Category Archives: Rants

Always Remember the Business, InfoSec Folks

Posted on by
8

I just got out of yet another meeting with a big company partner for whom we act as an information security and threat advisor. In that meeting, I listened to a keyed-up,  hypercaffinated group of good guy security geeks tell their senior executives about the latest set of DLP controls they were putting in place. They spent 45 minutes describing packet-level checking, data flows, architecture diagrams and the technology of their solution set in painful (even for me) detail. Many of the executives were dosing lightly, while the geeks spun their techno-web. That’s when things took a turn for the worse…

The COO asked them one single question, interrupting a slide about email data flows ~ “How will this impact the business of ‘Dan’s’ group and the ‘Singularity’ project we have been working on since 2011? Doesn’t it depend on some of that data?” (**Names changed to protect the innocent and the guilty…)

Then, NOTHING HAPPENED. You could have heard a pin drop. Dead silence for close to two minutes. Finally, the COO repeated the question. Still nothing. He asked the lead geek if he knew who Dan was, and the geek said yes. He asked if Dan had been interviewed by the geeks prior to this. They said, no. The COO erupted in a rage, railing about how Singularity was the largest new line of business launch in the history of the company and how the projected income from the business would change the landscape of the firm. There were a LOT of apologies and some amount of notes taken to immediately consult with Dan. Much geek cred was lost. It will be a while before they get to present to the executives again like that. 

I tell you this story simply to remind all infosec folks about something I see all too often. It’s about the business. We are about the business. We are there to secure the business, nurture it, protect it, empower it to succeed. If that’s not where you or your team are, then you are doing it wrong. Get it right. Talk to the business. Speak their language. Give up on the “beauty of the baud” approach. Your packets and technology stack may be gorgeous to you, but if they don’t align with the business, then they won’t do anyone, including you, any good at all. Keep that in mind at all times. Also, remember to always talk to Dan ~ he’s a nice guy and he appreciates it. He can give you the answers you need and usually, he desperately wants to understand what you can do to make his project a success. Get to know all the Dan’s in your organization. They drive the world, you support them, together you build business and all of you will succeed!

Guest Blog Post: Less Pwn, More Help!

Posted on by
5

By: Mick Douglas (@bettersafetynet)

The client looked at us from across the table, grimacing as they gulped the foul coffee (sure it’s awful, but hey it’s a free perk!).  They leaned in and said conspiratorially “So can you… umm… sort of… help us get the inside scoop on how we can pass this pentest?” 

I pause and close my eyes for a second.  I’ve heard pleas like this throughout my career.  If you’re a veteran pentester, no doubt you have too.  And what I always think… no matter how large or small the client…  Nobody passes pentests!   It’s their turn to suffer under our boot as we hijack the network and have shells fall down on us like rain.  Nobody… nobody passes a pentest.  There’s always a way in.  Once we’re in, we make their worst nightmares come alive right under their own nose!  No, pentests aren’t for passing.  They’re to be endured.
 
Strong though the predatory instinct is, I must push it aside.  The “pop ’em all” approach — while immensely fun — is not the way of the true pentester.  All too often InfoSec practitioners focus on the technical aspect of the pentest.  If you’re reading this site, chances are good you’re a techie… not a suit.  So unless fate has given you a tour of duty on the other side of the table, you have no idea what hell you’re about to bring to someone who’d rather be doing anything else than deal with you — the pentester.  Things are about to get ugly, and your shell count has nothing to do with it.  You are about to turn their world upside down in ways you cannot begin to fathom.
 
It doesn’t matter if you’re internal, external, a consultant… whatever… you are the enemy.. and not in the way you think.  Sure, you’re the “enemy” as The Almighty Red Team here to cause mayhem and pop boxes.  However, what you might not realize is that the havoc is just getting started once you leave the engagement.  Next to nobody will remember the pivots, the recon, or the OSINT you did.  None of that really matters… What they will remember is that “Jake the InfoSec Guy” failed at his job — miserably. But wait there’s more!  Not only did he fail, but someone — who doesn’t know our systems — was able to use freely available tools from the internet to compromise our entire network!! To make matters worse, it was done in under a week!! It’s a safe bet that soon the client will look at the budget spent on firewalls, AV, IDS, even the salaries — everything — and think “All this spending… for what? They brushed aside our best efforts as if they were nothing more than cobwebs!”
 
If all your client gets out of your pentest is that they’ve got a crappy infosec program, then know what? You’re a crappy pentester.  

You may hate to hear this, but you *owe* your client.  
 
You need to give them a complete assessment which checks for multiple paths to the victory conditions.
 
You need to give them reports which are understandable, actionable, and brief.
 
