ICS/SCADA Security Symposium Reminder

Posted on October 29, 2012 by Brent Huston

COLUMBUS, Ohio October 9, 2012 – The second annual ICS/SCADA Security Symposium, to be held November 1 2012 in Columbus, is designed to serve as a level set for teams and organizations who are actively managing production ICS/SCADA environments. Once again, this full day session will include best practices advice, incident response, detection techniques and a current threat briefing focused on ICS/SCADA providers. Presenters will cover a variety of topics about what is working, what is not working so well in terms of information security, network protection and trust management. To learn more about the event and to see if you qualify to attend, please contact us via email (info<at sign>microsolved(<dot>)com) or via phone by calling 614.351.1237 ext 215. Chris Lay (@getinfosechere) is handling the invitee list for the event and will be happy to discuss the event with you in more detail. Attendance is free of charge, meals will be provided and a limited number of seats are still available if you qualify.

MSI Announces The Second Annual ICS/SCADA Security Symposium

Posted on October 9, 2012 by Brent Huston

Quick & Dirty Plan for Critical Infrastructure Security Improvement

Posted on September 4, 2012 by Brent Huston

J0202190

I was recently engaged with some critical infrastructure experts on Twitter. We were discussing a quick and dirty set of basic tasks that could be used an approach methodology for helping better secure the power grid and other utilities.

There was a significant discussion and many views were exchanged. A lot of good points were made over the course of the next day or so.

Later, I was asked by a couple of folks in the power industry to share my top 10 list in a more concise and easy to use manner. So, per their request, here it is:

@LBHuston’s Top 10 Project List to Help Increase Critical Infrastructure “Cyber” Security

1. Identify the assets that critical infrastructure organizations have in play and map them for architecture, data flow and attack surfaces

2. Undertake an initiative to eliminate “low hanging fruit” vulnerabilities in these assets (fix out of date software/firmware, default configurations, default credentials, turn on crypto if available, etc.)

3. Identify attack surfaces that require more than basic hardening to minimize or mitigate vulnerabilities

4. Undertake a deeper hardening initiative against these surfaces where feasible

5. Catalog the surfaces that can’t be hardened effectively and perform fail state analysis and threat modeling for those surfaces

6. Implement detective controls to identify fail state conditions and threat actor campaigns against those surfaces

7. Train an incident investigation and response team to act when anomalous behaviors are detected

8. Socialize the changes in your organization and into the industry (including regulators)

9. Implement an ongoing lessons learned feedback loop that includes peer and regulator knowledge sharing

10. Improve entire process organically through iteration

The outcome would be a significant organic improvement of the safety, security and trust of our critical infrastructures. I know some of the steps are hard. I know some of them are expensive. I know we need to work on them, and we better do it SOON. You know all of that too. The question is – when will WE (as in society) demand that it be done? That’s the 7 billion people question, isn’t it?

Got additional items? Wanna discuss some of the projects? Drop me a line in the comments, give me a call at (614) 351-1237 or tweet with me (@lbhuston). Thanks for reading and until next time, stay safe out there!

PS – Special thanks to @chrisjager for supporting me in the discussion and for helping me get to a coherent top 10 list. Follow him on Twitter, because he rocks!

Ask The Experts: Important SCADA Security Tips

Posted on August 31, 2012 by Brent Huston

This time the question comes from an online forum where we were approached about the MSI Expert’s Opinions on an interesting topic. Without further ado, here it is:

Question: In your opinion, what is the single most important question that security teams should be discussing with SCADA asset owners?

Adam Hostetler (@adamhos) replies:

Do your SCADA managers and IT have a culture of security? It’s still found that many SCADA industries still have a weak culture. This needs to be changed through ongoing education and training (like the DHS training). This will help engineers and IT develop and deploy stronger network architectures and technologies to combat increasing SCADA risks in the future.

John Davis also weighed in:

I would say the most important question to discuss with SCADA asset owners is this: do you have short term, mid term and long term plans in place for integrating cyber-security and high technology equipment into your industrial control systems? Industrial concerns and utilities have been computerizing and networking their SCADA systems for years now. This has allowed them to save money, time and manpower and has increased their situational awareness and control flexibility. However, industrial control systems are usually not very robust and also very ‘dumb’. They often don’t have the bandwidth or processing power built into them for mechanisms like anti-virus software, IPS and event logging to work, and these systems are usually made to last for decades. This makes most industrial control systems extremely vulnerable to cyber-attack. And with these systems, availability is key. They need to work correctly and without interruption or the consequences vary from loss of revenue to personal injury or death. So, it behooves those in charge of these systems to ensure that they are adequately protected from cyber-attack now and in the future. They are going to have to start by employing alternate security measures, such as monitoring, to secure systems in the short term. Concerns should then work closely with their SCADA equipment manufacturers, IT specialists, sister concerns and information security professionals to develop mid term and long term plans for smoothly and securely transitioning their industrial control systems into the cyber-world. Failure to do this planning will mean a chaotic future for manufacturers and utilities and higher costs and inconveniences for us all.

