Skip to content

CyberSecurity Institute

Security News Curated from across the world

Menu
Menu

F5 Fires Up Powerful SSL VPN Solution

Posted on April 15, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

It supports clustering environments up to 10 nodes, allowing up to 20,000 concurrent users—1,000 concurrent users per node—and secure Web-based remote access to corporate applications and desktops. The FirePass 4100 includes four 10/100/1000 copper Ethernet ports and three PCI slots for optional SSL acceleration as well as an 80-Gbyte hard drive. It’s Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) 140-compliant, an important selling point for solution providers serving the health-care, government and military verticals. The FirePass 4100 is an enterprise-class appliance engineered to provide remote access as well as create SSL VPNs with greater ease and manageability than any products previously available.

To evaluate the appliance, they used a test network running Windows Server 2003 Active Directory and using Cisco and AdTran access routers and switches at Clover Park Technical College, Lakewood, Wash. This article publishes the results of their revew.

http://www.crn.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=160900298&flatPage=true

Read more

Six Ways To Protect Against Zero-Day Attacks

Posted on April 15, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

Use file integrity checking
File integrity checking tells you if the software you think you have installed on your network is actually what it is supposed to be. There are a number of free utilities to do this — Tripwire is the best known among them. Traditionally, file integrity checking is used is to identify recent changes on a PC. That way, when things go desperately wrong you can try to back out of the latest changes. File integrity checking is also useful for discovering spyware and viruses your antivirus software has missed.

Run new or unknown software in a sandbox
A new generation of antivirus software extends file integrity checking by making unknown software run in a “sandbox.” This form of isolation prevents viruses or worms from propagating unless they can trick a known program into doing the work for them. Another way to develop a sandbox is by using Microsoft’s Active Directory to keep users from installing anything new. Any new software is then carefully checked by the network administrator before it is installed on the rest of the network. In effect, this makes the network administrator’s PC the sandbox.

Scan autoruns
Each PC’s autorun programs should be periodically scanned for threats. There is a terrific free utility from SysInternals that will show you everything that is run when you boot up your PC.

Use intrusion prevention at the gateway and on each desktop
Effective intrusion prevention soft-ware monitors network traffic and matches it to known types of attacks. This approach would have stopped the Sasser and Korgo.W worms in their tracks since they exploited known vulnerabilities. Intrusion prevention rules are continually updated by your vendor. You also should be able to add new intrusion prevention rules yourself.

Use heuristic and signature- based antivirus software
A recent addition is the ability for users to easily create their own virus signatures and to distribute them throughout their networks.

Be aware of Microsoft holes
It is no secret that Microsoft systems and programs are the most vulnerable to attack. Some software vendors have extended Microsoft’s security by adding to Windows the concept of program permissions. Just as users have permissions for directories and files, programs can have permissions to access different parts of the operating system, giving you direct control over what they can and cannot do.

http://www.networkingpipeline.com/160902074

Read more

Is Machine-To-Machine (M2M) The Gap In Your Security

Posted on April 14, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

M2M connections are endemic and can range from all the complex communications within a modern aeroplane, through to internal Microsoft servers talking to each other.

In manufacturing, all processes are increasingly linked automatically. Lathes, for example, are driven by production scheduling systems and robots are managed by manufacturing systems. In the pharmaceutical industry, production processes are very closely monitored to ensure legal compliance with FDA and other regulations. In finance, automated linked processes are subject to close regulation; and ATMs communicate directly with their core corporate systems. In the average organisation, servers talk to other servers all the time without manual intervention.

While these linkages provide major cost benefits, most of these internal appliances are not given the same level of security as outward facing systems. They typically rely on gateway systems for firewall and anti-virus protection. This was more than adequate in the past but not any longer, as has become increasingly clear to the many organisations who have had to build patch scheduling (or rush patching) into their timetables.

Unsecured IP connected devices are potentially vulnerable to a range of problems such as network viruses, trojans and hacking. A recent report on ‘The Register’ web site described how a couple of simple web searches threw up over a thousand unprotected surveillance cameras.

Other areas at risk include VoIP servers and VoIP devices. Digital telephone switches can also be a problem. The list of ‘machines’ with a potential security risk is long and includes wireless devices, video conferencing systems, data centre monitoring equipment, internal security cameras, webcams, POS devices and ATM devices.

Real life examples include a company where production was lost for days when robots on an IP network became infected. A pharmaceutical company had to take its systems down for two weeks, to recalibrate them to comply with Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) regulations, after needing to install urgent patches.

Telephone switch and router problems, though probably less expensive, can still run into tens of thousands of pounds.

