Securosis

Research

Endpoint Security Management Buyer’s Guide: Periodic Controls

As we discussed in the Endpoint Security Management Lifecycle, there are controls you use periodically and controls you need to run on an ongoing basis. This post will dig into the periodic controls, including patch and configuration management. Patch Management When Microsoft got religion about the security issues in Windows XP about a decade ago, they started a wide-ranging process called Trustworthy Computing to restore confidence in the integrity of the Windows operating system. That initiative included a monthly patch cycle to fix software defects that could cause security issues. Patch Tuesday was born, and almost every company in the world has since had to patch every month. Over the past decade, many software companies have instituted similar patch processes across many different applications and other operating systems. None are as regimented or predictable as Microsoft’s, and some have tried to move to a silent install process, where no effort is required of the customer organization. But most security and operations personnel don’t feel comfortable without control over what gets installed and when. So organizations needed to look beyond tactical software updates, considering patching as an operational discipline. Once a patch is issued each organization needs to assess it, figure out which devices need to be patched, and ultimately install the patch within the window specified by policy – typically a few days. Let’s dig a bit deeper. Patching Process Patching is an operational discipline, so an organization’s patching process must first be defined and then automated appropriately. Securosis documented a patch process in Patch Management Quant and if you are looking for an over-arching process for all your patching we recommend you start there. You can see the process map is detailed and granular – just use the parts that make sense in your environment. Let’s hit the high points of the process here: Define targets: Before you even jump into the Patch Management process you need to define what devices will be included. Is it just the endpoints or do you also need to patch servers? These days you also need to think about cloud instances. The technology is largely the same, but increased numbers of devices have made execution more challenging. In this series we largely restrict discussion to endpoints, as server operations are different and more complicated. Obtain patches: You need to monitor for the release of relevant patches, and then figure out whether you need to patch or you can work around the issue. Prepare to patch: Once the patch is obtained you need to figure out how critical fixing the issue is. Is it something you need to do right now? Can it wait for the next maintenance window? Once priority is established, give the patch a final Q/A check to ensure it won’t break anything important. Deploy the patch: Once preparation is done and your window has arrived you can install. Confirm the patch: Patches don’t help unless the install is successful, so confirm that each patch was fully installed. Reporting: In light of compliance requirements for timely patching, reporting on patching is also an integral function. Technology Considerations The good news about transforming a function from a security problem to an operational discipline is that the tools (products and services) to automate operational disciplines are reasonably mature and work fairly well. Let’s go over a few important technology considerations: Coverage (OS and apps): Obviously your patch management offering needs to support your operating systems and applications. Make sure you fully understand your tool’s value – what distinguishes it from the low-end operating system-centric tools such as Microsoft’s WSUS. Discovery: You can’t patch what you don’t know about, so you must ensure you have a way to identify new devices and get rid of deprecated devices – otherwise the process will fail. You can achieve this with a built-in discovery capability, bidirectional integration with asset management and inventory software, or (more likely) both. Library of patches: Another facet of coverage is accuracy and support of the operating systems and applications above. Just because something is ‘supported’ on a vendor’s data sheet doesn’t mean they support it well. So make sure to test the vendor’s patch library and check on the timeliness of their updates. How long does the vendor take to update their product after a patch is released? Deployment of patches and removal of software: This is self-explanatory. If patches don’t installed consistently or devices are negatively impacted by patches, that means more work for you. This can easily make the tool a net disadvantage. Agent vs. agentless: Does the patching vendor assess the device via an agent or do they perform an agentless scan (typically using a non-persistent or ‘disolvable’ agent), and then how to do they deploy patches? This borders on a religious dispute, but fortunately both models work. Patching is a periodic control, so either model is valid here. Remote devices: How does the patching process work for a remote device? This could be a field employee’s laptop or a device in a remote location with limited bandwidth. What kind of recovery features are built in to ensure the right patches get deployed regardless of location? And finally, can you be alerted when a device hasn’t updated within a configurable window – perhaps because it hasn’t connected? Deployment architecture: Some patches are hundreds of megabytes, so it is important to have some flexibility in patch distribution – especially for remote devices and locations. Architectures may include intermediate patch distribution points to minimize network bandwidth, and/or intelligent patch packaging to only install the appropriate patches to each device. Scheduling flexibility: Of course it’s essential that disruptive patching not impair productivity, so you should be able to schedule patches during off-hours or when machines are idle. There are many features and capabilities to consider and discuss with vendors. Later we will provide a handy list of key questions. Configuration Management As we described in the ESM Lifecycle post: Configuration Management provides the ability for an organization to define an authorized set

