Securosis

Research

Making Browsers Hard Targets

Check out this great secure browser guide from the folks at Stach and Liu. The blog post is OK, but the PDF guide is comprehensive and awesome. Here is the intro: Sometimes conventional wisdom lets us down. Recently some big names have been in the headlines: Apple, Facebook, Microsoft. They all got owned, and they got owned in similar ways: Specially-crafted malware was targeted at employee computers, not servers. The malware was injected via a browser, most often using malicious Java applets. The Java applets exploited previously unknown “0day” vulnerabilities in the Java VM. The Internet browser was the vector of choice in all cases. And an even better summary of what it tells us: Patching doesn’t help: It goes without saying that there are no security patches for 0day. Anti-virus won’t work: It was custom malware. There are no AV signatures. No attachments to open: Attacks are triggered by simply visiting a web page. No shady websites required: Attacks are launched from “trust-ed” advertising networks embedded within the websites you visit. And the kill shot: “We need to lock down our browsers.” Just in case you figured using Chrome on a Mac made you safe… The PDF guide goes through a very detailed approach to reducing your attack surface, sandboxing your browser and other critical apps, and changing your browser habits. Funny enough, they demonstrate locking down the Mac Gatekeeper functionality to limit the apps that can be installed on your device. And the software they suggest is Little Snitch, an awesome outbound firewall product I use religiously. They didn’t mention that as another means to secure your browser but I get some piece of mind from using single-purpose apps (built with Fluid) for sensitive sites, and locking down the outbound traffic allowed to each app with Little Snitch. This level of diligence isn’t for everyone. But if you want to be secure against the kinds of attacks we see targeted at browsers, which don’t require any user activity to run, you’ll do it. Photo credit: “Target” originally uploaded by Chris Murphy Share:

Share:
Read Post

Quick Wins with Website Protection Services: Protecting the Website

In the introductory post in the Quick Wins with Website Protection Services series, we described the key attack vectors that usually result in pwnage of your site and possibly data theft, or an availability issue with your site falling down and not being able to get back up. Since this series is all about Quick Wins, we aren’t going to belabor the build-up, rather let’s jump right in and talk about how to address these issues. Application Defense As we mentioned in the Managing WAF paper, it’s not easy to keep a WAF operating effectively, which involves lots of patching and rule updates based on new attacks and tuning the rules to your specific application. Doing nothing isn’t an option, given the fact that attackers use your site as the path of least resistance to gain a foothold in your environment. One of the advantages of front-ending your website with a website protection service (WPS) is to take advantage of a capability we’ll call WAF Lite. Now WAF Lite is first and foremost — simple. You don’t want to spend a lot of time configuring or tuning the application defense. The key to getting a Quick Win is to minimize required customization, while providing adequate coverage against the most likely attacks. You want it to just work and block the stuff that’s pretty obviously an attack. You know, stuff like XSS, SQLi, and the other stuff that makes the OWASP Top 10 list. These are pretty standard attack types and it’s not brain surgery to build rules to block them. It’s amazing that everyone doesn’t have this kind of simple defense implemented. Out of one side of our mouths we talk about the need for simplicity. But we also need the ability to customize and/or tune the rules when you need to, which shouldn’t be that often. It’s kind of like having a basic tab, which gives you a few check boxes to configure and needs to be within the capabilities of the unsophisticated admin. That’s what you should be using most of the time. But when you need it, or when you enlist expert help, you’d like to have an advanced tab to give you lots of knobs and granular controls. Although a WPS can be very effective against technical attacks, these services are not going to do anything to protect against a logic error on the part of your application. If your application or search engine or shopping cart can be gamed using legitimate application functions, no security service (or dedicated WAF, for that matter) can do anything about that. So parking your sites behind a WPS doesn’t mean you don’t have to do QA testing and have smart penetration tester types trying to expose potential exploits. OK, we’ll end the disclaimer there. We’re talking about service offerings in this series, but that doesn’t mean you can’t accomplish all of these goals using on-premise equipment and managing the devices yourself. In fact, that’s how stuff got done before the fancy cloud-everything mentality started to permeate through the technology world. But given the fact that we’re trying to do things quickly, a service gives you the opportunity to deploy within hours and not require significant burn-in and tuning to bring the capabilities online. Platform Defense Despite the application layer being the primary target for attacks on your website (since it’s the lowest hanging fruit for attackers) that doesn’t mean you don’t have to pay attention to attacks on your technology stack. We delved a bit into some of the application denial of service (DoS) attacks targeting the building blocks of your application, like Apache Killer and Slowloris. A WPS can help deal with this class of attacks by implementing rate controls on the requests hitting your site, amongst other application defenses. Given that search engines never forget and some data you don’t want in the great Googly-moogly index, it pays to control the pages available for crawling by the search bots. You can configure this using a robots.txt file, but not every search engine plays nice. And some will jump right to the disallowed sections, since that’s where the good stuff is, right? Being able to block automated requests and other search bots via the WPS can keep these pages off the search engines. You’ll also want to restrict access to unauthorized areas of your site (and not just from the search engines discussed above). This could be pages like the control panel, sensitive non-public pages, or your staging environment where you test feature upgrades and new designs. Unauthorized pages could also be back doors left by attackers to facilitate getting back into your environment. You also want to be able to block nuisance traffic, like comment spammers and email harvesters. These folks don’t cause a lot of damage, but are a pain in the rear and if you can get rid of them without any incremental effort, it’s all good. A WPS can lock down not only where a visitor goes, but also where they come from. For some of those sensitive pages you may want to enforce those pages can only be accessed by someone on the corporate network (either directly or virtually via a VPN). So the WPS can block access to those pages unless the originating IP is on the authorized list. Yes, this (and most other controls) can be spoofed and gamed, but it’s really about reducing your attack surface. Availability Defense We can forget about keeping the site up and taking requests, and a WPS can help with this function in a number of ways. First of all, a WPS provider has bigger pipes than you. In most cases, a lot bigger that gives them the ability absorb a DDoS without disruption or even impacting performance. You can’t say the same. Of course, be wary of bandwidth based pricing, since a volumetric attack won’t just hammer your site, but also your wallet. At some point, if the WPS provider has enough customers you can pretty much guarantee at least one of their

Share:
Read Post

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.