Securosis

Menu

Research

Top Five Steps to Prevent Data Loss and Information Leaks

Rich November 1, 2006 No Comments

One of the great things about the Internet is that it allows isolated assholes to connect and communicate like never before. Thus Rothman and I, mere professional acquaintances and friendly faces at a few industry events, can engage in deeper dialog, dragging any of our loyal readers down with us. (Mike and I are the assholes, not you guys. Except maybe for Will). I like it when smart guys like Mike push me, it makes for better analysis. I published a little on data security a few weeks ago, and Mike calls for a simpler approach. I thought about it a lot, and it gave me a great idea for a new way to position data security within the data life cycle. The bad news is I’ll be publishing it through Gartner, since that’s sort of what pays the bills. It’s also why I can’t completely expand on what little I wrote here on Securosis, that would be a conflict of interest. The good news is that occasionally Gartner releases some of our research free to the public. Below I’ve pasted the complete text of a press release issued by Gartner a few months ago. It’s based directly on a research note I authored, one of the more popular security notes, that any of you with Gartner seats can go take a look at. It’s not often I can release research, but since this is now public material I should be safe. I’m reprinting the entire press release just to be safe. Here ya go Mike. Not quite as simple as you asked for, but much more direct than the hierarchy- Top five steps to limit data loss and information leaks: Gartner Public exposure of private data is becoming a regular occurrence, but the majority of these incidents can be prevented if companies implement the proper security best practices, according to Gartner. Gartner analysts have identified the top five steps to prevent data loss and information leaks: 1. Deploy Content Monitoring and Filtering (CMF) A CMF solution monitors all outbound network traffic and generates alerts regarding (or sometimes blocks) activity based on inspecting the data in network sessions. CMF tools monitor common channels, including e-mail, IM, FTP, HTTP and Web mail (interpreting the HTTP for specific Web mail services) and look for policy violations based on a variety of techniques. “CMF tools are best at detecting and reducing information loss from accidents, such as e-mailing the wrong file to the wrong person, or bad business process, such as exchanging HR data over an unencrypted FTP connection,” says Rich Mogull, research vice president for Gartner. “CMF won’t stop all malicious activity and can be circumvented by a knowledgeable attacker. Still, most information leaks are the result of these accidents or bad processes, and CMF is evolving rapidly to address more malicious attacks.” 2. Encrypt Backup Tapes and (Possibly) Mass Storage Gartner analysts highly doubt that many of the reported lost backup tapes containing consumer records eventually result in fraud. However, because there is no way to know for sure, companies have to assume exposure anyway. Encryption can ensure that the data will still be safe. “During the past few years, tools have emerged that significantly improve the performance, manageability and simplicity of encryption,” says Mr. Mogull. “For large tape installations, we recommend in-line encryption appliances. For tape drives connected to local systems or servers, companies may want to consider software encryption. Older mainframes may need an in-line appliance with an adapter for mainframe protocols, while new software solutions can take advantage of extra processors or cryptographic coprocessors in more current models.” 3. Secure Workstations, Restrict Home Computers and Lock Portable Storage Workstations and laptops can be a major source of loss, especially when a poorly configured or out-of-date enterprise or home computer is compromised by a virus or worm, and by losing portable storage media, such as a Universal Serial Bus (USB) drive or CD-ROM. “There’s really no excuse for not keeping an enterprise system up-to-date with the latest patches, a personal firewall, antivirus and anti-spyware software,” states Mr. Mogull. “These precautions alone will prevent the vast majority of commonly encountered Internet attacks.” 4. Encrypt Laptops If organizations give employees portable computers, employees will store sensitive data on it. Policies don’t matter: Users will always use the tools they acquire, and sensitive data will always end up in unexpected places. “There is only one tool to protect sensitive information on a lost laptop: encryption, preferably whole-drive encryption from a third-party vendor,” Mr. Mogull says. “Whole-driven encryption, as opposed to file and folder encryption, involves very little user action, protects all data on the computer, and is not vulnerable to the same kinds of recovery techniques that skirt the protections of passwords or other controls.” 5. Deploy Database Activity Monitoring. Most organizations struggle to secure existing databases that are rarely designed with effective security controls. While companies eventually need to encrypt some of the data in their databases, database activity monitoring is a powerful security control that”s easier to implement and more viable than encryption for many types of data. “Database activity monitoring tools observe all activity within a database, record this activity in a secure repository and generate instant alerts for unusual activity,” explains Mr. Mogull. “Through detection of unusual behaviour, database activity monitoring can limit insider misuse of database systems, enforce separation of duties for database administrators and limit certain external attacks, all without affecting database performance.” Additional issues related to the state of the security industry will be presented at the Gartner IT Security Summit, September 18-19, at the Royal Lancaster Hotel in London. www.europe.gartner.com/security Share:

Share:
Read Post

Month of Kernel Bugs Starts With Apple: November Should be Fun

Rich November 1, 2006 3 Comments

The first flaw isn’t all that interesting (affecting older PowerBooks, and only under certain conditions) but methinks November will be pretty darn interesting: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=359 http://kernelfun.blogspot.com/ http://www.securityfocus.com/brief/344 http://blog.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2006/11/exploit_released_for_unpatched_1.html http://www.mckeay.net/secure/2006/11/a_month_of_kernel_bugs.html More later, but the nasty ones to watch out for will, I expect, generally be either for wireless drivers (like this one), or file systems (and make nasty USB keys with). Remember, these all run in ring 0 and can do pretty much whatever they want. For the record, I really don’t like full disclosure of 0 days like this, but I suppose it will draw needed attention to a nasty issue. I’d prefer to see it handled more responsibly than dumping code on the Internet. (Updated 9/2: I was reminded that deauthenticating a mac using something like Void11 or KisMac can cause the vulnerable condition). Share:

Share:
Read Post
dinosaur-sidebar

Research

view all

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Totally Transparent Research is the embodiment of how we work at Securosis. It’s our core operating philosophy, our research policy, and a specific process. We initially developed it to help maintain objectivity while producing licensed research, but its benefits extend to all aspects of our business.