Adding tens or hundreds of additional security devices to the IT department’s management load would have been an expensive nonsense. Finally, patching vulnerabilities has often been dealt with on a tactical basis, so the workload and expense have not always been planned or costed.

http://www.ebcvg.com/articles.php?id=675

Read more

Microsoft Worm Cleanser Goes Rootkit Hunting

Posted on April 14, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

It is the first time Redmond has added rootkit detection capabilities to the free Malicious Software Removal Tool, a move that underscores the increased prevalence of stealth rootkits on Windows machines.

Stephen Toulouse, program manager at the Microsoft Security Response Center, told eWEEK.com that the decision to add Hacker Defender to the worm zapper was the result of feedback from users. In all, Toulouse said four child variants of the stealth rootkit will be detected.

Hacker Defender (Win32/Hackdef) is a family of backdoor Trojans capable of creating, changing and hiding Windows system resources on a computer that it has infected. The program works on Windows NT 4.0, Windows 2000 and Windows XP machines. According to definitions posted by Computer Associates, Hacker Defender is a Trojan creation tool that can also be used to wrap existing Trojans to make them harder to detect. It can also hide proxy services and back-door functionality and conceal use of TCP and UDP (User Datagram Protocol) ports for receiving commands from attackers.

Microsoft isn’t the only software vendor flagging rootkits as a growing threat. Finnish anti-virus specialist F-Secure Corp. recently released the BlackLight Rootkit Elimination Technology as a free beta tool through Apr. 30.

Sysinternals Freeware, a site that offers Windows utilities, also offers RootkitReveal, a tool capable of finding registry and file system API discrepancies that may indicate the presence of a user-mode or kernel-mode rootkit.

The availability of rootkit detection tools has triggered a cat-and-mouse game between security researchers and spyware writers.

The latest iteration of Microsoft’s worm cleanser also adds detections for the Mimail family of mass-mailing and network worms and the Rbot backdoor Trojan family. New new variants from the Berbew, Bropia Gaobot, MyDoom and Sober worms can also be detected.

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1785621,00.asp

Read more

Convergence: The Payoff…The Pain

Posted on April 14, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

CSOs say they can lead their functions to be more effective and save money at the same time. It means overcoming the challenges posed by executives who don’t buy the idea, and staff who will resist you. Here’s a guide to understanding both the upside and the hurdles to holistic security management.

Talk to Jim Mecsics about the benefits of convergence, and you’ll first have to stomach a metaphor about belly buttons. At the end of the day, says Mecsics, if there’s a security problem, the CEO is going to jab Mecsics’ belly button, hold him accountable and say, “Fix it.”

His point: In a converged security organization, there’s only one button to push—executives don’t have to contemplate whether to call the corporate security director or head of IT security or the facilities manager when they have a security issue.

Mecsics arrived on the job at credit bureau Equifax in 2002 with a mandate to create a corporate security program—to bring together previously disparate pieces of security, including physical and information security, under one roof. It didn’t take long for the reorganization to bear fruit. Some three months into his tenure, a large identity theft ring began hitting credit reporting agencies and was attempting to penetrate Equifax’s networks. Mecsics and his team went to work—they set up a plan, mapped out the bad guys’ architecture and worked closely with the FBI. Soon they pinpointed the intermediary company where the breach was taking place. (A former help desk employee at the intermediary company had stolen user codes and passwords and sold them to more than a dozen mostly Nigerian nationals in the New York City area.) At the end of 2002, the U.S. attorney’s office in New York arrested the culprits, putting a stop to what it said was the largest identity theft ring in the country (some 30,000 identities were stolen).

The Payoff: Executive-level backing and a mandate to run one operation for all security functions gives CSOs the chance to create more effective teams.

And did we mention the part about saving money? “That was a pure example of [the benefit of] us having everything under one umbrella,” says Mecsics. “I had the ability to bring the data and fraud folks and everyone else together and come up with a cohesive strategy,” he says. Mecsics didn’t have to get authorization from people’s bosses to work on the converged effort. He had the authority, he acted, and the coordinated security groups worked to the company’s benefit. (Mecsics left Equifax last year and now works as a senior security analyst at SAIC, a research and engineering company.)

Improved collaboration among security functions is just one of the payoffs of convergence. Others include better alignment of security with business operations, establishing the CSO as a single point of contact for all security issues, the opportunity to cross-train employees, increased information-sharing that leads to more efficient problem solving and, if you’re trying to convince otherwise skeptical execs of why convergence is worth doing, you can pull out your trump card: cost savings.

