We started picking up a few very low intensity scans last night. The pace of them are increasing. They appear to be aimed at cataloging users of the ANT tool. You can find a list of the scanning targets and a link to BrainWebScan here, if you would like to check for them yourself.

If you are a MicroSolved Managed Assessment (GuardDog) client, your systems will be tested during your next scheduled assessment.

If you have any questions or would like to know more about our ongoing assessment services, threat management or application security testing, feel free to email us at info [at] microsolved [dot] C O M or give us a shout at 1-877-351-1237. We would love to discuss it with you!

I don’t know about you, but I LOVE cheat sheets. I absolutely use the crap out of them.

Today, someone (I lost the email since then), sent me this page that has a boatload of cheat sheets in one locale. Thanks to whoever sent it, you know who you are. 🙂

Check them out here.

I hope you find something useful there. I know I did!

After the discussion about my last post and my omission of appsec, I wanted to make up for it not being in the list. Certainly, application security is important and as pointed out, I should have added it to the list of primary concerns for organizations.

By now, I hope everyone understands that attacks like SQL injection, cross-site scripting and the rest of the OWASP top 10 can have devastating effects. Often, when these vulnerabilities come into play, data loss soon follows. Sometimes, the attacker is able to gain direct access to the data targets they are seeking. For example, if SQL injection grants them access to a database that contains credit card information or identity data, then the initial compromise may be all that the attacker needs to obtain their goal.

But, even when the initial compromise does not directly yield them the data they seek, the initial SQL injection compromise often allows them access to and/or control over other systems and components. They then use a variety of technologies and techniques (from keylogging to sniffing and from pivot attacks to trojans) to leverage the initial problem into the compromise of the data they seek. In many cases, the attackers prove themselves to be both creative and patient as they slowly crawl towards their goals.

Even if your site does not have the targets they want, the SQL injection can be quite damaging for your organization. Not only do you have the compromise itself, but quite often, the application or web server with the vulnerability is manipulated to propagate malware that infects the visitors to your site, turning their machines into victims as well. As a client recently told me, “You don’t want to have to explain to upper management why your web site is responsible for infecting your customer’s computers with a virus. It is not really good for your career.”

These are just a few of the reasons that your organizations should take web application security seriously. If you have some more you would like to share, please leave a comment below.

Welcome to 2010. A new decade, for sure, but one likely to contain many of the traditional security problems that we have grown used to.

How would I rate the top three things you should be paying attention to as we begin the new year? Glad you asked. 🙂

1. Malware – malware is the current serious scourge of infosec. It is becoming increasingly clear that prevention is a losing battle. Detection is often not even up to par, so personally, I would be thinking about response. How can we leverage egress filtering, data leak protection and other controls in depth to limit the amount of damage that an infected machine can do? Can we perform alternative forms of detection, like HoneyPoints and HoneyBees to identify when things are “not quite right” in our environment? These approaches have a proven track record for helping. Check out the SANS CAG for more tips down this line of thinking.

2. Partner network connections – Are you sure they are secure? Do you treat them (and their traffic) like a DMZ? If not, get a move on, because the statistics show this is a major source of issues and data loss.

3. Do you have “production blinders” on? – Are all of your systems in scope for your ongoing assessments? You need at least monthly ongoing vulnerability assessments of every machine in your environment. Not just from the Internet, but also from the internal network(s). Why the inside too? Review point number 1. The inside is the new outside….. Give us a call to discuss assessments if you need help. Our GuardDog appliance can provide you with ongoing assessments that are affordable and results focused. Together, we can help you get to a comfort point where security is a manageable task.

Those are the big three. They are what I would focus on if I were a CIO or network manager. Welcome to 2010, where everything is different, except the things that aren’t. 🙂

PS – I hope you had a wonderful holiday season!

I loved this story. The idea that some “hackers” hack for political or social causes is not new. This idea stems back several years and has evolved from simple web defacements with social and political messages to the “new breed” of information theft, data disclosure and possibly even sabotage to further one’s views.

Today, all of the experts in the security field, myself included spend a great deal of time teaching people that the primary data theft threat is more organized crime than teenage vandalism. But, that said, we certainly can’t forget the idea that hacktivism is still alive and well. In fact, given the explosive growth of the Internet, the continually expanding dependence on technology for everyday life and the common availability of so much data and access, hacktivism is likely to gain in popularity, not shrink.

That brings us to a huge issue. How do we know where some of the data that hacktivists would be interested in lives? Given that people are involved today in a myriad of social activities, use of social networks and such, how do we know who might have information that a hacktivist would want and who doesn’t? The answer of course, is that we have to assume that someone in our organization might have data that is relevant to this threat, so we have to account for it when we create our threat models. If we happen to be a philanthropic organization, a government agency or a federal group, we definitely can’t overlook hacktivism as a threat, because our very existence yields reputational risk for us and a reputational trophy for many hacktivists if they make us a poster child.

While the hacktivism threat model is likely more one of opportunistic nature than dedicated, focused attacks against a given organization, that may not always hold true. One day it may not be all about what data YOU have and hold, but what data the people who WORK FOR YOU have and what roles they play in their personal lives. While this is not necessarily true today, the idea that hacktivists might one day target individuals to achieve social goals is not out of the question.

So, all of that said, how much thought have you given hacktivism? Does your risk assessment cover that as a threat? Have you done any threat models around politically or socially motivated attackers? If not, it might be a good idea to take a look at this threat vector. Their aims and goals may be different than what you had in mind when you last updated your threat models.