Going beyond Open Source Research, and a far cry from the traditional syndicated research model, we think it’s the best way to produce independent, objective, quality research.

Here’s how it works:

  • Content is developed ‘live’ on the blog. Primary research is generally released in pieces, as a series of posts, so we can digest and integrate feedback, making the end results much stronger than traditional “ivory tower” research.
  • Comments are enabled for posts. All comments are kept except for spam, personal insults of a clearly inflammatory nature, and completely off-topic content that distracts from the discussion. We welcome comments critical of the work, even if somewhat insulting to the authors. Really.
  • Anyone can comment, and no registration is required. Vendors or consultants with a relevant product or offering must properly identify themselves. While their comments won’t be deleted, the writer/moderator will “call out”, identify, and possibly ridicule vendors who fail to do so.
  • Vendors considering licensing the content are welcome to provide feedback, but it must be posted in the comments - just like everyone else. There is no back channel influence on the research findings or posts.
    Analysts must reply to comments and defend the research position, or agree to modify the content.
  • At the end of the post series, the analyst compiles the posts into a paper, presentation, or other delivery vehicle. Public comments/input factors into the research, where appropriate.
  • If the research is distributed as a paper, significant commenters/contributors are acknowledged in the opening of the report. If they did not post their real names, handles used for comments are listed. Commenters do not retain any rights to the report, but their contributions will be recognized.
  • All primary research will be released under a Creative Commons license. The current license is Non-Commercial, Attribution. The analyst, at their discretion, may add a Derivative Works or Share Alike condition.
  • Securosis primary research does not discuss specific vendors or specific products/offerings, unless used to provide context, contrast or to make a point (which is very very rare).
    Although quotes from published primary research (and published primary research only) may be used in press releases, said quotes may never mention a specific vendor, even if the vendor is mentioned in the source report. Securosis must approve any quote to appear in any vendor marketing collateral.
  • Final primary research will be posted on the blog with open comments.
  • Research will be updated periodically to reflect market realities, based on the discretion of the primary analyst. Updated research will be dated and given a version number.
    For research that cannot be developed using this model, such as complex principles or models that are unsuited for a series of blog posts, the content will be chunked up and posted at or before release of the paper to solicit public feedback, and provide an open venue for comments and criticisms.
  • In rare cases Securosis may write papers outside of the primary research agenda, but only if the end result can be non-biased and valuable to the user community to supplement industry-wide efforts or advances. A “Radically Transparent Research” process will be followed in developing these papers, where absolutely all materials are public at all stages of development, including communications (email, call notes).
    Only the free primary research released on our site can be licensed. We will not accept licensing fees on research we charge users to access.
  • All licensed research will be clearly labeled with the licensees. No licensed research will be released without indicating the sources of licensing fees. Again, there will be no back channel influence. We’re open and transparent about our revenue sources.

In essence, we develop all of our research out in the open, and not only seek public comments, but keep those comments indefinitely as a record of the research creation process. If you believe we are biased or not doing our homework, you can call us out on it and it will be there in the record. Our philosophy involves cracking open the research process, and using our readers to eliminate bias and enhance the quality of the work.

On the back end, here’s how we handle this approach with licensees:

  • Licensees may propose paper topics. The topic may be accepted if it is consistent with the Securosis research agenda and goals, but only if it can be covered without bias and will be valuable to the end user community.
  • Analysts produce research according to their own research agendas, and may offer licensing under the same objectivity requirements.
  • The potential licensee will be provided an outline of our research positions and the potential research product so they can determine if it is likely to meet their objectives.
  • Once the licensee agrees, development of the primary research content begins, following the Totally Transparent Research process as outlined above. At this point, there is no money exchanged.
  • Upon completion of the paper, the licensee will receive a release candidate to determine whether the final result still meets their needs.
  • If the content does not meet their needs, the licensee is not required to pay, and the research will be released without licensing or with alternate licensees.
  • Licensees may host and reuse the content for the length of the license (typically one year). This includes placing the content behind a registration process, posting on white paper networks, or translation into other languages. The research will always be hosted at Securosis for free without registration.

Here is the language we currently place in our research project agreements:

“Content will be created independently of LICENSEE with no obligations for payment. Once content is complete, LICENSEE will have a 3 day review period to determine if the content meets corporate objectives. If the content is unsuitable, LICENSEE will not be obligated for any payment and Securosis is free to distribute the whitepaper without branding or with alternate licensees, and will not complete any associated webcasts for the declining LICENSEE. Content licensing, webcasts and payment are contingent on the content being acceptable to LICENSEE. This maintains objectivity while limiting the risk to LICENSEE. Securosis maintains all rights to the content and to include Securosis branding in addition to any licensee branding.”

Even this process itself is open to criticism. If you have questions or comments, you can email us or comment on the blog.