Showing posts with label Web Security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Web Security. Show all posts

Sunday, March 21, 2010

A Caravanaseri at the Crossroads of Alternate Futures: A Report on the CyLab Silicon Valley Briefing


A Caravanaseri at the Crossroads of Alternate Futures: A Report on the CyLab Silicon Valley Briefing

By Richard Power


As we hurtle forward into the 21st Century (a mere synonym for the Information Age), there is a profound challenge before us. Year by year, day by day, moment by moment, the importance of digital information and cyber systems increases in almost all aspects of human life; and likewise, the spectrum of related risks and threats deepens and broadens year by year, day by day.

Will we develop the 21st Century cyber security technologies and strategies required to cope with this runaway risk and threat matrix? Or will we continue to try and make do with 20th Century visions of cyber security and its digital thumb in the dike approach? Which of these alternate futures will we find ourselves in at the end of the second decade of the 21st Century?

Recently, an impressive gathering was held at the Carnegie Mellon Silicon Valley Campus in NASA Research Park. The presenters were all CyLab researchers. The other participants consisted of CEOs, VPs, CTOs, CSOs and leading technologists from a range of companies from Cisco and Microsoft to WhiteHat Security and iSEC, along with regional representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigations and the U.S. Secret Service, as well as Board of Directors members from the local chapters of Information Systems Security Association (ISSA) and the American Society for Industrial Security (ASIS). The ultimate aim of the gathering was to push for the better of those two possible futures.

Attendance was RSVP, and by my personal invitation; there was no advertising for this event, no marketing, no hype. It was limited to 50 people, and the attendees were selected to provide a cross-section of concerns, knowledge, influence and experience. If you have been in cyber security for any length of time, you know there are many circles, there is the law enforcement circle, the security professional circle, the technical expert circle, the technology vendors circle, etc. It is at the points where these circles intersect that the most vital work is done. At the CyLab Silicon Valley Briefing, all of these circles intersected, and the dialogue that ensured was rich and rewarding.

Jeremiah Grossman, Founder and CTO of WhiteHat Security: "The speakers were highly informative and very qualified. Definitely good data to be had and I'm happy to we attended. I personally learned several things. Even the audience was well qualified, which is not something ones tends to find at smaller events."

Leslie Lambert, former CSO of Sun Microsystems: "The dialogue with the attendees was rich, as well. The event was very valuable and has the opportunity to increase the interactions between industry folks, government folks, and CMU folks. Good use of my time."

The theme of the event was "Harnessing the Future to Secure the Present," and the agenda highlighted four of CyLab's research thrusts: Trustworthy Computing Platforms and Devices, Software Security, Privacy Protection and Mobility. (Driven by over fifty faculty researchers, working with over one hundred graduate students, CyLab's program, is organized around seven research thrusts and seven additional, cross-cutting thrusts.)


Adrian Perrig, CyLab Technical Director spoke on "Building Secure Applications with Attestation."

"The problem I am going to address is how do we trust the computer we are currently using? How do I really know, as a human user? The goal is that we want to provide the user with strong security properties, such as execution integrity, data secrecy and authenticity.

"Virgil Gligor, CyLab Director, has coined the phrase Cyber-Secure Moments (© Virgil Gligor). So when you connect to your bank account, you want to have a Cyber-Secure Moment, you want to make sure that you have connected to the correct bank, that there is no man in the middle attack, no malware on your local system, stealing your credentials.

"You will also want to make sure that there are no transaction generators, that is one of the most recent attacks; malware is on your system, it waits for you to log-in to your bank account, and as soon as you are logged in, it conducts transactions with your secure login. How can you make sure that no one these malicious activities are happening? So how can you live these Cyber-Secure Moments?

"But you also want to be compatible with existing systems ... we can't easily change all the hardware or change all the operating systems ... We also want efficient execution. There are some solutions, which people have proposed that would slow down your system ten-fold, but obviously we want performance.

"So ideally in the presence of malware, we can still perform secure operations ..."

Perrig went on to explore Attestation, a promising approach for building secure systems, based on the recent development of a Trusted Platform Module (TPM) by the Trusted Computing Group (TCG). In particular, Perrig highlighted four related CyLab projects Flicker, XTREC, Sec Visor and Lockdown, and demonstrated the roles each can play in creating those precious Secure Cyber Moments.

CyLab researcher Alessandro Acquisti (who rocked the world last year with his revelations on predicting Social Security Numbers) spoke on "The Economics (and Behavioral Economics) of Privacy." In his talk, Acquisti outlined evolution of the economics of privacy, and highlighted some experiments in investigating privacy valuations and decision making through the lenses of behavioral economics.