In this story, security executives at BWX Technologies (BWXT), EDS, Level3 Communications, Pemco Financial, Rohm and Haas, SAIC, Triwest Healthcare Alliance, United Rentals and Wells Fargo talk about why they’ve converged and the payoffs they’ve achieved from reorganizing their security departments to better meet the needs of their businesses.

Payoff #1 A comprehensive security strategy better aligns security goals with
Most CSOs these days would agree that security should dance cheek to cheek with the needs of the business. In a post-9/11 world, companies that hold onto the traditional view of security as just another cost center are failing to recognize the importance of security to day-to-day business activities.

When Marshall Sanders, vice president of corporate security and CSO (and who served as the founding director of security for President Reagan’s strategic defense initiative program in the ’80s), joined Level3 Communications in 1999, he had a mandate: establish a comprehensive security architecture. Sanders’ mission was made easier because senior executives at the company viewed security as a key enabler for the business. “We’re a network services provider—we’re all about network availability. If the network isn’t available due to a logical or physical incident, it’s a revenue-impacting event. So security was seen by our [company leaders] as an integral component of the business architecture,” he says.

A corporate risk management council, comprising Sanders and other senior executives, forms the basis for an integrated security governance structure and helps keep security top-of-mind at Level3 (see “Security Committee,” Page 28). “It’s critical to have top-down sponsorship,” Sanders says, adding that in his case, the CEO “realized security needed to be integrated into the architecture of the business.” The council, an audience for updates on physical and logical security, business continuity and disaster recovery exercises, is critical to driving this agenda, he says. “It can provide an enterprisewide perspective and accountability for managing the risks to the business; so then security becomes not just security’s problem—it’s a business concern.”

Sanders defines convergence as the integration of logical, information, physical and personnel security; business continuity; disaster recovery; and safety risk management. (Logical security focuses on the tools in a network computing environment; information security focuses on the flow of information across both the logical and physical environment.)

Payoff #2 The CSO can be a single point of contact
When there’s a single point of contact, the CFO or COO can pick up the phone and speed-dial the CSO. John Pontrelli, vice president and CSO at Triwest Healthcare Alliance, a Department of Defense contractor that manages a health-care program in the western United States for military personnel and their families, wouldn’t have left his previous job at W.L. Gore & Associates to come to Triwest unless he had that kind of accountability. Having a single point of contact also makes it easier for the CEO, board of directors, contractors, external business partners and employees to know that they can call Pontrelli if they have any questions or problems. But bringing team members into a more cohesive organization with one strategic mission and consistent goals will encourage collaboration and help break down some of the walls that can exist among people who previously had prime allegiance to their individual security function.

Payoff #3 Information-sharing among disparate security functions increases
Richard Loving is reaping the benefits of a more collaborative environment at BWX Technologies, which manages and operates nuclear and national security facilities. For years, the company, which runs or helps run facilities for the U.S. government in nine states, organized its facility teams as self-contained units. “We were able to bring an expert from each site together to talk about the changes in regulations, how they were going to protect media and share that information back and forth so that as one site found a new and different way to control something, they would share that information the same day,” says Loving. Contributing to the vulnerabilities is that these networks are generally managed by process control engineers, whose job has been to make sure the systems run day and night, not to worry about hackers or other cybercriminals. For Keith Antonides, corporate information security director at Rohm and Haas, a large specialty chemical manufacturing company, convergence has meant establishing a closer working relationship with the process control engineers.

Payoff #4 Convergence gives you a more versatile staff
Although the unified security theme resonates today at Wells Fargo, it wasn’t long ago that the message was a little more garbled. Previously, external and internal investigations operated separately. That led to inefficiencies, where two separate teams could be investigating the same case. And if the case happened to be in Boise, Idaho, Wipprecht spent money to send somebody from the corporate office in San Francisco to work with the regional agent.

That changed in February 2004, when Wipprecht brought external and internal investigations into his new, converged organization and began cross-training most of his agents. Now the regional agent, trained in external and internal investigations and physical security, can run the case from Boise solo, giving security more bang for its buck and improving response time. Cross-training has also made his agents more aware of areas that weren’t previously part of their job descriptions.

In the past, the physical security folks thought a lot about homeland security but not investigative issues; investigators, conversely, were less observant about homeland security. Now the security organization is more cohesive, with different divisions pursuing similar goals. “The cross-training is an awakening of what they ought to be looking at internationally, nationally and locally,” says Wipprecht.

Triwest’s Pontrelli and Pemco’s Telders cross-train their physical and infosec staff. “It’s mostly a people cost savings,” says Telders. “I can take someone trained in CPR and have them do e-mail filtering and password accounts. I can cross-train staffs so they can cover each other, so my staffing costs are down. People assigned to projects can get cross-trained on the job,” he says. Pontrelli also likes the fact that cross-training gives his team members greater career opportunities.

