Vulnerabilities / Threats

10/25/2017
10:30 AM
Commentary
Commentary
Commentary
50%
50%

Why Patching Software Is Hard: Organizational Challenges

The Equifax breach shows how large companies can stumble when it comes to patching. Organizational problems can prevent best practices from being enforced.

Second of a two-part post.

My last article about why patching is hard explained some of the technical challenges related to patching software in large organizations. That people don't patch software isn't purely a technical problem, however.

In instances like the Equifax breach, it's understandable to try to assign blame, but the reality is there are many organizational challenges preventing best practices. To solve the problem and not just point fingers, companies should look at the teams and individuals involved with patching and identify potential blockers. The following is a list of the roles that may be involved in patching, and what challenges they may face.

The CISO
CISOs have a hard job. They must push for security, but not too hard because the company may let the CISO go if requirements are "blocking business initiatives." On the other hand, when a breach occurs, the company blames and fires the CISO (or the CISO leaves knowing that getting fired is inevitable). When executives hire CISOs, they may ask questions to make sure the CISO is "reasonable" when it comes to security, meaning that he or she won't be too insistent on stringent security policies. I doubt the CISO failed to tell the company to patch software. The question is, did the CISO document the recommendation and the company's response to that recommendation?

The Security Team
At many companies, the security team makes policies and recommendations but may have no authority to enforce them. Security professionals often handle security appliances and act as auditors but cannot make any changes to networks or systems that run applications. If the security team didn't recommend that the business install the latest software patches, or had the authority to enforce or implement patching and didn't do it, then perhaps they were to blame. Often this is not the case.

The IT Team
Some have suggested the system administrator should have just installed the patch. At a large company, system administrators can't just install software to production whenever they want. They must follow a change control process that includes steps and levels of approval that vary depending on the activity and affected systems. Requirements may include scheduling a deployment window and defining a rollback plan if the change introduces the risk of downtime. Compliance and federal regulations mandate this process in some industries.

Software Developers
The security team and system administrators may not have been aware of what software versions the developers were installing. The team that deployed the original application may have been working on a different project when the creators of the flawed software released the patch. Some developers don't know what a CVE is (that is, a common vulnerability exposure), let alone every software release for libraries in their applications. Development teams are usually under a lot of pressure to release projects quickly. They must implement the prioritized tasks assigned to them by product managers and business owners. They won't want to risk creating a production bug that creates considerable losses, delays the project, and puts their job at risk.

Product Managers and Business Owners
Assignments to create or change software starts with approval from a group of people who review the list of proposed projects and decide which ones get funded. Often this group is devoid of security professionals and consists of businesspeople focused on revenue-generating or cost-saving business goals. The rewards this group receives are based on delivery of projects in a specified timeline and budget, and the faster the better. Deploying new software versions delays deliverables, so they have no incentive to prioritize this work.

The CEO
Did the CEO know the status of patched software and system inventory throughout the company? He should have. CEOs look at all types of financial and operational reports. Just as CEOs need to understand financials, they should review internal and external reports to understand cybersecurity metrics. Understanding the top threats, defenses, and detection mechanisms will help CEOs create business goals that ensure the company is performing essential security tasks, like patching software. CEOs, top executives, and board members can take cybersecurity classes from experienced and qualified cyber organizations or individuals.

Security Is a Matter of Priority
Do businesses know that patching software is critical? They do now. Why aren't they doing it? Patching needs to be a priority. It takes time and money from other important projects that offer more immediate and visible value compared to protection against a potential threat. Companies praise teams for completing projects quickly, despite obvious security problems. When is the last time you heard a CEO stand up and praise a team in front of the whole company for patching software? Companies need to do more than talk about security; they need to implement measurable business processes that truly make it a top priority.

Related Content:

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two days of practical cyber defense discussions. Learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the INsecurity agenda here.

 

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
6 Security Trends for 2018/2019
Curtis Franklin Jr., Senior Editor at Dark Reading,  10/15/2018
6 Reasons Why Employees Violate Security Policies
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer, Dark Reading,  10/16/2018
Getting Up to Speed with "Always-On SSL"
Tim Callan, Senior Fellow, Comodo CA,  10/18/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Latest Comment: Too funny!
Current Issue
Flash Poll
The Risk Management Struggle
The Risk Management Struggle
The majority of organizations are struggling to implement a risk-based approach to security even though risk reduction has become the primary metric for measuring the effectiveness of enterprise security strategies. Read the report and get more details today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-10839
PUBLISHED: 2018-10-16
Qemu emulator <= 3.0.0 built with the NE2000 NIC emulation support is vulnerable to an integer overflow, which could lead to buffer overflow issue. It could occur when receiving packets over the network. A user inside guest could use this flaw to crash the Qemu process resulting in DoS.
CVE-2018-13399
PUBLISHED: 2018-10-16
The Microsoft Windows Installer for Atlassian Fisheye and Crucible before version 4.6.1 allows local attackers to escalate privileges because of weak permissions on the installation directory.
CVE-2018-18381
PUBLISHED: 2018-10-16
Z-BlogPHP 1.5.2.1935 (Zero) has a stored XSS Vulnerability in zb_system/function/c_system_admin.php via the Content-Type header during the uploading of image attachments.
CVE-2018-18382
PUBLISHED: 2018-10-16
Advanced HRM 1.6 allows Remote Code Execution via PHP code in a .php file to the user/update-user-avatar URI, which can be accessed through an "Update Profile" "Change Picture" (aka user/edit-profile) action.
CVE-2018-18374
PUBLISHED: 2018-10-16
XSS exists in the MetInfo 6.1.2 admin/index.php page via the anyid parameter.