"Contrary to the assumption in much social science that people have stable, coherent preferences with respect to personal privacy, we find that privacy valuations and concerns are highly sensitive to contextual and non-normative factors, and even internally inconsistent. This research raises questions about whether individuals are able to navigate in a self-interested fashion increasingly complex issues of privacy, as well as information security."

CyLab researcher David Brumley spoke on "Safe Software and Systems."

"A major focus of my research is developing techniques for protecting vulnerable applications when the program is only readily available as binary (i.e., executable) code. Since most programs are available in binary form, and binary-only analysis does not require cooperation of the source code vendor, this line of research is likely to impact a wide audience."

Brumley described two new security applications of binary code analysis: "automatic patch-based exploit generation, demonstrating how binary analysis can be used to automatically generate exploits based upon patches released from Windows Update, allowing attackers to create new exploits before all vulnerable hosts can receive a patch, and automatic input filter generation, which offers a way to defend against exploits by automatically generating input filters."

After a delicious Middle Eastern buffet luncheon, which was a abuzz with dialogue spinning of the morning's presentations, there were three more sessions.

Martin Griss, Director of the Silicon Valley Campus and the CyLab Mobility Research Center (MRC) spoke on "Creating a Truly Mobile Companion."

Griss' research is focused on the vision of a mobile device, with an integrated suite of applications on the device and services in the cloud and on telecom infrastructure.

"It must be context-aware. It must understand where I am, and what I am doing. It must be adaptable and able to learn, so that I do not have to repeat the same things over and over again. Machine-learning ...

"It should be pro-active; it should do thing for me, but it shouldn't constantly do things for me or to me; so it should be considerate. So we are trying to define what it is to be a proactive but considerate system. There is this balancing act between too helpful and not helpful enough.

"It must be secure and private, of course. Because as people use it for more and more things, and as you carry it more and more of the time, it knows more and more about you.

"It must be social; it must interact well with me and others as well as with other devices and with the social networks. It should be a device that recommends, reminds and advises. The obvious example is having turn by turn driving instructions on your phone, but we can do much more than that.

"And it should act for me, when needed. So, in extreme cases, I tell it to do something, and then I go off and do something else, while the phone, or the phone and the services are doing things for me, it will negotiate in the background. So when I would like to make a meeting, I would rather not go poking around on my calendar, I could just tell it 'meeting with my friends,' and at some point later it would say, 'meeting with your friends.'"


CyLab researcher Collin Jackson spoke on "Securing the Web Platform."

He outlined his work on Browserscope, an ongoing collaboration with browser vendors to improve browser encryption, defend against the most common web application vulnerabilities, and develop building blocks for securing third-party advertisements and applications; Browserscope has been deployed in many of the world's most popular browsers, including Firefox, Google Chrome, and Safari.

Patrick Tague spoke on "Guaranteeing Availability and Reliability in Mobile Wireless
Networks
." He delivered an overview of issues related to availability and reliability of service in mobile wireless networks, and presented a variety of vulnerabilities and attacks of interest at the network layer and below, including interference and jamming by external adversaries and data- and control-plane routing attacks by internal adversaries."

Perrig and Brumley flew in from Pittsburgh, PA. where the main campus of Carnegie Mellon University is located. Griss, Jackson and Tague are based at the Silicon Valley Campus. Underscoring the bi-coastal nature of Carnegie Mellon's program, Acquisti spoke via video conference from the Pittsburgh campus.

As the host of the event, I was delighted that the level of engagement between the presenters and the attendees was so genuine that I had to cut-off the Q and A at the end of every session to keep on the event on track.

Indeed, "Harnessing the Future to Secure the Past: A CyLab Silicon Valleuy Briefing" was a compelling re-affirmation of academic research's vital role in helping us choose the better of the alternate futures that stretch out before us, i.e., the one that demands 21st Century responses to 21st Century challenges.

Tuesday, February 23, 2010

Cyber Shock, Virtualization, Cloud Computing & the State of the Web -- Not for the Faint of Heart ...


Partial map of the Internet based on the January 15, 2005 data found on opte.org. Each line is drawn between two nodes, representing two IP addresses. The length of the lines are indicative of the delay between those two nodes. This graph represents less than 30% of the Class C networks reachable by the data collection program in early 2005. Lines are color-coded according to their corresponding RFC 1918 allocation as follows:
* Dark blue: net, ca, us
* Green: com, org
* Red: mil, gov, edu
* Yellow: jp, cn, tw, au, de
* Magenta: uk, it, pl, fr
* Gold: br, kr, nl
* White: unknown

Matt Britt, Internet Map, 12-1-2005

Cyber Shock, Virtualization, Cloud Computing & the State of the Web -- Not for the Faint of Heart ...