What do you think? Let us know on Twitter (@microsolved) or drop us a line in the comments below.

Remember Public Cellular Networks in Smart Meter Adoption

Posted on April 16, 2012 by Brent Huston

One of the biggest discussion points at the recent MEA Summit was the reliance of Smart Meter technology on the public cellular networks for communication.

There seemed to be a great deal of confusion about negotiating private cellular communications versus dependence on fully public networks. Many folks also described putting in their own femtocell and microcell deployments to greatly reduce the dependence on communication assets that they did not own. However, as you might expect, the purchase, install, management, and maintenance of private cellular infrastructure is expensive, requires skilled personnel, and often bumps into regulatory issues with frequency control and saturation.

Other considerations than cost also emerged with several ICS/SCADA owners discussing prioritization of repair issues versus consumer deployments, problems with negotiating effective, acceptable Service Level Agreements with the cell network vendors and a lack of understanding on the cell vendors’ part about ICS/SCADA deployments/integration/criticality in general.

Clearly, more analysis, study, and communication needs to occur between ICS/SCADA researchers/owners/developers and the relevant cellular network engineers/implementation teams to grow mutual knowledge and understanding between the parties. In the meantime, ICS/SCADA owners must strive to clearly identify their needs around cellular technologies, clearly demarcate the requirements for private/segmented/public cellular network use and understand the benefits/issues and threats of what they are utilizing. Cellular communications has a clear role to play in the future of ICS/SCADA, but the waters of how it will be managed, how it will be secured and how smaller organizations can obtain it affordably remain a bit muddy for now.

If your organization has winning strategies or has concerns that have arisen with the use of cellular networks, we would love to hear about them in the comments. The more ICS/SCADA owners work together to bring this knowledge forward, the more quickly and effectively we can resolve many of the issues that utilities and other organizations are encountering.

Getting Your ICS/SCADA Components Security Tested

Posted on April 13, 2012 by Brent Huston

Recently, at the MEA Summit, I had the opportunity to engage in a great discussion with a number of SCADA owners about security testing of their devices. Given all of the big changes underway concerning SCADA equipment, connectivity and the greater focus on these systems by attackers; the crowd had a number of questions about how they could get their new components tested in a lab environment prior to production deployment.

Device and application testing is something that MicroSolved has done for more than a decade. We have tested hundreds of IT hardware products, commercial software loads, web/mobile applications, consumer products, and for the last several years, ICS/SCADA and Smart Grid components. Our lab environments are suitable for a wide variety of testing scenarios and are used by utility companies, manufacturers and software developers from around the world as a trusted source for rational security testing and relevant threat analysis. We have a firm non-disclosure policy for client systems tested and the relevant vulnerabilities discovered and we often work hand in hand with the developers/design engineers to work through both mitigation and/or compensating control development.

ICS/SCADA owners should have any new designs assessed prior to implementation, they should have some form of ongoing security assessment (analysis – NOT scanning…) performed against current deployments/threats, plus they should be engaged in testing all new hardware and software platforms before production adoption. Developers, designers and manufacturers of ICS/SCADA/Smart Grid components should be engaging in a full set of product assessments, attack surface analysis, threat modeling and penetration testing prior to the release of the products to market. This will be a value-add to your customers, and ultimately, to the consumer.

If your organization would like to have a device or software analysis performed, or would like to discuss how to engage with MicroSolved to have new equipment or ICS/SCADA deployment ideas modeled, tested and assessed, please contact us.

Sample ICS/SCADA Maps

Posted on January 31, 2012 by Brent Huston

After I published the blog posts about the sample IT maps a few weeks back, questions started to come in about how those maps could be created for ICS/SCADA deployments.

I thought I would take a few minutes and create quick sample maps for folks to visualize what that might look like. In this case, I built a set of compound maps that show first, the basics of the process. Then I added data flow, trust mechanisms and eventually attack surfaces with the smallest bit of vulnerability insight thrown in. Click the links below to download the PDFs:

Basic Diagram

Data Flow Diagram

Trust Diagram

Surface Map Diagram

The goal would be to create a set of maps like this for each process or deployment, eventually leading to a master map that showed high level relationships between your deployments.

Imagine how helpful these maps would be in an assessment or audit. Being able to show an auditor a strong set of diagrams of your controls and what your team knows about your environment is a powerful thing. Imagine the usefulness of this data in an incident. You could quickly, easily and effectively estimate the width and depth of compromise, understand what is potentially in play and even get a rough idea of what and where to look for evidence.

It might not be easy, since there is a lot of up front work to building these maps. But, every time we work through the project of creating them with clients, they learn a lot they didn’t know about their environment and their teams emerge stronger than before.

