The Top 10, Top Predictions for 2012
Around this time of year, almost everyone and their brother put out their annual predictions for the coming year. So instead of coming up with my own, I figured I’d simply regurgitate what many others are expecting to happen. Security Predictions 2012 & 2013 - The Emerging Security Threat – SANS talks Custom Malware, IPv6, ARM hacking and Social Media. Top 7 Cybersecurity Predictions for 2012 - From Stuxnet to Sony, a number of cyberattacks emerged in 2011 that experts have predicted for quite some time. Webroot’s top seven forecasts for the year ahead. Zero-day targets and smartphones are on this list. Top 8 Security Predictions for 2012 – Fortinet’s Security Predictions for 2012. Sponsored attacks and SCADA Under the Scope. Security Predictions for 2012 - With all of the crazy 2011 security breaches, exploits and notorious hacks, what can we expect for 2012? Websense looks at blended attacks, social media identity and SSL. Top 5 Security Predictions For 2012 – The escalating change in the threat landscape is something that drives the need for comprehensive security ever-forward. Firewalls and regulations in this one. Gartner Predicts 2012 – Special report addressing the continuing trend toward the reduction of control IT has over the forces that affect it. Cloud, mobile, data management and context-aware computing. 2012 Cyber Security Predictions – Predicts cybercriminals will use cyber-antics during the U.S. presidential election and will turn cell phones into ATMs. Top Nine Cyber Security Trends for 2012 – Imperva’s predictions for the top cyber security trends for 2012. DDoS, HTML 5 and social media. Internet Predictions for 2012 – QR codes and Flash TOP 15 Internet Marketing Predictions for 2012 – Mobile SEO, Social Media ROI and location based marketing. Certainly not an exhaustive list of all the various 2012 predictions including the doomsday and non-doomsday claims but a good swath of what the experts believe is coming. Wonder if anyone predicted that Targeted attacks increased four-fold in 2011. ps Technorati Tags: F5, cyber security, predictions, 2012, Pete Silva, security, mobile, vulnerabilities, crime, social media, hacks, the tube, internet, identity theftIPS or WAF Dilemma
As they endeavor to secure their systems from malicious intrusion attempts, many companies face the same decision: whether to use a web application firewall (WAF) or an intrusion detection or prevention system (IDS/IPS). But this notion that only one or the other is the solution is faulty. Attacks occur at different layers of the OSI model and they often penetrate multiple layers of either the stack or the actual system infrastructure. Attacks are also evolving—what once was only a network layer attack has shifted into a multi-layer network and application attack. For example, malicious intruders may start with a network-based attack, like denial of service (DoS), and once that takes hold, quickly launch another wave of attacks targeted at layer 7 (the application). Ultimately, this should not be an either/or discussion. Sound security means not only providing the best security at one layer, but at all layers. Otherwise organizations have a closed gate with no fence around it. Often, IDS and IPS devices are deployed as perimeter defense mechanisms, with an IPS placed in line to monitor network traffic as packets pass through. The IPS tries to match data in the packets to data in a signature database, and it may look for anomalies in the traffic. IPSs can also take action based on what it has detected, for instance by blocking or stopping the traffic. IPSs are designed to block the types of traffic that they identify as threatening, but they do not understand web application protocol logic and cannot decipher if a web application request is normal or malicious. So if the IPS does not have a signature for a new attack type, it could let that attack through without detection or prevention. With millions of websites and innumerable exploitable vulnerabilities available to attackers, IPSs fail when web application protection is required. They may identify false positives, which can delay response to actual attacks. And actual attacks might also be accepted as normal traffic if they happen frequently enough since an analyst may not be able to review every anomaly. WAFs have greatly matured since the early days. They can create a highly customized security policy for a specific web application. WAFs can not only reference signature databases, but use rules that describe what good traffic should look like with generic attack signatures to give web application firewalls the strongest mitigation possible. WAFs are designed to protect web applications and block the majority of the most common and dangerous web application attacks. They are deployed inline as a proxy, bridge, or a mirror port out of band and can even be deployed on the web server itself, where they can audit traffic to and from the web servers and applications, and analyze web application logic. They can also manipulate responses and requests and hide the TCP stack of the web server. Instead of matching traffic against a signature or anomaly file, they watch the behavior of the web requests and responses. IPSs and WAFs are similar in that they analyze traffic; but WAFs can protect against web-based threats like SQL injections, session hijacking, XSS, parameter tampering, and other threats identified in the OWASP Top 10. Some WAFs may contain signatures to block well-known attacks, but they also understand the web application logic. In addition to protecting the web application from known attacks, WAFs can also detect and potentially prevent unknown attacks. For instance, a WAF may observe an unusually large amount of traffic coming from the web application. The WAF can flag it as unusual or unexpected traffic, and can block that data. A signature-based IPS has very little understanding of the underlying application. It cannot protect URLs or parameters. It does not know if an attacker is web-scraping, and it cannot mask sensitive information like credit cards and Social Security numbers. It could protect against specific SQL injections, but it would have to match the signatures perfectly to trigger a response, and it does not normalize or decode obfuscated traffic. One advantage of IPSs is that they can protect the most commonly used Internet