Richard Power


Three stories have intrigued me over the past few days, and I will share them with you here. Woven together they deliver a message that needs to be heard (over and over again apparently). And that message? From the corridors of the highest power, through IT networks across the planet, down to each and every end user -- there is a tremendous amount of yet as yet undone, and much of it is attitudinal and cultural.

Cyber Shock

First, there is the Cyber Shock story.

Event: A massive cyber attack has turned the cellphones and computers of tens of millions of Americans into weapons to shut down the Internet. A cascading series of events then knocks out power for most of the East Coast amid hurricanes and a heat wave.
Is the assault on cellphones an armed attack? In a crisis, what power does the government have to order phone and Internet carriers to allow monitoring of their networks? What level of privacy can Americans expect?
A war game, sponsored by a nonprofit group and attended by former top-ranking national security officials, laid bare Tuesday that the U.S. government lacks answers to such key questions.
Half an hour into an emergency meeting of a mock National Security Council, the attorney general declared: "We don't have the authority in this nation as a government to quarantine people's cellphones."
The White House cyber coordinator was "shocked" and asserted: "If we don't have the authority, the attorney general ought to find it."
Ellen Nakashima, War game reveals U.S. lacks cyber-crisis skills, Washington Post, 2-17-10

If you google Cyber Shock, you will find hundreds of news items, and blog posts, about it.

When I heard it, I started hearing the theme music from the hilarious filmGroundhog Day, starring Bill Murray and co-written and directed by Harold Ramis again.

Do you remember The Day After (1996)? Do you remember Eligible Receiver (1997)? There have been many other such cyber war games over the past 15 years. I have been involved in a few, and studied the results of many.

So when I read the WashPo's headline,"War game reveals U.S. lacks cyber-crisis skills," I tweeted, "Shouldn't this read STILL lacks?"

As a reality check, I asked a few friends and colleagues who have been at and beyond the front-line for all the years of this long struggle. I received three responses. None thought it was anything new, of course. One dismissed it as a "bad joke." One said hopefully it would "embarrass" some officials on high to "addressing the issue" at long last. One said that it never hurts to try to get the attention of people who are just tuning in."

From my perspective, I encourage and commend such exercises, but I think everyone would learn more if we framed them in proper historical context, and I certainly would have hoped that we would be much farther along, here at the start of the second decade of the 21st Century, than discovering that we STILL LACK cyber crisis skills.

As it quite often, the press (both mainstream and IT) missed the real story.

Head in the Clouds

Meanwhile, two new studies perked my interest, and not surprisingly they also reinforce the sense that we are spinning our wheels in the the digital Thunderdome.

The first of them was conducted for Symantec by Applied Research. It queried "2,100 top IT and security managers in 27 countries."

Is moving to virtualization and cloud computing making network security easier or harder? The "2010 State of Enterprise Security Survey - Global Data" report shows that about one-third believe virtualization and cloud computing make security "harder," while one-third said it was "more or less the same," and the remainder said it was "easier." The telephone survey was done by Applied Research last month on behalf of Symantec, and it covered 120 questions about technology use -- organizations remain overwhelmingly Microsoft Windows-based -- and cyberattacks on organizations. Ellen Messmer, Security of Virtualization, Cloud Computing Divides IT and Security, Network World, 2-22-10

Harder? About the same? Easier? Well, of course, the most insightful answer would be "All of the Above." (There are numerous security concerns, not the least of which is that we still do not know most of them.) But I doubt the "All of the Above" was available option to the respondents.

Certainly, it should be of concern to us all that most of these "top IT and security managers" are under the impression that virtualization and cloud computing have either made the challenge of cyber security easier to deal with or had no impact on it at all. This data point suggests that a majority of "top IT and security managers" don't really understand security in any depth.

Leading SaaS Vendor Offers Evidence of Enterprise Exposure

The second study is hot of the digital press.

Zscaler Lab's State of the Web - Q4 2009, A View of the Web from an End User's Perspective." Zscaler is a Security-as-a-Service (SaaS) vendor, so its "network of web gateways continually inspects traffic for millions of end users around the globe."

"With the emergence of Advanced Persistent Threats (APT) as evidenced with the Operation Aurora attacks, it is obvious that large enterprise are vulnerable to such targeted attacks that exploit employee behavior," the Zscaler study concludes; and furthermore, it also offers corroboration that "vulnerable desktops and browsers are extremely common in corporate environment making them easier targets than previously believed."