You need to teach them what you did so they can re-test for themselves.
 
You have to show what’s wrong, but also give them multiple options on how to fix, remediate, or compensate for the findings.
 
You need to offer “quick win” fixes so the infosec program can start rebuilding their credibility after you clipped their wings.
 
You need to give them suggestions on how to alter business operations to better avoid risks altogether.
 
You need to give them a road map on how to get better tomorrow… and the next day after.
 
You need to give and give.
 
Most of all, you need to give them hope.
 

About the Author:

Mick Douglas (twitter.com/bettersafetynet) does R&D, PenTesting, and profesional services for Diebold Inc.  When he’s not doing tech stuff, he’s off in the woods somewhere hiking or trying — mostly in vain — to improve his photography chops.

Thanks to Mick for contributing. I think he’s right on with what we need to do as penetration testers. — Brent Huston

Cyber News Today from Homeland Security Middle East – Abu Dhabi, UAE

Posted on by
3

Happy Memorial Day Readers;

The Red Dragon and MicroSolved are at the Homeland Security Summit- Middle East taking place in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates…

Latest World Cyber News you should be maintaining cyber situational awareness on comes to you today after 6 different flights across 4 different continents and a total of 30,000 airmiles…oh yes 5 hours of sleep –

Nonetheless – here are some developing stories out of the International Cyber World….

General Alexander – Four-star general in eye of U.S. cyber storm… Read more @ http://newsle.com/article/0/76523525/

The covert battle over Beijing’s defence policy heats up…People’s Republic of China gets into the business of making friends

Read more @ http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-gets-into-the-business-of-making-friends-20130524-2k6q3.html#ixzz2UTeO2Fht

People’s Republic of China’s Huawei a victim of its success

Read more @: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2013-05/25/content_16530834.htm &
http://wanderingchina.org/2013/05/26/huawei-a-victim-of-its-success-china-daily-risingchina-trade/

All for now from the Middle East…more to come as the world wakes to a new day…

Semper Fi,

謝謝

紅龍

Quick Thought on CSRF Attacks

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday, I listened to @Grap3_Ap3 present at the Columbus OWASP local chapter on Cross Site Request Forgery (CSRF). While this attack has been around since 2001, it continues to show a strong presence in web applications across a range of platforms. Phil spent a lot of his time talking about content management systems on the public Internet, but we have seen CSRF very widely exploitable on embedded devices.

Embedded devices, often equipped with rather rudimentery web servers and applications for management, have proven to be a searing hot pain point for CSRF in our research. While that isn’t shocking or new, I definitely see an interesting and potentially dangerous collision between the growth of the “Internet of Things” and web vulnerabilities. Today, some of these platforms are toys, or novelty tools built into home appliances – BUT, the future of internetworking of our devices and our physical lives means that these web controls will eventually have larger impacts on our day to day lives.

What happens when a CSRF attack can be used to trick your teenager into clicking on a picture on the web that while they view it, they also execute a command to raise the temperature on your refrigerator to unsafe levels? Or when an embedded link in an email tricks you into a click that turns your oven onto super heat clean mode without your knowledge? Sound like a prank? Maybe. Extend it to thermostats, home automation and consumer control over alternative energy controls like solar panels and such and it might take a new form.

We are on a course of collision. Our inattention to information security and the exploding complexity and technology dependencies will soon come together in ways that may surprise us. Ignore the hyperbole, but think about it rationally. Isn’t it time we worked with organizations who make products to demand an increase in protection from some of these basic known attacks? In the future, consumers and organizations alike will vote with their dollars. How will you spend yours?

Threat Data Sharing in ICS/SCADA Needs Improvement

Posted on by
Reply

I had an interesting discussion on Twitter with a good friend earlier this week. The discussion was centered around information sharing in ICS/SCADA environments – particularly around the sharing of threat/attack pattern/vulnerability data. 

It seems to us that this sharing of information – some might call it “intelligence”, needs to improve. My friend argues that regulation from the feds and local governments have effectively made utilities and asset owners so focused on compliance, that they can’t spare the resources to share security information. Further, my friend claims that sharing information is seen as dangerous to the utility, as if the regulators ever found out that information was shared that wasn’t properly reported “up the chain”, that it could be used against the utility to indicate “negligence” or the like. I can see some of this, and I remember back to my DOE days when I heard some folks talk along the same lines back when we showed up to audit their environments, help them with incidents or otherwise contribute to their information security improvement.

