Skip to content

CyberSecurity Institute

Security News Curated from across the world

Menu
Menu

Category: Uncategorized

E-Mail Is Exhibit A

Posted on May 9, 2006December 30, 2021 by admini

“Most companies are sitting ducks,” says Nancy Flynn, founder and executive director of the ePolicy Institute. “They don’t realize that E-mail is the electronic equivalent of DNA evidence.”

Bill Gates wasn’t thinking about that when he sent messages to Microsoft executives in 1996 discussing the need for the company to increase its share of the Web browser market. Two years later, he had to explain his written statements under oath when the federal government accused the company of violating antitrust laws when it crushed Netscape in the Web browser market. Watching Gates squirm–and grab headlines–in a court case involving E-mail should have been fair warning to all business executives and other high-ranking officials to exercise greater caution when writing E-mails.

Failure to get a handle on E-mail–and soon instant messages and blogs and other forms of business communications–can cost companies money and their reputations. Morgan Stanley learned that lesson the hard way. It’s been hit with millions of dollars in Securities and Exchange Commission and court fines as well as legal judgments for violating E-mail retention rules. And it’s been embarrassed by archived mail introduced in a wrongful termination case that showed, among other things, its CTO hitting up vendors for tickets to sporting events.

Many industries have regulations such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act in health care, and all public companies are governed by Sarbanes-Oxley. “The first thing my clients want to see now is E-mail and E-mail attachments,” says Eric Blank, managing attorney of law firm Blank Law & Technology, which specializes in electronic evidence detection. If a company has to review millions of pages of E-mail, legal fees of $300 an hour can quickly add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The average company creates at least a million messages each day, Forrester Research estimates. But technology tools and services can help companies monitor and manage that E-mail, including specialized archiving, retrieval, and discovery software.

Blank turned to archiving software from Postini to sort through the messages, eliminate the captured spam, and create files of relevant E-mail for use in regulatory compliance.

Transatlantic Reinsurance, a provider of insurance to the insurance industry, operates within a “very litigious environment, as the insurance industry is highly scrutinized,” says Socrates Pichardo, VP of IT. The company was receiving numerous search requests from its IT and legal teams that required the manual review of thousands of E-mails. The offering lets customers automate information collection and archiving and avoid the “save everything” strategy by saving only what needs to be saved.

Consultants offer advice on classification and policy services, records management and assessment, E-mail archiving assessment, tape restoration and migration planning, and data erasure.

Businesses in the past year have shifted their attention from border security to regulatory compliance, so the services company needs to help its customers retain messages for compliance reasons as well as preserve other valuable communications.

http://www.informationweek.com/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=187200562

Read more

Your Top Three Security Priorities

Posted on May 2, 2006December 30, 2021 by admini

Priority One: Make sure employees are well trained to recognize and respond to threats
Priority Two: Eliminate passwords
Priority Three: Keep it simple

http://www.darkreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=93336&WT.svl=column1_2

Read more

A Few Good Metrics

Posted on April 29, 2006December 30, 2021 by admini

“A CEO’s favorite visualization of metrics is a stock chart, a 1-inch square that contains a month’s worth of opening and closing prices, a trend line and several other indicators.

By no means does Jaquith (or CSO for that matter) think these five metrics are the final word on infosecurity. Quite the contrary, they’re a starting point, relatively easy to ascertain and hopefully smart enough to get CISOs thinking about finding other metrics like these, out in the vast fields of data, waiting to be reaped.

Your coverage of devices by these security tools should be in the range of 94 percent to 98 percent. If in one quarter you’ve got 96 percent antivirus coverage, and it’s 91 percent two quarters later, you may need more formalized protocols for introducing devices to the network or a better way to introduce defenses to devices. “At any given time, your network management software doesn’t know about 30 percent of the IP addresses on your network,” says Jaquith, because either they were brought online ad hoc or they’re transient. How to get it: Run network scans and canvass departments to find as many devices and their network IP addresses as you can. Then check those devices’ IP addresses against the IP addresses in the log files of your antivirus, antispyware, IDS, firewall and other security products to find out how many IP addresses aren’t covered by your basic defenses.