protocols, such as DNS, SMTP, SSH, Telnet, and FTP. The best security implementation will likely involve both an IPS and a WAF, but organizations should also consider which attack vectors are getting traction in the malicious hacking community. An IDS or IPS has only one solution to those problems: signatures. Signatures alone can’t protect against zero-day attacks for example; proactive URLs, parameters, allowed methods, and deep application knowledge are essential to this task. And if a zero-day attack does occur, an IPS’s signatures can’t offer any protection. However if a zero-day attack occurs that a WAF doesn’t detect, it can still be virtually patched using F5’s iRules until a there’s a permanent fix. A security conversation should be about how to provide the best layered defense. Web application firewalls like BIG-IP ASM protects traffic at multiple levels, using several techniques and mechanisms. IPS just reads the stream of data, hoping that traffic matches its one technique: signatures. Web application firewalls are unique in that they can detect and prevent attacks against a web application. They provide an in-depth inspection of web traffic and can protect against many of the same vulnerabilities that IPSs look for. They are not designed, however, to purely inspect network traffic like an IPS. If an organization already has an IPS as part of the infrastructure, the ideal secure infrastructure would include a WAF to enhance the capabilities offered with an IPS. This is a best practice of layered defenses. The WAF provides yet another layer of protection within an organization’s infrastructure and can protect against many attacks that would sail through an IPS. If an organization has neither, the WAF would provide the best application protection overall. ps Related: 3 reasons you need a WAF even if your code is (you think) secure Web App Attacks Rise, Disclosed Bugs Decline Next-Gen Firewalls Make Old Arguments New Again Why Developers Should Demand Web App Firewalls. Too Dangerous to Enter? Asian IT security study finds enterprises revising strategy to accommodate new IT trends Protecting the navigation layer from cyber attacks OWASP Top Ten Project F5 Case Study: WhiteHat Security Technorati Tags: F5, PCI DSS, waf, owasp, Pete Silva, security, ips, vulnerabilities, compliance, web, internet, cybercrime, web application, identity theftF5 BIG-IP Platform Security
When creating any security-enabled network device, development teams must fully investigate security of the device itself to ensure it cannot be compromised. A gate provides no security to a house if the gap between the bars is large enough to drive a truck through. Many highly effective exploits have breached the very software and hardware that are designed to protect against them. If an attacker can breach the guards, then they don’t need to worry about being stealthy, meaning if one can compromise the box, then they probably can compromise the code. F5 BIG-IP Application Delivery Controllers are positioned at strategic points of control to manage an organization’s critical information flow. In the BIG-IP product family and the TMOS operating system, F5 has built and maintained a secure and robust application delivery platform, and has implemented many different checks and counter-checks to ensure a totally secure network environment. Application delivery security includes providing protection to the customer’s Application Delivery Network (ADN), and mandatory and routine checks against the stack source code to provide internal security—and it starts with a secure Application Delivery Controller. The BIG-IP system and TMOS are designed so that the hardware and software work together to provide the highest level of security. While there are many factors in a truly secure system, two of the most important are design and coding. Sound security starts early in the product development process. Before writing a single line of code, F5 Product Development goes through a process called threat modeling. Engineers evaluate each new feature to determine what vulnerabilities it might create or introduce to the system. F5’s rule of thumb is a vulnerability that takes one hour to fix at the design phase, will take ten hours to fix in the coding phase and one thousand hours to fix after the product is shipped—so it’s critical to catch vulnerabilities during the design phase. The sum of all these vulnerabilities is called the threat surface, which F5 strives to minimize. F5, like many companies that develop software, has invested heavily in training internal development staff on writing secure code. Security testing is time-consuming and a huge undertaking; but it’s a critical part of meeting F5’s stringent standards and its commitment to customers. By no means an exhaustive list but the BIG-IP system has a number of features that provide heightened and hardened security: Appliance mode, iApp Templates, FIPS and Secure Vault Appliance Mode Beginning with version 10.2.1-HF3, the BIG-IP system can run in Appliance mode. Appliance mode is designed to meet the needs of customers in industries with especially sensitive data, such as healthcare and financial services, by limiting BIG-IP system administrative access to match that of a typical network appliance rather than a multi-user UNIX device. The optional Appliance mode “hardens” BIG-IP devices by removing advanced shell (Bash) and root-level access. Administrative access is available through the TMSH (TMOS Shell) command-line interface and GUI. When Appliance mode is licensed, any user that previously had access to the Bash shell will now only have access to the TMSH. The root account home directory (/root) file permissions have been tightened for numerous files and directories. By default, new files are now only user readable and writeable and all directories are better secured. iApp Templates Introduced in BIG-IP v11, F5 iApps is a powerful new set of features in the BIG-IP system. It provides a new way to architect application delivery in the data center, and it includes a holistic, application-centric view of how applications are managed and delivered inside, outside, and beyond the data center. iApps provide a framework that application, security, network, systems, and operations personnel can use to unify, simplify, and control the entire ADN with a contextual view and advanced statistics about the application services that support business. iApps are designed to abstract the many individual components required to deliver an application by grouping these resources together in templates associated with applications; this alleviates the need for administrators to manage discrete components on the network. F5’s new NIST 800-53 iApp Template helps organizations become NIST-compliant. F5 has distilled the 240-plus pages of guidance from NIST into a template with the relevant BIG-IP configuration settings—saving organizations hours of management time and resources. Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) Developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Federal Information Processing Standards are used by United States government agencies and government contractors in non-military computer systems. FIPS 140 series are U.S. government computer security standards that define requirements for cryptography modules, including both hardware and software components, for use by departments and agencies of the United States federal government. The requirements cover not only the cryptographic modules themselves but also their documentation. As of December 2006, the current version of the standard is FIPS 140-2. A hardware security module (HSM) is a secure physical device designed to generate, store, and protect digital, high-value cryptographic keys. It is a secure crypto-processor that often comes in the form of a plug-in card (or other hardware) with tamper protection built in. HSMs also provide the infrastructure for finance, government, healthcare, and others to conform to industry-specific regulatory standards. FIPS 140 enforces stronger cryptographic algorithms, provides good physical security, and requires power-on self tests to ensure a device is still in compliance before operating. FIPS 140-2 evaluation is required to sell products implementing cryptography to the federal government, and the financial industry is increasingly specifying FIPS 140-2 as a procurement requirement. The BIG-IP system includes a FIPS cryptographic/SSL accelerator—an HSM option specifically designed for processing SSL traffic in environments that require FIPS 140-1 Level 2–compliant solutions. Many BIG-IP devices are FIPS 140-2 Level 2–compliant. This security rating indicates that once sensitive data is imported into the HSM, it incorporates cryptographic techniques to ensure the data is not extractable in a plain-text format. It provides tamper-evident coatings or seals to deter physical tampering. The BIG-IP system includes the option to install a FIPS HSM (BIG-IP 6900, 8900, 11000, and 11050 devices). BIG-IP devices can be customized to include an integrated FIPS 140-2 Level 2–certified SSL accelerator. Other solutions require a separate system or a FIPS-certified card for each web server; but the BIG-IP system’s unique key management framework enables a highly scalable secure infrastructure that can handle higher traffic levels and to which organizations can easily add new services. Additionally the FIPS cryptographic/SSL accelerator uses smart cards to authenticate administrators, grant access rights, and share administrative responsibilities to provide a flexible and secure means for enforcing key management security. Secure Vault It is generally a good idea to protect SSL private keys with passphrases. With a passphrase, private key files are stored encrypted on non-volatile storage. If an attacker obtains an encrypted private key file, it will be useless without the passphrase. In PKI (public key infrastructure), the public key enables a client to validate the integrity of something signed with the private key, and the hashing enables the client to validate that the content was not tampered with. Since the private key of the public/private key pair could be used to impersonate a valid signer, it is critical to keep those keys secure. Secure Vault, a super-secure SSL-encrypted storage system introduced in BIG-IP version 9.4.5, allows passphrases to be stored in an encrypted form on the file system. In BIG-IP version 11, companies now have the option of securing their cryptographic keys in hardware, such as a FIPS card, rather than encrypted on the BIG-IP hard drive. Secure Vault can also encrypt certificate passwords for enhanced certificate and key protection in environments where FIPS 140-2 hardware support is not required, but additional physical and role-based protection is preferred. In the absence of hardware support like FIPS/SEEPROM (Serial (PC) Electrically Erasable Programmable Read-Only Memory), Secure Vault will be implemented in software. Even if an attacker removed the hard disk from the system and painstakingly searched it, it would be nearly impossible to recover the contents due to Secure Vault AES encryption. Each BIG-IP device comes with a unit key and a master key. Upon first boot, the BIG-IP system automatically creates a master key for the purpose of encrypting, and therefore protecting, key passphrases. The master key encrypts SSL private keys, decrypts SSL key files, and synchronizes certificates between BIG-IP devices. Further increasing security, the master key is also encrypted by the unit key, which is an AES 256 symmetric key. When stored on the system, the master key is always encrypted with a hardware key, and never in the form of plain text. Master keys follow the configuration in an HA (high-availability) configuration so all units would share the same master key but still have their own unit key. The master key gets synchronized using the secure channel established by the CMI Infrastructure as of BIG-IP v11. The master key encrypted passphrases cannot be used on systems other than the units for which the master key was generated. Secure Vault support has also been extended for vCMP guests. vCMP (Virtual Clustered Multiprocessing) enables multiple instances of BIG-IP software to run on one device. Each guest gets their own unit key and master key. The guest unit key is generated and stored at the host, thus enforcing the hardware support, and it’s protected by the host master key, which is in turn protected by the host unit key in hardware. Finally F5 provides Application Delivery Network security to protect the most valuable application assets. To provide organizations with reliable and secure access to corporate applications, F5 must carry the secure application paradigm all the way down to the core elements