It is an interesting report, with lots of data points to ponder, but two in particular jumped out at me.

First, Internet Explorer continues to dominate among browsers, with over 70% of market share, while Firefox Mozilla its nearest competitor, with only 15% of market share in December 2009. I was not surprised that IE still held sway, but I was surprised that the margin was so significant. But what is even more striking to me was that 48% were still using 6.0, while only 46% had moved on to 7.0, and only 5% have moved on to 8.0. Yes, although 6.0 is still being updated by Microsoft, it lacks several important security features available in later releases. We are talking about IE here? How can this be so?

Another intriguing tidbit, concerning "Top Ten Malware IP Addresses," was that "more and more," Zscaler reports seeing "otherwise legitimate sites hosting malware without being aware of it."

I asked Mike Geide, a senior security researcher for Zscaler, for some insight into the study's findings.

CyBlog: On pg. 17 and pg. 18, you share some numbers on browsers that were eye opening to me, specifically breakdowns of market share and IE versions. I expected to see IE still holding the lion's share, but I confess I was surprised to see by it to be dominating by such a wide margin. Why? Is this a failure on corporate network managers to push upgrades out, or insist on them, or are the 6.x number inflated by home use (of course, either way it represents an unnecessary risk)?

Mike Geide: In short, yes this a failure of corporate network managers. This could be because corporate managers are unfamiliar with the security risks of IE 6 / benefits of IE 8. Because MS is still supporting / releasing patches for IE 6, managers may feel that they are sufficiently secure because their IE 6 is patched. Additionally, while IE 8 is pushed as a High-Priority update from Automatic Updates, it will not automatically install on machines. Users must opt-in to install IE 8 or organizations may deploy via SMS / WSUS. (Ref: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2009/04/10/prepare-for-automatic-update-distribution-of-ie8.aspx)

What could corporate IT security people be doing to improve on these numbers?

Mike Geide: Corporate IT should have a centralized method for managing software and patch installation. It is not enough to just patch the underlying OS, web browsers and other client software (e.g., Adobe Acrobat, MS Office, etc.) need to be included in this management.

CyBlog: Is there anything that Microsoft could be doing (or not doing) that could help these numbers?

Mike Geide: If Microsoft announced an end-of-life for IE 6, this may force organizations to conduct an audit of their systems and upgrade to IE 8. However, from MS's point-of-view they may feel that there is still too much of a user base to end-of-life the product, and should continue to maintain/provide patches for any newly discovered vulnerabilities that would impact this user base. The responsibility is really on the corporations and end users to sufficiently patch and upgrade.

CyBlog: On pg. 22, you talk about Top 10 Malware IP Addresses, and note that "more and more legitimate sites are hosting malware without being aware of it." I see you have listed the IP addresses, could you share some more information here? Of the Top 10, how many are "legitimate sites," and could you characterize them in any way? Types of businesses, types of applications, types of traffic?

Mike Geide: For this report we did not specifically break out stats for "legitimate sites" versus "illegitimate sites" for malware- perhaps we will do this for the next report. I would need to pull the logs to properly answer this question, however based on Google results, the majority of the top 10 appeared to be illegitimate sites identified in other resources (e.g., ThreatExpert).

CyBlog: Of the Top 10, how do you define this?

Mike Geide: I would define an illegitimate site as a site that is setup by the attacker explicitly for malicious purposes. Whereas a malicious legitimate site provides or had provided benign content, but has been compromised and is serving some malicious content (e.g., embedded malicious iframe or JS drive-by-download).

CyBlog:Is there any accountability for either "legitimate sites" or "illegitimate sites" that show up in such a ranking?

Mike Geide: Depends. Some hosting providers will terminate legitimate site accounts if they are repeatedly compromised, while other hosting companies care very little about malicious content being hosting. Depending on the severity of the incident and jurisdiction, law enforcement (LE) could enforce accountability- but LE resources do not scale to the Internet. In short, the Internet doesn't have an overall policing body to ensure accountability. If a site continues to be an offending site, block it from being visited. If the site provides a legitimate service they will either fix their security problem or go out of business.

CyBlog: What are key measures that "legitimate sites" should be taking to avoid ending up as a part of the problem instead of being part of the solution?

Mike Geide: Legitimate sites are frequently leveraged to host malicious content through vulnerabilities in 3rd party web applications (e.g., Wordpress, Joomla, etc.). The most common vulnerabilities in these and other web applications are SQL Injection and Cross Site Scripting (XSS). Legitimate sites should only install 3rd party web applications that they absolutely need, and then follow the patch cycle of the application to ensure that known vulnerabilities are fixed.