Payoff #5 You save the company money
OK, you’d like to be converged, you’ve talked up the benefits of single points of contact and holistic strategies and aligning security operations with business goals—and you’ve met with glassy eyes, thinly disguised yawns and general apathy from senior execs. Now’s the time to pull out your trump card: Cost savings. One area that’s generating savings is technology convergence, the intersection of physical and information security.

That’s what Telders at Pemco Insurance has found. Telders has put smiles on the suits at Pemco by replacing proprietary systems with a centralized, IP-based security management system for both field offices and headquarters that encompasses closed-circuit TV, door controls, access card controls, sensors, alarm monitoring and panic buttons. The system has obviated the need for local security guards; instead, guards monitor the system 24/7 from a central location. Burglar alarm monitoring is also done from that location, so outside contracts with third parties have, for the most part, become unnecessary. And video recording takes place on server disks, not on local digital video recorders. “If a DVR goes out, it could cost five grand. If a disk goes out, it costs $150,” he notes. Telders says the system saved Pemco on the order of $2 million in the first year. (Most came from eliminating the guards; bringing burglary and security monitoring services in-house saved more.)

The company can also use the surveillance cameras in the various locations to hold teleconferences at no additional cost. And Pemco has tied building control systems such as HVAC and lighting into the centralized system, which allows the real estate staff to remotely manage some building systems, largely freeing them from having to install their own network or wiring.

Stephen Baird, vice president of corporate security at United Rentals, North America’s largest equipment rental company, is similarly using CCTV improvements to reduce costs. Baird joined the company last July and has become the single point of contact for security. (Previously the top security role wasn’t as clearly defined.) He reports to the company’s president and CFO. Since coming on board, he’s been working on upgrading the company’s digital CCTV systems to make them motion-based. That will save his staff major chunks of time when conducting investigations—using the old system, watching the DVR could take hours; now it takes minutes. He plans on rolling it out in the company’s corporate facilities first and hopes to roll it out in stores eventually. He’s also looking to save money by standardizing DVRs across the company and by buying those DVRs in bulk.

Stephen Baird, VP of corporate security at United Rentals, is the company’s single point of contact for all security matters. Another technology Baird is exploring is global positioning systems, or GPS, which the company was prototyping before he arrived. One application would involve putting GPS systems on large pieces of equipment, such as light towers. GPS systems would allow security to track where the tower is, how long it’s been there and even if it was turned on. “We’ve had theft of everything,” says Baird. But rolling out a GPS system won’t happen automatically—as with any big project, Baird will first assess the risks and the costs before he and his fellow execs give a thumbs-up or thumbs-down.

But if you’ve done the due diligence and believe that convergence can enhance your security posture and bring more value to the business, the CSOs in this story will tell you that you can converge and not just survive, but prosper.

http://www.csoonline.com/read/041505/payoffpain.html

Read more

Check Point launches wireless security series

Posted on April 11, 2005December 30, 2021 by admini

Check Point will debut its VPN-1 Edge W series, which consists of versions of its existing virtual private network-firewall security devices tailored to wireless connections.

The move comes as corporate demand grows for such features and as competitors deliver their own wireless security lines. “This is a natural extension of our firewall and VPN business,” said Dave Burton, product marketing director at Check Point. Burton noted that customers want wireless connectivity for their remote offices and also a secure and central means to handle data and information across a variety of devices.

Check Point’s wireless VPN-firewall appliance will support 802.11b/g/Super G wireless standards at speeds of up to 108Mbps and wireless coverage of up to 300m indoors. “With 300m, a customer needs to deploy fewer access points in their environment, and so that’s a cost saving,” Burton said.

Industry analysts said that a number of providers, such as Juniper Networks’ NetScreen Technologies and Symantec, are selling wireless firewall-VPN devices.

“What Check Point is doing is not revolutionary… They’re just trying to remain competitive in their space,” said Steven Hunt, president of 4H International, a strategic consulting firm for physical and IT security.

Check Point’s Burton, however, said that while it is not the first to sell wireless security appliances, the company’s devices, unlike others, offer customers the ability to manage and set policy for thousands of devices from one central location.

The VPN-1 Edge W series will come in four different configurations. It has a starting price of $799 (£426) per eight concurrent users, rising to $2,199 for unlimited concurrent users.

http://news.zdnet.co.uk/communications/0,39020336,39194553,00.htm

Read more

Posts navigation

  • Previous
  • 1
  • …
  • 305
  • 306
  • 307
  • 308
  • 309
  • 310
  • 311
  • …
  • 421
  • 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