of the BIG-IP system. It’s not enough to provide security to application transport; the transporting appliance must also provide a secure environment. F5 ensures BIG-IP device security through various features and a rigorous development process. It is a comprehensive process designed to keep customers’ applications and data secure. The BIG-IP system can be run in Appliance mode to lock down configuration within the code itself, limiting access to certain shell functions; Secure Vault secures precious keys from tampering; and optional FIPS cards ensure organizations can meet or exceed particular security requirements. An ADN is only as secure as its weakest link. F5 ensures that BIG-IP Application Delivery Controllers use an extremely secure link in the ADN chain. ps Resources: F5 Security Solutions Security is our Job (Video) F5 BIG-IP Platform Security (Whitepaper) Security, not HSMs, in Droves Sometimes It Is About the Hardware Investing in security versus facing the consequences | Bloor Research White Paper Securing Your Enterprise Applications with the BIG-IP (Whitepaper) TMOS Secure Development and Implementation (Whitepaper) BIG-IP Hardware Updates – SlideShare Presentation Audio White Paper - Application Delivery Hardware A Critical Component F5 Introduces High-Performance Platforms to Help Organizations Optimize Application Delivery and Reduce Costs Technorati Tags: F5, PCI DSS, virtualization, cloud computing, Pete Silva, security, coding, iApp, compliance, FIPS, internet, TMOS, big-ip, vCMPICSA Certified Network Firewall for Data Centers
The BIG-IP platform is now ICSA Certified as a Network Firewall. Internet threats are widely varied and multi-layered. Although applications and their data are attackers’ primary targets, many attackers gain entry at the network layer. Internet data centers and public-facing web properties are constant targets for large-scale attacks by hacker/hactivist communities and others looking to grab intellectual property or cause a service outage. Organizations must prepare for the normal influx of users, but they also must defend their infrastructure from the daily barrage of malicious users. Security administrators who manage large web properties are struggling with security because traditional firewalls are not meeting their fundamental performance needs. Dynamic and layered attacks that necessitate multiple-box solutions, add to IT distress. Traditional firewalls can be overwhelmed by their limited ability to scale under a DDoS attack while keeping peak connection performance for valid users, which renders not only the firewalls themselves unresponsive, but the web sites they are supposed to protect. Additionally, traditional firewalls’ limited capacity to interpret context means they may be unable to make an intelligent decision about how to deliver the application while also keeping services available for valid requests during a DDoS attack. Traditional firewalls also lack specialized capabilities like SSL offload, which not only helps reduce the load on the web servers, but enables inspection, re-encryption, and certificate storage. Most traditional firewalls lack the agility to react quickly to changes and emerging threats, and many have only limited ability to provide new services such as IP geolocation, traffic redirection, traffic manipulation, content scrubbing, and connection limiting. An organization’s inability to respond to these threats dynamically, and to minimize the exposure window, means the risk to the overall business is massive. There are several point solutions in the market that concentrate on specific problem areas; but this creates security silos that only make management and maintenance more costly, more cumbersome, and less effective. The BIG-IP platform provides a unified view of layer 3 through 7 for both general and ICSA required reporting and alerts, as well as integration with SIEM vendors. BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager offers native, high-performance firewall services to protect the entire infrastructure. BIG-IP LTM is a purpose-built, high-performance Application Delivery Controller designed to protect Internet data centers. In many instances, BIG-IP LTM can replace an existing firewall while also offering scale, performance, and persistence. Performance: BIG-IP LTM manages up to 48 million concurrent connections and 72 Gbps of throughput with various timeout behaviors, buffer sizes, and more when under attack. Protocol security: The BIG-IP system natively decodes IPv4, IPv6, TCP, HTTP, SIP, DNS, SMTP, FTP, Diameter, and RADIUS. Organizations can control almost every element of the protocols they’re deploying. DDoS prevention capabilities: An integrated architecture enables organizations to combine traditional firewall layers 3 and 4 with application layers 5 through 7. DDoS mitigations: The BIG-IP system protects UDP, TCP, SIP, DNS, HTTP, SSL, and other network attack targets while delivering uninterrupted service for legitimate connections. SSL termination: Offload computationally intensive SSL to the BIG-IP system and gain visibility into potentially harmful encrypted payloads. Dynamic threat mitigation: iRules provide a flexible way to enforce protocol functions on both standard and emerging or custom protocols. With iRules, organizations can create a zero day dynamic security context to react to vulnerabilities for which an associated patch has not yet been released. Resource cloaking and content security: Prevent leaks of error codes and sensitive content. F5 BIG-IP LTM has numerous security features so Internet data centers can deliver applications while protecting the infrastructure that supports their clients and, BIG-IP is now ICSA Certified as a Network Firewall. ps Resources: F5’s Certified Firewall Protects Against Large-Scale Cyber Attacks on Public-Facing Websites F5 BIG-IP Data Center Firewall – Overview BIG-IP Data Center Firewall Solution – SlideShare Presentation High Performance Firewall for Data Centers – Solution Profile The New Data Center Firewall Paradigm – White Paper Vulnerability Assessment with Application Security – White Paper Challenging the Firewall Data Center Dogma Technorati Tags: F5, big-ip, virtualization, cloud computing, Pete Silva, security, icsa, iApp, compliance, network firewall, internet, TMOS, big-ip, vCMPVulnerability Assessment with Application Security
