Skip to content

CyberSecurity Institute

Security News Curated from across the world

Menu
Menu

Author: admini

Choosing SIEM: Security Info and Event Management Dos and Don’ts

Posted on December 2, 2009December 30, 2021 by admini

1. Security event management (SEM): Analyzes log and event data in real time to provide threat monitoring, event correlation and incident response. Data can be collected from security and network devices, systems and applications.

2. Security information management (SIM): Collects, analyzes and reports on log data (primarily from host systems and applications, but also from network and security devices) to support regulatory compliance initiatives, internal threat management and security policy compliance management.

Traditional SEM vendors have responded by orienting products previously geared toward real-time event alerting and management toward log management functionality. For instance, ArcSight added its Logger appliance and additional deployment options to address compliance. Meanwhile, SIM players such as SenSage and LogLogic are adding real-time capabilities.

Jon Oltsik, an analyst at Enterprise Strategy Group, sees the market differently. The main driver, he says, is the need to keep up with security complexity. “There is an acute awareness that security attacks are more sophisticated and that security at a system level is harder than at the device level,” he says. Compliance is the second most important factor, he says, and the third is the need to replace early SIEM platforms that don’t scale or provide the right level of analytics and reporting capabilities.

Forrester expects consolidation among the 20-plus SIEM vendors in the next 12 to 36 months, as well as more cloud-based SIEM services.

Core Capabilities
According to Gartner, five critical capabilities differentiate SIEM products, whether you use them for SEM, SIM or both.
This includes functions that support the cost-effective collection, indexing, storage and analysis of a large amount of information, including log and event data, as well as the ability to search and report on it.
Reporting capabilities should include predefined reports, ad hoc reports and the use of third-party reporting tools.
Key capabilities include user and resource access reporting.
This includes real-time data collection, a security event console, real-time event correlation and analysis, and incident management support.

The need for compliance has encouraged smaller security staffs to adopt SIEM, and these buyers need predefined functions and ease of deployment and support over advanced functionality and extensive customization.

Large volumes of event data will be collected, and a wide scope of analysis reporting will be deployed. This calls for an architecture that supports scalability and deployment flexibility.
Access Monitoring. This capability defines access policies and discovers and reports on exceptions. It enables organizations to move from activity monitoring to exception analysis. This is important for compliance reporting, fraud detection and breach discovery.

SIEM DOs and DON’Ts DO include multiple stakeholders.
When developing requirements, be sure to collect them from the range of groups that may benefit from collected log data. This includes internal auditors, compliance, IT security and IT operations.
There are certainly customers just looking for log management because of a compliance requirement, and they may not have the internal resources to do anything but collect and document logs, Kavanaugh says. “But many buyers realize the capabilities inherent in log management software—the ability to collect, search and run reports—are valuable to security operations.” Once the security group gets involved, he says, they look at including network security devices, routers and other areas of the network environment where they don’t have great insight, as well as the real-time component.

When selecting a SIEM product at Liz Claiborne, Mike Mahoney, manager of IT security and compliance, involved architecture leaders from eight groups, asking them to respond to an in-depth questionnaire regarding what would help them improve their jobs. It ultimately took six months to complete the evaluation. “I wanted this to be a tool they would benefit from beyond log collection,” Mahoney says.
“Ultimately, the point of intersection is log management, but analytics might be done by two different platforms,” Oltsik says. “Whether you need security or compliance, you’re using the same log data.”

Correlation is a key aspect of SIEM systems, says Larry Whiteside, associate director of information security at the Visiting Nurse Service of New York (VNSNY). SIEM systems normalize logs from various systems, which helps you see the most important data you need out of those logs in a readable format. They also help you correlate events that the human eye could never perceive but that correlation rules can detect. “If you use correlation rules, you can run a report, and two events that are 10 minutes apart will be right on top of each other because they’re directly related to each other,” White­side says. He can also look at specific databases on specific servers and see who’s touching them. Or he can get log events to see what applications are talking to other applications and what database tables they’re hitting.For instance, if Server A is talking to Server B, and activity peaks on Sunday night at 10 p.m., he can drill in further to see what desktops are involved.