Maximum coverage, while an important baseline, is too narrow in scope to give any sort of overall idea of your security profile. For example, percentage coverage by class of device (for instance, 98 percent antivirus coverage of desktops, 87 percent of servers) or by business unit or geography (for instance, 92 percent antispyware coverage of desktops in operations, 83 percent of desktops in marketing) will help uncover tendencies of certain types of infrastructure, people or offices to miss security coverage. That is, 98 percent antivirus coverage of manufacturing servers is useless if the average age of the virus definitions on manufacturing’s servers is 335 days. Here’s an example: plotting the percentages of five business units’ antivirus and antispyware coverage and the time of their last update against a companywide benchmark.

Patch latency is the time between a patch’s release and your successful deployment of that patch. As with basic coverage metrics, patch latency stats may show machines with lots of missing patches or machines with outdated patches, which might point to the need for centralized patch management or process improvements. At any rate, through accurate patch latency mapping, you can discover the proverbial low-hanging fruit by identifying the machines that might be the most vulnerable to attack. One possible visualization: For data where you can sum up the results, such as total number of missing patches, a “small multiples” graphic works well.

Password strength: This metric offers simple risk reduction by sifting out bad passwords and making them harder to break, and finding potential weak spots where key systems use default passwords. Password cracking can also be a powerful demonstration tool with executives who themselves have weak passwords.

Gratuitous pictures, 3-D bars, florid design and noise around the data diminish effectiveness.

One possible visualization: An overall score here is simple to do: It’s a number between 1 and 10. To supplement that, consider a tree map. Tree maps use color and space in a field to show “hot spots” and “cool spots” in your data. They are not meant for precision; rather they’re a streamlined way to present complex data. They give you a feel for where your problems are most intense. In the case of platform-compliance scores, for instance, you could map the different elements of your benchmark test and assign each element a color based on how risky it is and a size based on how often it was left exposed. Be warned, tree maps are not easy to do. But when done right, they can have instant visual impact.

Legitimate e-mail traffic analysis is a family of metrics including incoming and outgoing traffic volume, incoming and outgoing traffic size, and traffic flow between your company and others. There are any number of ways to parse this data; mapping the communication flow between your company and your competitors may alert you to an employee divulging intellectual property, for example. The fascination to this point has been with comparing the amount of good and junk e-mail that companies are receiving (typically it’s about 20 percent good and 80 percent junk). Such metrics can be disturbing, but Jaquith argues they’re also relatively useless. By monitoring legitimate e-mail flow over time, you can learn where to set alarm points. At least one financial services company has benchmarked its e-mail flow to the point that it knows to flag traffic when e-mail size exceeds several megabytes and when a certain number go out in a certain span of time. How to get it: First shed all the spam and other junk e-mail from the population of e-mails that you intend to analyze. Then parse the legitimate e-mails every which way you can. Added benefit: An investigations group can watch e-mail flow during an open investigation, say, when IP theft is suspected. Try this: Monitor legitimate e-mail flow over time.

CISOs can actually begin to predict the size and shape of spikes in traffic flow by correlating them with events such as an earnings conference call.

You can also mine data after unexpected events to see how they affect traffic and then alter security plans to best address those changes in e-mail flow. Time series simply means that the X axis delineates some unit of time over which something happens. How to get it: Build a risk indexing tool to measure risks in your top business applications. Expressed as: A score, or temperature, or other scale for which the higher the number, the higher the exposure to risk. Could also be a series of scores for different areas of risk (for example, business impact score of 10 out of 16, compliance score of 3 out of 16, and other risks score of 7 out of 16). Added benefit: A simple index like this is a good way to introduce risk analysis into information security (if it’s not already used) because it follows the principles of risk management without getting too deeply into statistics. Try this: With your industry consortia, set up an industrywide group to use the same scorecard and create industrywide application risk benchmarks to share (confidentially, of course).