The longer an application remains vulnerable, the more likely it is to be compromised. Protecting web applications is an around-the-clock job. Almost anything that is connected to the Internet is a target these days, and organizations are scrambling to keep their web properties available and secure. The ramifications of a breach or downtime can be severe: brand reputation, the ability to meet regulatory requirements, and revenue are all on the line. A 2011 survey conducted by Merrill Research on behalf of VeriSign found that 60 percent of respondents rely on their websites for at least 25 percent of their annual revenue. And the threat landscape is only getting worse. Targeted attacks are designed to gather intelligence; steal trade secrets, sensitive customer information, or intellectual property; disrupt operations; or even destroy critical infrastructure. Targeted attacks have been around for a number of years, but 2011 brought a whole new meaning to advanced persistent threat. Symantec reported that the number of targeted attacks increased almost four-fold from January 2011 to November 2011. In the past, the typical profile of a target organization was a large, well-known, multinational company in the public, financial, government, pharmaceutical, or utility sector. Today, the scope has widened to include almost any size organization from any industry. The attacks are also layered in that the malicious hackers attempt to penetrate both the network and application layers. To defend against targeted attacks, organizations can deploy a scanner to check web applications for vulnerabilities such as SQL injection, cross site scripting (XSS), and forceful browsing; or they can use a web application firewall (WAF) to protect against these vulnerabilities. However a better, more complete solution is to deploy both a scanner and a WAF. BIG-IP Application Security Manager (ASM) version 11.1 is a WAF that gives organizations the tools they need to easily manage and secure web application vulnerabilities with multiple web vulnerability scanner integrations. As enterprises continue to deploy web applications, network and security architects need visibility into who is attacking those applications, as well as a big-picture view of all violations to plan future attack mitigation. Administrators must be able to understand what they see to determine whether a request is valid or an attack that requires application protection. Administrators must also troubleshoot application performance and capacity issues, which proves the need for detailed statistics. With the increase in application deployments and the resulting vulnerabilities, administrators need a proven multi-vulnerability assessment and application security solution for maximum coverage and attack protection. But as many companies also support geographically diverse application users, they must be able to define who is granted or denied application access based on geolocation information. Application Vulnerability Scanners To assess a web application’s vulnerability, most organizations turn to a vulnerability scanner. The scanning schedule might depend on a change control, like when an application is initially being deployed, or other factors like a quarterly report. The vulnerability scanner scours the web application, and in some cases actually attempts potential hacks to generate a report indicating all possible vulnerabilities. This gives the administrator managing the web security devices a clear view of all the exposed areas and potential threats to the website. It is a moment-in-time report and might not give full application coverage, but the assessment should give administrators a clear picture of their web application security posture. It includes information about coding errors, weak authentication mechanisms, fields or parameters that query the database directly, or other vulnerabilities that provide unauthorized access to information, sensitive or not. Many of these vulnerabilities would need to be manually re-coded or manually added to the WAF policy—both expensive undertakings. Another challenge is that every web application is different. Some are developed in .NET, some in PHP or PERL. Some scanners execute better on different development platforms, so it’s important for organizations to select the right one. Some companies may need a PCI DSS report for an auditor, some for targeted penetration testing, and some for WAF tuning. These factors can also play a role in determining the right vulnerability scanner for an organization. Ease of use, target specifics, and automated testing are the baselines. Once an organization has considered all those details, the job is still only half done. Simply having the vulnerability report, while beneficial, doesn’t mean a web app is secure. The real value of the report lies in how it enables an organization to determine the risk level and how best to mitigate the risk. Since re-coding an application is expensive and time-consuming, and may generate even more errors, many organizations deploy a web application firewall like BIG-IP ASM. A WAF enables an organization to protect its web applications by virtually patching the open vulnerabilities until it has an opportunity to properly close the hole. Often, organizations use the vulnerability scanner report to then either tighten or initially generate a WAF policy. Attackers can come from anywhere, so organizations need to quickly mitigate vulnerabilities before they become threats. They need a quick, easy, effective solution for creating security policies. Although it’s preferable to have multiple scanners or scanning services, many companies only have one, which significantly impedes their ability to get a full vulnerability assessment. Further, if an organization’s WAF and scanner aren’t integrated, neither is its view of vulnerabilities, as a non-integrated WAF UI displays no scanner data. Integration enables organizations both to manage the vulnerability scanner results and to modify the WAF policy to protect against the scanner’s findings—all in one UI. Integration Reduces Risk While finding vulnerabilities helps organizations understand their exposure, they must also have the ability to quickly mitigate found vulnerabilities to greatly reduce the risk of application exploits. The longer an application remains vulnerable, the more likely it is to be compromised. F5 BIG-IP ASM, a flexible web application