When I asked on open Twitter with the #ICS/#SCADA hashtags about what hampered utilities from sharing information, the kind Twitter folks who replied talked about primarily three big issues: the lack of a common language for expressing security information (we have some common languages for this (mitre’s work, VERIS, etc.)), legal/regulatory concerns (as above) and the perceived lack of mitigations available (I wonder if this is apathy, despair or a combination of both?). 

I would like to get some wider feedback on these issues. If you don’t mind, please let me know either in comments, via private email or via Twitter (@lbhuston) what you believe the roadblocks are to information sharing in the ICS/SCADA community.

Personally, I see this as an area where a growth of “community” itself can help. Maybe if we can build stronger social ties amongst utilities, encourage friendship and sharing at a social level, empower ourselves with new mechanisms to openly share data (perhaps anonymously) and create an air of trust and equity, we can solve this problem ourselves. I know the government and industry has funded ISACs and other organizations, but it seems to me that we need something else – something more easily participatory, more social. It has to be easier and safer to share information between us than it is today. Maybe, if we made such a thing, we could all share more openly. That’s just my initial 2 cents. Please, share yours.

Thanks for reading, and until next time, stay safe out there!  

Three Ways to Engage with the InfoSec Community

Posted on by
7

J0289893

Folks who are just coming into infosec often ask me for a few ways to engage with the infosec community and begin to build relationships. Here a few quick words of advice that I give them for making that happen.

1) Join Twitter and engage with people who are also interested in infosec. Talk directly to researchers, security visionaries and leadership. Engage with them personally and professionally to build relationships. Add value to the discussions by researching topics or presenting material that you are familiar with.

2) Join an open source software project. Even if you aren’t a coder, join the project and help with testing, documentation or reviews of some kind. Open source projects (they don’t have to be security projects) can benefit from the help, an extra set of eyes and the energy of new folks contributing to their work. You’ll learn new stuff and build great relationships in the development and likely infosec communities along the way. 

3) The way that most folks go about it works as well. Go to events. Network. Meet infosec people and engage them in discussions about technical and non-technical subjects. Groups like ISSA, ISACA, ISC2, OWASP and other regional security events are good places to meet people, learn stuff and develop relationships with folks working on hard problems. Cons can be good for this too, but often have less chances for building rapport due to the inherent sensory overload of most con environments. Cons are a good place to grow relationships, but may not be the best events for starting them.

That’s my advice. All 3 items are hard work. They offer a chance for you to learn and engage. BUT, you have to work to earn respect and rapport in this community. You have to contribute. You must add value. 

As always, thanks for reading and until next time, stay safe out there! 

PIPA/SOPA/Etc. Will Speed Up the Crime Stream

Posted on by
2

Today, many sites are protesting PIPA/SOPA and the like. You can read Google or Wikipedia for why those organizations and thousands of others are against the approach of these laws. But, this post ISN’T about that. In fact, censorship aside, I am personally and professionally against these laws for an entirely different reason all together.

My reason is this; they will simply speed up the crime stream. They will NOT shut down pirate sites or illicit trading of stolen data. They will simply force pirates, thieves and data traders to embrace more dynamic architectures and mechanisms for their crimes. Instead of using web sites, they will revert to IRC, bot-net peering, underground message boards and a myriad of other ways that data moves around the planet. They will move here, laws will pass to block that, they will move there, lather, rinse and repeat…

In the meantime, piracy, data theft, data trading and online crimes will continue to grow unabated, as they will without PIPA/SOPA/Etc. Nary a dent will be made in the amount or impact of these crimes. Criminals already have the technology and incentives to create more dynamic, adaptable and capable tools to defy the law than we have to marshall against them in enforcing the law.

After all that, what are we left with? A faster, more agile set of criminals who will actively endeavor to shorten the value chain of data, including intellectual property like movies, music and code. They will strive to be even faster to copy and spread their stolen information, creating even more technology that will need to be responded to with the “ban hammer”. The cycles will just continue, deepen and quicken, eventually stifling legitimate innovation and technology.

Saddest of all, once we determine that the legislative process was ineffective against the crime they sought to curtail, we still will have a loss of speech during that time, even if the laws were to ever be repealed. That’s right, censorship has a lasting effect, and we might lose powerful ideas, ideals and potentially world changing innovations during the time when people feel they are being censored. We lose all of that, even without a single long term gain against crime.

Given the impacts I foresee from these laws, I can not support them. I do believe in free speech. I do believe in free commerce on the Internet as a global enabler. But all of those reasons aside, I SIMPLY DO NOT BELIEVE that these laws will in any way affect the long term criminal viability or capability of pirates, thieves and data traders. Law is simply not capable of keeping pace with their level of innovation, adaptation and incentives. I don’t know what the answer is, I just know that this approach is not likely to be it.