Share:
Read Post

Incite 8/8/2012: The Other 10 Months

It’s hard to believe, but the summer is over. Not the brutally hot weather – that’s still around and will be for a couple more months in the ATL. But for my kids, it’s over. We picked the girls up at camp over the weekend and made the trek back home. They settled in pretty nicely, much better than the Boy. All three kids just loved their time away. We didn’t force the girls cold turkey back into their typical daily routine – we indulged them a bit. We looked at pictures, learned about color war (which broke right after the girls left) and will check the camp Facebook page all week. But for the most part we have a week to get them ready for real life. School starts on Monday and it’s back to work. But while we think they are getting back into their life at home, they have really just started their countdown to camp in 2013. Basically, once we drove out of camp, they started the other 10 months of the year. Any of you who went to sleep-away camp as kids know exactly what I’m talking about. They are just biding the time until they get back to camp. It’s kind of weird, but as a kid that’s really how you think. At least I did. The minute I stepped on the bus to head home, I was thinking about the next time I’d be back in camp. Now it’s even easier to keep a link to their camp friends over the other 10 months. XX1 was very excited to follow her camp friends on Instagram. We’re making plans to attend the reunion this winter. The Boss has been working with some of the other parents to get the kids together when we visit MD over the holidays. And I shouldn’t forget Words with Friends. I figure they’ll be playing with their camp friends as well, and maybe even learning something! Back in the olden days, I actually had to call my camp friends. And badger my Mom to take me to the Turkey Bowl in Queens Thanksgiving weekend, which was my camp’s reunion. It wasn’t until I got a car that I really stayed in touch with camp friends. Now the kids have these magic devices that allow them to transcend distance and build relationships. For the Boss and me, these 10 months are when the real work gets done. But don’t tell them that. And we’re not just talking about school. Each year at camp all the kids did great with some stuff, and had other areas that need improvement. Besides schoolwork and activities, we will work with each child over the next 10 months to address those issues and strengthen the stuff they did well at camp. So they are primed and ready next June. Remember, camp is the precursor to living independently – first at college and later in the big leagues. They’ll screw things up, and we’ll work with them to avoid those mistakes next time. It’s hard to get young kids to understand the big picture. We try, but it’s a process. They need to make mistakes and those mistakes are OK. Mistakes teach lessons, and sometimes those lessons are hard. All we ask of them is to work hard. That they strive to become better people – which means accepting feedback, admitting shortcomings, and doing their best. Basically to learn constantly and consistently, which we hope will serve them well when they start playing for real. If we can get that message across over the next 10 months, we will have earned our 2 months of vacation. –Mike Photo credits: Countdown calendar originally uploaded by Peter Heavy Research We’re back at work on a variety of blog series, so here is a list of the research currently underway. Remember you can get our Heavy Feed via RSS, where you can get all our content in its unabridged glory. And you can get all our research papers too. Endpoint Security Management Buyer’s Guide The ESM Lifecycle The Business Impact of Managing Endpoints Pragmatic WAF Management The WAF Management Process New Series: Pragmatic WAF Management Incite 4 U It’s not over ‘til it’s over: Good luck to Rich Baich, who was recently named CISO of Wells Fargo. It’s a big job with lots of moving pieces and resources, and a huge amount at risk. He has his work cut out for him, but given his background he knows just how bad things can go. As Adam points out, Rich was CISO for ChoicePoint during their debacle, and some folks would have turned tail and found another area of technology to practice. That would have validated the clear myth that a breach = career death. But clearly that’s not true. As long as the lessons learned were impactful, executives living through experiences like that can end up the better for it. That’s why experienced CEOs keep getting jobs, even with Titanic-scale failures on their resumes. Investors and directors bet that an experienced CEO won’t make the same mistakes again. Sometimes they are right. As difficult as it is, you learn a hell of a lot more during a colossal failure than during a raging success. Take it from me – I learned that the hard way. – MR I’m with stoopid: It just friggin’ sad when someone says sensationalistic crap like How Apple and Amazon Security Flaws Led to My Epic Hacking. First because there was no ‘epic’ hacking. There was only epic stupidity, which produced epic fail. Apple and Google are only tangentially involved. The victim even stated a couple sentences in that “In many ways, this was all my fault.” You think? You daisy-chained your accounts together and they were all hacked. Of course you had cascading FAIL once the first account was breached. How about the author taking some real responsibility? If you want to help people understand the issue, how about titling the article “I’m with

Share:
Read Post
dinosaur-sidebar

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.