firewall, enables strong visibility with granular, session-based enforcement and reporting; grouped violations for correlation; and a quick view into valid and attack requests. BIG-IP ASM delivers comprehensive vulnerability assessment and application protection that can quickly reduce web threats with easy geolocation-based blocking—greatly improving the security posture of an organization’s critical infrastructure. BIG-IP ASM version 11.1 includes integration with IBM Rational AppScan, Cenzic Hailstorm, QualysGuard WAS, and WhiteHat Sentinel, building more integrity into the policy lifecycle and making it the most advanced vulnerability assessment and application protection on the market. In addition, administrators can better create and enforce policies with information about attack patterns from a grouping of violations or otherwise correlated incidents. In this way, BIG-IP ASM enables organizations to mitigate threats in a timely manner and greatly reduce the overall risk of attacks and solve most vulnerabilities. With multiple vulnerability scanner assessments in one GUI, administrators can discover and remediate vulnerabilities within minutes from a central location. BIG-IP ASM offers easy policy implementation, fast assessment and policy creation, and the ability to dynamically configure policies in real time during assessment. To significantly reduce data loss, administrators can test and verify vulnerabilities from the BIG-IP ASM GUI, and automatically create policies with a single click to mitigate unknown application vulnerabilities. Security is a never-ending battle. The bad guys advance, organizations counter, bad guys cross over—and so the cat and mouse game continues. The need to properly secure web applications is absolute. Knowing what vulnerabilities exist within a web application can help organizations contain possible points of exposure. BIG-IP ASM v11.1 offers unprecedented web application protection by integrating with many market-leading vulnerability scanners to provide a complete vulnerability scan and remediate solution. BIG-IP ASM v11.1 enables organizations to understand inherent threats and take specific measures to protect their web application infrastructure. It gives them the tools they need to greatly reduce the risk of becoming the next failed security headline. ps Resources: F5’s Certified Firewall Protects Against Large-Scale Cyber Attacks on Public-Facing Websites IPS or WAF Dilemma F5 Case Study: WhiteHat Security Oracle OpenWorld 2011: BIG-IP ASM & Oracle Database Firewall Audio White Paper - Application Security in the Cloud with BIG-IP ASM The Big Attacks are Back…Not That They Ever Stopped Protection from Latest Network and Application Attacks The New Data Center Firewall Paradigm – White Paper Vulnerability Assessment with Application Security – White Paper F5 Security Vignette: Hacktivism Attack – Video F5 Security Vignette: DNSSEC Wrapping – Video Jeremiah Grossman blog Technorati Tags: F5, big-ip, virtualization, cloud computing, Pete Silva, security, waf, web scanners, compliance, application security, internet, TMOS, big-ip, asmInfographic: Protect Yourself Against Cybercrime
Maybe I’ll start doing an ‘Infographic Friday’ to go along with Lori’s F5 Friday. This one comes to us from Rasmussen College's School of Technology and Design Cyber Security Program and shows the online risks and offers some good tips on how to better protect your computer and avoid being a victim of cybercrime. psThe Exec-Disconnect on IT Security
Different Chiefs give Different Security Stories. A recent survey shows that there is a wide gap between CEOs and Chief Security Officers when it comes to the origin and seriousness of security threats. They differ on how they view threats to IT Infrastructure and remain far apart on how to best address an issue that according to analyst reports, costs organizations more than $30 billion annually. The survey of 100 CEOs and 100 CISO (or other C-levels with security responsibility), shows that the discrepancy is often due to lack of communication. 36% of CEOs said that they never get a security report from their CISO and only 27% receive updates on a regular basis. Is it the CISO that doesn’t report back or the CEO that is not interested? Let’s look at some more data. The CISO felt that the biggest threat was from internal (their employees) due to lack of education and attention while the CEO felt that the biggest threat was from the outside, such as phishing attacks. Thus, 61% of CEOs said they did have enough time and resources to adequately train the staff on how to mitigate threats while Only 27% of CISOs felt the same. It’s opposite day. When asked if their IT systems were ‘definitely’ or ‘probably’ under attack without their knowledge, 58% of CISOs said yes while only 26% of CEOs agreeing. The chasm grows. What percentage of each, do you think, said they were very concerned about their IT systems getting hacked? 30 seconds on the clock, please. Don’t peek. Only 15% of CEOs and ‘only’ 62% of CISOs are anxious about breaches. 15%? That’s it? Maybe they have great confidence in their security team…or, they don’t have the information. 65% of CEOs admitted to not having the sufficient data needed to interpret how security threats translate to overall business risk. Wow, the very day-to-day operations. Granted, the CEO is further removed from the specific threats and how they are handled but there is clearly a distance between how each views threats and the company’s ability to successfully mitigate them. Lack of interest or lack of understanding/information? Probably both. An old adage was that a great boss hired people who were good at the things he/she wasn’t so good at. Surround yourself with those who know their areas better. Or maybe there is a culture that you don’t alert the top unless it’s dire, critical or unstoppable. Communication or interest, it is evident that the C-suite isn’t really talking about these critical business issues especially when 3 times as many CEOs worried about losing their jobs following an attack than did CISOs. ps References SECURITY: A LACK OF CEO INSIGHT OR CEO INTEREST? CEOs Lack Visibility Into Origin and Seriousness of Security Threats Talking About Security Bores the Boss, Survey Shows Myth or Fact? Debunking 15 of the Biggest Information Security Myths The CEO/CISO Disconnect InfographicDNSSEC: Is Your Infrastructure Ready?