That said, give it a shot. If you want assistance or someone to do the heavy lifting, give us a call. If you want to discuss the process, reach out to me on Twitter (@lbhuston). I love to talk about this stuff, so I’m happy to help you.

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

Snort and SCADA Protocol Checks

Posted on January 16, 2012 by Brent Huston

Recently, ISC Diary posted this story about Snort 2.9.2 now supporting SCADA protocol checks. Why is this good news for SCADA?

Because it is a lower cost source of visibility for SCADA operators. Snort is free and a very competitive solution. There are more expensive commercial products out there, but they are more difficult to manage and have less of a public knowledge base and tools/options than Snort. Many security folks are already familiar with Snort, which should lower both the purchase and operational cost of this level of monitoring.

Those who know how to use Snort can now contribute directly to more effective SCADA monitoring. Basically, people with Snort skills are more prevalent, so it becomes less expensive to support the product, customize it to their specific solution and manage it over time. There are also a wide variety of open source add-ons, and tools that can be leveraged around Snort, making it a very reasonable cost, yet powerful approach to visibility. Having people in the industry who know how the systems work and who know how Snort works allows for better development of signatures for various nefarious issues.

It is likely to be a good detection point for SCADA focused malware and manual probes. The way these new signatures are written allows them to look for common attacks that have already been publicly documented. The tool should be capable of identifying them and can do so with ease. In terms of trending malware, (not currently) these attack patterns have been known for some time.

The specifics of the probes are quite technical and we would refer readers to the actual Snort signatures for analysis if they desire.

By learning the signatures of various threats to the industry, people in the field can translate that into Snort scripts which can detect those signatures on the network and make the proper parties aware in a timely manner. Snort has the flexibility (in the hands of someone who knows how to use it) to be molded to fit the needs of nearly any network.

It makes an excellent companion tool to a deployment of HoneyPoint deep inside SCADA and ICS networks. In this case, Snort is usually deployed on the internal network segment of the ICS/SCADA firewall, plugged into the network switch. HPSS is as shown.

If you’re looking for a low-cost solution and plenty of functionality for your SCADA, this recent development is a welcome one!

Quick Use Case for HoneyPoint in ICS/SCADA Locations

Posted on January 11, 2012 by Brent Huston

This quick diagram shows a couple of ways that many organizations use HoneyPoint as a nuance detection platform inside ICS/SCADA deployments today.

Basically, they use HoneyPoint Agent/Decoy to pick up scans and probes, configuring it to emulate an endpoint or PLC. This is particularly useful for picking up wider area scans, probes and malware propagations.

Additionally, many organizations are finding value in HoneyPoint Wasp, using its white list detection capabilities to identify new code running on HMIs, Historian or other Windows telemetry data systems. In many cases, Wasp can quickly and easily identify malware, worms or even unauthorized updates to the ICS/SCADA components.

The Smart Grid Raises the Bar for Disaster Recovery

Posted on January 9, 2012 by Brent Huston

As we present at multiple smart grid and utility organizations, many folks seem to be focusing on the confidentiality, integrity, privacy and fraud components of smart grid systems.

Our lab is busily working with a variety of providers, component vendors and other folks doing security assessments, code review and penetration testing against a wide range of systems from the customer premise to the utility back office and everything in between. However, we consistently see many organizations under estimating the costs and impacts of disaster recovery, business continuity and other efforts involved in responding to issues when the smart grid is in play.

For example, when asked about smart meter components recently, one of our water concerns had completely ignored the susceptibility of these computer devices to water damage in a flood or high rain area. Seems simple, but even though the devices are used inside in-ground holes in neighborhoods, the idea of what happens when they are exposed to water had never been discussed. The vendor made a claim that the devices were “water resistant”, but that is much different than “water proof”. Filling a tub with water and submerging a device quickly demonstrated that the casing allowed a large volume of water into the device and that when power was applied, the device simply shorted in what we can only describe as “an interesting display”.

The problem with this is simple. Sometimes areas where this technology is eventually intended to be deployed will experience floods. When that happens, the smart meter and other computational devices may have to be replaced en masse. If that happens, there is a large cost to be considered, there are issues with labor force availability/safety/training and there are certainly potential issues with vendor supply capabilities in the event of something large scale (like Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans).

Many of the organizations we have talked to simply have not begun the process of adjusting their risk assessments, disaster plans and the like for these types of operational requirements, even as smart grid devices begin to proliferate across the US and global infrastructures.

There are a number of other examples ranging from petty theft (computer components have after market value & large scale theft of components is probable in many cases) to outright century events like hurricanes, floods, earthquakes and tornados. The bottom line is this – smart grid components introduce a whole new layer of complexity to utilities and the infrastructure. Now is the time for organizations considering or already using them to get their heads and business processes wrapped around them in today’s deployments and those likely to emerge in the tomorrows to come.

MSI :: State of Security

Insight from the Information Security Experts

Category Archives: SCADA/ICS