data breaches and regulations have forced organizations to pay closer attention to the security incident response function. However, security leaders may be overestimating their ability to detect and respond to security incidents. Read this report to find out more.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-5527
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-30
When MELSOFT transmission port (UDP/IP) of Mitsubishi Electric MELSEC iQ-R series (all versions), MELSEC iQ-F series (all versions), MELSEC Q series (all versions), MELSEC L series (all versions), and MELSEC F series (all versions) receives massive amount of data via unspecified vectors, resource co...
CVE-2020-5551
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-30
Toyota 2017 Model Year DCU (Display Control Unit) allows an unauthenticated attacker within Bluetooth range to cause a denial of service attack and/or execute an arbitrary command. The affected DCUs are installed in Lexus (LC, LS, NX, RC, RC F), TOYOTA CAMRY, and TOYOTA SIENNA manufactured in the re...
CVE-2020-10940
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-27
Local Privilege Escalation can occur in PHOENIX CONTACT PORTICO SERVER through 3.0.7 when installed to run as a service.
CVE-2020-10939
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-27
Insecure, default path permissions in PHOENIX CONTACT PC WORX SRT through 1.14 allow for local privilege escalation.
CVE-2020-6095
PUBLISHED: 2020-03-27
An exploitable denial of service vulnerability exists in the GstRTSPAuth functionality of GStreamer/gst-rtsp-server 1.14.5. A specially crafted RTSP setup request can cause a null pointer deference resulting in denial-of-service. An attacker can send a malicious packet to trigger this vulnerability.