A few months ago, we teamed with Infoblox for a DNSSEC webinar. Jonathan George, F5 Product Marketing Manager, leads with myself and Cricket Liu of Infoblox as background noise. He’s a blast as always and certainly knows his DNS. So, learn how F5 enables you to deploy DNSSEC quickly and easily into an existing GSLB environment with BIG-IP Global Traffic Manager (GTM). BIG-IP GTM streamlines encryption key generation and distribution by dynamically signing DNS responses in real-time. Running time: 49:20 </p> <p>ps</p> <p>Resources:</p> <ul> <li><a href="http://www.f5.com/news-press-events/web-media/" _fcksavedurl="http://www.f5.com/news-press-events/web-media/">F5 Web Media</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/f5networksinc" _fcksavedurl="http://www.youtube.com/user/f5networksinc">F5 YouTube Channel</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.f5.com/products/big-ip/global-traffic-manager.html" _fcksavedurl="http://www.f5.com/products/big-ip/global-traffic-manager.html">BIG-IP GTM</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.f5.com/pdf/white-papers/dnssec-wp.pdf" _fcksavedurl="http://www.f5.com/pdf/white-papers/dnssec-wp.pdf">DNSSEC: The Antidote to DNS Cache Poisoning and Other DNS Attacks (whitepaper)</a> | <a href="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/interviews/archive/2009/12/04/audio-tech-brief-dnssec-the-antidote-to-dns.aspx" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/interviews/archive/2009/12/04/audio-tech-brief-dnssec-the-antidote-to-dns.aspx">Audio</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.cricketondns.com" _fcksavedurl="http://www.cricketondns.com">Cricket on DNS</a></li> <li><a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/InfobloxInc" _fcksavedurl="http://www.youtube.com/user/InfobloxInc">Infoblox YouTube Channel</a></li> </ul> <p>Technorati Tags: <a href="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/psilva/psilva/psilva/archive/2011/05/09/" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/psilva/psilva/psilva/archive/2011/05/09/">F5</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/webinar" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/webinar">webinar</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/Pete+Silva" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/Pete+Silva">Pete Silva</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/security" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/security">security</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/business" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tag/business">business</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/education" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tag/education">education</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/technology" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tag/technology">technology</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/internet" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/internet">internet, </a><a href="http://technorati.com/tags/big-ip" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/big-ip">big-ip</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/dnssec" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tag/dnssec">dnssec</a>, <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/infoblox" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/infoblox">infoblox</a> <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/dns" _fcksavedurl="http://technorati.com/tags/dns">dns</a></p> <table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" width="378"><tbody> <tr> <td valign="top" width="200">Connect with Peter: </td> <td valign="top" width="176">Connect with F5: </td> </tr> <tr> <td valign="top" width="200"><a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/peter-silva/0/412/77a" _fcksavedurl="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/peter-silva/0/412/77a"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" title="o_linkedin[1]" border="0" alt="o_linkedin[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_linkedin.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_linkedin.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> <a href="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/psilva/Rss.aspx" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/psilva/Rss.aspx"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" title="o_rss[1]" border="0" alt="o_rss[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_rss.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_rss.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> <a href="http://www.facebook.com/f5networksinc" _fcksavedurl="http://www.facebook.com/f5networksinc"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" title="o_facebook[1]" border="0" alt="o_facebook[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_facebook.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_facebook.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> <a href="http://twitter.com/psilvas" _fcksavedurl="http://twitter.com/psilvas"><img style="border-bottom: 0px; border-left: 0px; display: inline; border-top: 0px; border-right: 0px" title="o_twitter[1]" border="0" alt="o_twitter[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_twitter.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_twitter.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> </td> <td valign="top" width="176"> <a href="http://bitly.com/nIsT1z?r=bb" _fcksavedurl="http://bitly.com/nIsT1z?r=bb"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="o_facebook[1]" border="0" alt="o_facebook[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_facebook.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_facebook.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> <a href="http://bitly.com/rrAfiR?r=bb" _fcksavedurl="http://bitly.com/rrAfiR?r=bb"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="o_twitter[1]" border="0" alt="o_twitter[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_twitter.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_twitter.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> <a href="http://bitly.com/neO7Pm?r=bb" _fcksavedurl="http://bitly.com/neO7Pm?r=bb"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="o_slideshare[1]" border="0" alt="o_slideshare[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_slideshare.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_slideshare.png" width="24" height="24" /></a> <a href="http://bitly.com/mOVxf3?r=bb" _fcksavedurl="http://bitly.com/mOVxf3?r=bb"><img style="border-right-width: 0px; display: inline; border-top-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px" title="o_youtube[1]" border="0" alt="o_youtube[1]" src="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_youtube.png" _fcksavedurl="http://devcentral.f5.com/s/weblogs/images/devcentral_f5_com/weblogs/macvittie/1086440/o_youtube.png" width="24" height="24" /></a></td> </tr> </tbody></table></body></html> ps Resources: F5 Web Media F5 YouTube Channel BIG-IP GTM DNSSEC: The Antidote to DNS Cache Poisoning and Other DNS Attacks (whitepaper) | Audio Cricket on DNS Infoblox YouTube ChannelInvasion of Privacy - Mobile App Infographic Style
Couple blogs/weeks ago, I posted What’s in Your Smartphone? covering the recent Nielsen report, State of the Appnation – A Year of Change and Growth in U.S. Smartphones. According to the study, 70% (last year) and 73% (this year) expressed concern over personal data collection and 55% were cautious about sharing location info via smartphone apps so, obviously, it is important that users are aware of the risks they face when downloading and using apps. So it is perfect timing that I came across Veracode’s infographic showing real world cases to outline the threat to user privacy posed by mobile apps. Infographic by Veracode Application Security Fascinating and scary at the same time. ps References: How Mobile Apps are Invading Your Privacy Infographic Infographic: How Mobile Apps Invade Your Privacy State of the Appnation – A Year of Change and Growth in U.S. Smartphones Nielsen: 1 in 2 own a smartphone, average 41 apps Freedom vs. Control BYOD–The Hottest Trend or Just the Hottest Term Hey You, Get Off-ah My Cloud! Evolving (or not) with Our Devices The New Wallet: Is it Dumb to Carry a Smartphone? BYOD Is Driving IT ‘Crazy,’ Gartner Says Consumerization trend driving IT shops 'crazy,' Gartner analyst saysCloud Security With FedRAMP
Want to provide Cloud services to the federal government? Then you’ll have to adhere to almost 170 security controls under the recently announced Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program. The program, set to go live in June, is designed to analyze/audit cloud computing providers for federal government agencies, expedite security clearances for cloud providers and foster the adoption of cloud computing by the Federal government. FedRAMP is meant to provide a baseline for low to moderate risk systems and is based on the NIST cyber-security Special Publication 800-53 Revision 3. FedRAMP provides an overall checklist for handling risks associated with Web services that would have a limited, or serious impact on government operations if disrupted. Cloud providers must implement these security controls to be authorized to provide cloud services to federal agencies. The government will forbid federal agencies from using a cloud service provider unless the vendor can prove that a FedRAMP-accredited third-party organization has verified and validated the security controls. Once approved, the cloud vendor would not need to be ‘re-evaluated’ by every government entity that might be interested in their solution. There may be instances where additional controls are added by agencies to address specific needs. Independent, third-party auditors are tasked with testing each product/solution for compliance which is intended to save agencies from doing their own risk management assessment. Details of the auditing process are expected early next month but includes a System Security Plan that clarifies how the requirements of each security control will be met within a cloud computing environment. Within the plan, each control must detail the solutions being deployed such as devices, documents and processes; the responsibilities of providers and government customer to implement the plan; the timing of implementation; and how solution satisfies controls. A Security Assessment Plan details how each control implementation will be assessed and tested to ensure it meets the requirements and the Security Assessment Report explains the issues, findings, and recommendations from the security control assessments detailed in the security assessment plan. Ultimately, each provider must establish means of preventing unauthorized users from hacking the cloud service. The regulations allow the contractor to determine which elements of the cloud must be backed up and how frequently. Three backups are required, one available online. All government information stored on a provider's servers must be encrypted. When the data is in transit, providers must use a "hardened or alarmed carrier protective distribution system," which detects intrusions, if not using encryption. Since cloud services may span many geographic areas with various people in the mix, providers must develop measures to guard their operations against supply chain threats. Also, vendors must disclose all the services they outsource and obtain the board's approval to contract out services in the future. More details of the FedRAMP program will be available from the General Services Administration by February 8th, but they have already started accepting applications for third party assessment vendors. ps Resources: Contractors dealt blanket cloud security specs FedRAMP includes 168 security controls New FedRAMP standards first step to secure cloud computing GSA to tighten oversight of conflict-of-interest rules for FedRAMP What does finalized FedRAMP plan mean for industry? New FedRAMP standards first step to secure cloud computing GSA reopens cloud email RFQ NIST, GSA setting up cloud validation process FedRAMP Security Controls Unveiled FedRAMP security requirements benchmark IT reform FedRAMP baseline controls released Federal officials launch FedRAMP Audio: Steven VanRoekel announces FedRAMP NIST: Cloud providers should adopt portability standards Cloud security breach inevitable as businesses underestimate security due diligence Technorati Tags: F5, federal government, integration, cloud computing, Pete Silva, security, business, fedramp, technology, nist, cloud, compliance, regulations, web, internet