So, that said, feel free to comment below on your thoughts on the impacts of these laws. If you are against the enactment of these laws, please contact your representatives in Congress and make your voice known. As always, thanks for reading and stay safe out there!

These are my opinions, as an individual – Brent Huston, and as an expert on information security and cyber-crime. They do not represent the views of any party, group or organization other than myself.

Piracy as a Crimeware Defense

Posted on by
3

So, just a quick thought on this one. What if we, as security folks, made a serious endeavor to reduce the earning capability of those who create crimeware, spyware and other malware? What if we did to them exactly what the gaming companies and MPAA have been saying is killing their business? What if every time we saw a piece of “licensed” crimeware tool, we cracked it and published keygens and other cracks for it?

Sure, in the mid-term there would be more attackers able to use the malware. But, what if, in the longer term, less malware were actually created? What if the bar went up to the point where publishing these tools was no longer profitable? Would the numbers and evolution of malware be slowed?

I am asking, not because I have an answer in mind, but because I am curious. At what point does striking at the root of the profitability of criminals reduce their efforts and capabilities? Anyone with ideas or experience in this line of thought, please leave a comment below. Thanks for reading and I look forward to your responses.

Twitter Annoys Me #marketing #security

Posted on by
Reply

I just deleted 172 twitter users who I was following but for varied reasons, were not following me back. Here is the irony: 90% of them followed me first.

I have initiated “the follow” with only a handful of people. Most of the people on my follow list happened because they followed me first and I reciprocated. (Emulating the Twitter powerhouse @GuyKawasaki, and all…) However, as I went down my list of those who were not following me, I laughed as I saw @YourBoyfriend, @CharlotteWeather, and others who I remember specifically following me first.

Those who join Twitter realize eventually that those they originally follow may not be as interesting as they thought they’d be. Or maybe they’re not “tweeting” as often. For me, tweeting is part of my job and I do enjoy letting others know about our innovative products and services. So I follow a lot of tech news sites. But for those of us using Twitter for business, we understand the point of Twitter is to start conversations. So it wasn’t painful to let go of @JohnCleese, who most likely won’t be purchasing a vulnerability assessment from us anytime soon but yet was slightly so with @RobertScoble, who I specifically remembered following me back because I mentioned it to my boss. But I kept @THErealDVORAK because I adore the “Cranky Geek” for his technological, humourous insights, even though he most likely will never respond to me.

It’s tempting to use Twitter as a bullhorn. It’s so simple to tap out those 140 characters and hit send. But if I try to start a conversation with you three times and you never respond, then it doesn’t seem to be beneficial for either of us. I admit I get annoyed when people don’t respond to a tweet directed to them when, say, they only have 4,572 followers. They way I look at it is this: If Guy Kawasaki (who has 234,732 followers) and Seth Godin (who isn’t on Twitter but yeah, he’s a big deal) can both respond to me personally, they guess what? So can you.

I admit I can do better with Twitter. I usually respond to everyone who sends me a tweet, whether it’s public or private. I enjoy helping others connect with someone who can help them. However, starting conversations around information security is sometimes tricky because I’m not a techie but yet an evangelist for our incredibly helpful products (like our HoneyPoint family, which is crazy-helpful for organizations). So although I may not be able to discuss in depth the pros and cons of cloud computing, I can point you to those in our organization who can.

The point is that Twitter is a powerful tool, but only when used by two people. It’s a tennis game, not a triathlon. Because when you drill down to the take-away for business, it’s all about the conversation and how you can help someone reach their goal. I still like the “win-win” phrase and hope that in 2010, I’ll have more of those types of conversations on Twitter.

Microsoft IIS 6.0 WebDav Vulnerability – Urgent

Posted on by
Reply

We recently received a report of a vulnerability we thought everyone should be aware of. The vulnerability is in the Microsoft IIS 6.0 implementation of the WebDAV protocol. According to Wikipedia, “Web-based Distributed Authoring and Versioning, or WebDAV, is a set of extensions to the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) that allows users to edit and manage files collaboratively on remote World Wide Web servers.” A common tool used as a WebDAV client, is Microsoft’s FrontPage.

The vulnerability describes a way for an attacker to retrieve protected files without any authentication. From a technical standpoint, all an attacker needs to do is insert a certain unicode character in the URI request. This make this vulnerability trivial to exploit. The vulnerability allows attackers to list all of the files in the WebDAV folder, and then access them individually.

As of this morning, there is no known mitigation for this vulnerability save disabling WebDAV for the time being.

Businesses employing an IIS 6.0 Web Server with WebDAV authoring method should carefully analyze their need for such service, and disable it if possible until a fix is released.