While software is the traditional form factor, Kavanaugh says, vendors have increasingly come out with all-in-one appliances, which do the data collection, analysis and correlation and use their own built-in databases to store copies of logs.

There are also many blended offerings, in which a server performs the real-time analysis, correlation and monitoring, and an appliance covers log collection.
Cincera warns that hardware and software accounts for one-half or less of the total cost of ownership of a SIEM implementation. The rest, he says, is the labor involved with creating, building and deploying the technology. “You can’t just put someone on the console and have them whip up 10 good correlation rules a day,” he says. “They need to understand things like, ‘These events need to be treated in this manner, or with this level of discretion.’ ” This requires the governance function to specify which events to care about and what actions to take. … There’s a cost to the organization based on that function,” Cincera says.

Another cost is maintenance, which includes keeping rules up to date, group management, permissions, alerting, monitoring and metrics. “You need to manage interfaces to upstream systems, things that feed information to the engine,” Cincera says. “You need to stay constantly involved, making sure connections stay in sync with one another, and that can be a daunting effort.” The work level grows dramatically based on the number of upstream systems you need to feed, he warns. “Every event you choose not to ignore is one on which you must act, even if it’s just to say, ‘noted,’ ” Cincera says. At some point, Cincera says, the rules, alerts and actions you take lose value and should be decommissioned.

Total cost of ownership is something no vendor is good at communicating, he adds. “They don’t want you to think of all those costs.”

http://www.csoonline.com/article/509553/Choosing_SIEM_Security_Info_and_Event_Management_Dos_and_Don_ts

Read more

FBI’s network against cyber crime

Posted on November 25, 2009December 30, 2021 by admini

He also made known that the most sophisticated adversaries are capable of altering software and hardware destined for the US during their passage through the global supply chain route, can remotely intrude on US networks, monitor communication and position insiders within those networks, and that all this may “provide them with pre-positioned capabilities to conduct computer network attacks.”

The Cyber Division’ latest success was the Operation Phish Phry.

At the consumer level, the FBI organized the Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), whose website is the leading national cyber crime incident reporting portal.

http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8537

Read more

Man pleads guilty to selling fake chips to US Navy

Posted on November 25, 2009December 30, 2021 by admini

Felahy, his wife Marwah Felahy, and her brother Mustafa Abdul Aljaff operated several microchip brokerage companies that imported chips from Shenzhen, in China’s Guangdong province. They would buy counterfeit chips from China or else take legitimate chips, sand off the brand markings and melt the plastic casings with acid to make them appear to be of higher quality or a different brand, the U.S. Department of Justice said in a press release. He is expected to be sentenced next year in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

Two years ago, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency funded a program called Trust in Integrated Circuits, to investigate the problem. The next year, the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) broke up a distribution network for counterfeit Cisco Systems routers, seizing $3.5 million worth of components.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9141438/Man_pleads_guilty_to_selling_fake_chips_to_US_Navy?source=CTWNLE_nlt_dailyam_2009-11-25

Read more

Workers stealing data for competitive edge

Posted on November 24, 2009December 30, 2021 by admini

Of those that plan to take competitive or sensitive corporate data, 64% will do so ‘just in case’ it were to prove useful or advantageous in the future, 27% would use it to negotiate their new position, while 20% plan to use it as a tool in their new job.

http://www.net-security.org/secworld.php?id=8534

Read more

Cyber-war is here and to stay: ask US, China, Russia, Israel and France

Posted on November 18, 2009December 30, 2021 by admini

“We don’t believe we’ve seen cases of cyber-warfare,” said Dmitri Alperovitch, vice president of threat research at McAfee.

There have been unauthorized penetrations into government systems since the early ARPANET days and it has long been known that the US critical infrastructure is vulnerable.

However, experts are putting dots together and seeing patterns that indicate that there is increasing intelligence gathering and building of sophisticated cyber-attack capabilities, according to the report titled “Virtually Here: The Age of Cyber Warfare.” “While we have not yet seen a ‘hot’ cyber-war between major powers, the efforts of nation-states to build increasingly sophisticated cyber-attack capabilities and in some cases demonstrate a willingness to use them, suggest that a ‘Cyber Cold War’ may have already begun,” the report says.