To this excellent article, the author suggests to use the measurment of Incidents and their impact as a metric.

http://www.csoonline.com/read/070105/metrics.html

Read more

IT security checklist focuses on consequences of breaches

Posted on April 26, 2006December 30, 2021 by admini

“We started seeing huge vulnerabilities,” Borg said Wednesday at the GovSec conference in Washington, where the draft document was released. Most of the systems were compliant with current security checklists and best practices. “And portions of those systems were extraordinarily secure. But they were Maginot Lines,” susceptible to being outflanked. The problem is that existing best practices are static lists based on outdated data. “We are way into diminishing returns on our investments in perimeter defense,” he said. “To deal with it now, you have to think of the problem of cybersecurity not from a technical standpoint, but by focusing on what the systems do, what you could do with them and what … the consequences [would] be.”

The list is based on real-world experience and on economic analysis of breaches. Surprisingly, the researchers found that simply shutting a system down is not the biggest threat in most areas of critical infrastructure. “Shutting things down for two or three days is not that costly,” Borg said. The larger threat is disruption of systems in ways that are not immediately evident.

“All of the things we are talking about are already under way,” Borg said, but some of the items in the checklist have no cost-effective commercial solutions. Borg said he hopes industry will step up to the plate to create solutions, and that government will adapt its acquisition policies to create incentives for these developments.

Borg said there is no schedule for final DHS approval of the draft. Additional information about the checklist is available from Borg at mailto:scott.borg@usccu.us.

http://www.gcn.com/online/vol1_no1/40564-1.html

Read more

How To Stop Internet Identity Theft

Posted on April 25, 2006December 30, 2021 by admini

Essentially, the process works by tricking e-mail recipients into going to phony Web sites to divulge personal data, like bank-account numbers or credit-card information.

Identity thieves also use technical subterfuge through spyware and Trojans to capture user names and passwords so they can gain access to consumers’ financial details.

http://www.cio-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=42950&page=1

Read more

New Security Directions for Removable USB Devices

Posted on April 6, 2006December 30, 2021 by admini

They can be simple credentials such as usernames and passwords, or more complex forms such as PKI based X509 certificates or claims based assertions in SAML tokens. To be really useful in today’s identity infrastructures an identity device must be more than a secure store of static credentials. It must also be able to generate cryptographic keys, perform digital signature operations, parse request messages and emit security tokens in standard formats. One doesn’t normally associate these operations with USB storage.

In fact, digital identity functions are very different from mass storage, but that doesn’t mean that they cannot exist on the same device, just as digital cameras now exist on cell phones. After all, digital identity devices already exist in other form factors such as smart cards and yes, USB key fobs.

Portability has been the Achilles’ heel of smart cards and USB tokens.

Even when you have deployed a smart card solution with all of the required components and middleware, you’ll probably find that the solution won’t work with another brand of smart card without swapping in new middleware components. The U.S. Government has addressed these interoperability challenges by developing GSC-IS (Government Smart Card Interoperability Specification) so that they can deploy smart cards to federal employees without being tied to one smart card or middleware provider.

This opens up a whole new set of possibilities for security operations as much more data can be sent and retrieved than what was previously possible on devices such as smart cards. The widespread native support and high bandwidth of the USB mass storage interface enables a digital identity device to be truly portable and accept high level application messages through a protocol that is as simple as reading and writing to a file.

http://www.it-observer.com/articles/1104/new_security_directions_removable_usb_devices/

Read more

Posts navigation

  • Previous
  • 1
  • …
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • …
  • 40
  • Next

Recent Posts

  • AI/ML News – 2024-04-14
  • Incident Response and Security Operations -2024-04-14
  • CSO News – 2024-04-15
  • IT Security News – 2023-09-25
  • IT Security News – 2023-09-20

Archives

  • 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
© 2025 CyberSecurity Institute | Powered by Superbs Personal Blog theme