Because pinpointing the source of cyber-attacks is usually difficult if not impossible, the motivations can only be speculated upon, making the whole cyber-war debate an intellectual exercise at this point. For instance, Alperovitch speculates that the July 4 attacks denial-of-service on Web sites in the US and South Korea could have been a test by an foreign entity to see if flooding South Korean networks and the transcontinental communications between the US and South Korea would disrupt the ability of the US military in South Korea to communicate with military leaders in Washington, DC, and the Pacific Command in Hawaii.

http://en.mercopress.com/2009/11/18/cyber-war-is-here-and-to-stay-ask-us-china-russia-israel-and-france

Read more

Threat Level Privacy, Crime and Security Online Senate Panel: 80 Percent of Cyber Attacks Preventabl

Posted on November 17, 2009December 30, 2021 by admini

Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, told senators that public apathy and ignorance played as much a role in the current state of cyber security as the unwillingness of corporate entities to take responsibility for securing the public’s data. “Many consumers have a false sense of security due to their belief that most of the financial impact resulting from the loss of personal data will be fully covered by corporate entities like the banks,” he said.

As for corporate and government entities that collect and store the public data, they “do not understand themselves to be responsible for the defense of the data,” said Clinton, whose group represents banks, telecoms, defense and technology companies and other industries that rely on the internet. “The marketing department has data, the finance department has data, etc, but they think the security of the data is the responsibility of the IT guys at the end of the hall.”

A 2009 Price Waterhouse Cooper study on global information security found that 47 percent of companies are reducing or deferring their information security budgets, despite the growing dangers of cyber incursions.

To improve cyber security, the public sector would have to institute sufficient market incentives to motivate companies to protect the public’s interests. Philip Reitinger, director of the National Cyber Security Center at the Department of Homeland Security, said that end users also need to be made aware of the simple things they can do to protect themselves — such as keeping software and anti-virus up to date.

“We need to, as a nation and as an IT echo system, continue to make it more simple for people to institute protections to determine if they’ve been compromised and to make sure they stay secure,” said Reitinger, a former Microsoft executive.

Civil liberties were also a concern of the panelists as they discussed privacy issues around the government’s implementation of Einstein 1 and 2 — programs designed to help monitor and protect government civilian networks — and Einstein 3, which the National Security Agency is currently developing for the same purpose. Reitinger said that DHS provides privacy and civil liberties training for those with the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team who are responsible for implementing Einstein. He also said that the DHS’s Office of Cybersecurity and Communications has an oversight officer whose job is to ensure compliance with the rules.

One panelist, Larry Wortzel a retired army intelligence officer, made the case for the NSA to take the lead on the government’s cyber security initiatives, despite the agency’s public stance that it has no interest in assuming the position. “If, in fact, the NSA has technical capabilities beyond those of the providers, why should you be relying on the providers in areas where the NSA actually has greater capability?”

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/cyber-attacks-preventable/

Read more

Posts pagination

  • Previous
  • 1
  • …
  • 130
  • 131
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136
  • …
  • 421
  • Next

Recent Posts

  • Boards Are Pricing Cyber Risk In. The IT Function Isn’t Keeping Up.
  • AI News – Mon, 17 Nov 2025
  • CSO News – Mon, 17 Nov 2025
  • AI/ML News – 2024-04-14
  • Incident Response and Security Operations -2024-04-14

Archives

  • April 2026
  • November 2025
  • April 2024
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • September 2020
  • October 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • December 2018
  • April 2018
  • December 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • August 2014
  • March 2014
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • February 2012
  • October 2011
  • August 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003

Categories

  • AI-ML
  • Augment / Virtual Reality
  • Blogging
  • Cloud
  • DR/Crisis Response/Crisis Management
  • Editorial
  • Financial
  • Make You Smile
  • Malware
  • Mobility
  • Motor Industry
  • News
  • OTT Video
  • Pending Review
  • Personal
  • Product
  • Regulations
  • Secure
  • Security Industry News
  • Security Operations
  • Statistics
  • Threat Intel
  • Trends
  • Uncategorized
  • Warnings
  • WebSite News
  • Zero Trust

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org
© 2026 CyberSecurity Institute | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme