Securosis

Research

Endpoint Security Buyer’s Guide: Endpoint Hygiene and Reducing Attack Surface

As we mentioned in the last post, anti-malware tends to be the anchor in endpoint security control sets. Given the typical attacks that is justified, but too many organizations forget the importance of keeping devices up-to-date and configured securely. Even “advanced attackers” don’t like to burn 0-day attacks when they don’t need to. So leaving long-patched vulnerabilities exposed, or keeping unnecessary services active on endpoints, makes it easy for them to own your devices. The progression in almost every attack – regardless of the attacker’s sophistication – is to compromise a device, gain a foothold, and then systematically move towards the target. By ensuring proper hygiene on devices you can reduce attack surface; if attackers want to get in, make them work for it. When we say ‘hygiene’ we are referring to three main functions: patch management, configuration management, and device control. We will offer an overview of each function, and then discuss some technical considerations involved in the buying decision. For more detail on patch and configuration management, see Implementing and Managing Patch and Configuration Management. Patch Management Patch managers install fixes from software vendors to address vulnerabilities. The best known patching process is monthly, from Microsoft. On Patch Tuesday Microsoft issues a variety of software fixes to address defects, many of which could result in exploitation of their systems. Many other vendors have adopted similar approaches, with a periodic patch cycle and out-of-cycle patches for important issues – generally when an exploit shows up in the wild. Once a patch is issued your organization needs to assess it, figure out which devices need to be patched, and install it within the window specified by policy – typically a few days. A patch management product scans devices, installs patches, and reports on the success or failure of the process. Our Patch Management Quant research provides a very detailed view of the patching process, so check it out for more information. Patch Management Technology Considerations Coverage (OS and applications): Your patch management offering needs to support the operating systems and applications you need to keep current. Discovery: You cannot patch what you don’t know about, so you need 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 vulnerability management (for active and passive monitoring for new devices), asset management and inventory software, or more likely all of the above. Library of patches: Another facet of coverage is accuracy and support of the operating systems and applications you use. We talk about the big 7 vulnerable applications (browsers, Java, Adobe Reader, Word, Excel, PowerPoint, and Outlook) – ensure those targeted applications are covered. Keep in mind that the word ‘supported’ on a vendor’s data sheet doesn’t mean they support whatever it is well. Be sure to test the vendor’s patch library and check the timeliness of their updates. How long do they take to package and deploy patches to customers after a patch is released? Reliable deployment of patches: If patches don’t install consistently – including updating, adding, and/or removing software – that means more work for you. This can easily make a tool more trouble than it’s worth. Do they get it right the first time? Agent vs. agentless: Does the patch vendor assess devices with an agent, or do they perform ‘agentless’ scanning (typically using a non-persistent or ‘dissolvable’ agent), and if so how do they deploy patches? This is almost a religious dispute, but fortunately both models work. If the patch manager requires an agent it should be integrated with any other endpoint agents (anti-malware, device control, etc.) to minimize the number of agents per endpoint. Remote devices: How does the patching process work for remote and disconnected devices? This includes field employees’ laptops as well as devices in remote locations with limited bandwidth. What features are built in to ensure the right patches are deployed, regardless of location? Can you be alerted when a device hasn’t updated within a configurable window – perhaps because it hasn’t connected? Deployment architecture: Some patches gigabytes in size, so some flexibility in distribution is important – especially for remote devices and locations. Architectures may include intermediate patch distribution points to minimize network bandwidth, as well as intelligent packaging to install only the appropriate patches on each device. Scheduling flexibility: Of course disruptive patching must not impair productivity, so you should be able to schedule patches during off hours and when machines are idle. Value-add: As you consider a patch management tool make sure you fully understand its value-add – what distinguishes it from low-end and low-cost (free) operating-system-based tools such as Microsoft’s WSUS. Make sure the tool supports your process and provides the capabilities you need. Configuration Management Configuration management enable an organization to define an authorized set of configurations for devices. These configurations control applications installed, device settings, running services, and on-device security controls. This is important because unauthorized configuration changes might indicate malware manipulation or operational error, perhaps exploitable. Additionally, configuration management can help ease the provisioning burden of setting up and reimaging devices in cas of malware infection. Configuration Management Technology Considerations Coverage (OS and applications): Your configuration management offering needs to support your operating systems. Enough said. Discovery: You cannot manage devices you don’t know about, so you need a way to identify new deviceand get rid of deprecated devices – otherwise the process will fail. You can achieve this with a built-in discovery capability, bidirectional integration with vulnerability management (for active and passive monitoring for new devices), asset management and inventory software, or more likely all of the above. Supported standards and benchmarks: The more built-in standards and/or configuration benchmarks offered by the tool, the better your chance of finding something you can easily adapt to your own requirements. This is especially important for highly regulated environments which need to support and report on multiple regulatory hierarchies. Policy editing: Policies generally require customization to satisfy requirements. Your configuration management tool should offer a flexible policy editor to define policies and add new baseline configurations

Share:
Read Post

Apple Developer Site Breached

From CNet (and my inbox, as a member of the developer program): Last Thursday, an intruder attempted to secure personal information of our registered developers from our developer website. Sensitive personal information was encrypted and cannot be accessed, however, we have not been able to rule out the possibility that some developers’ names, mailing addresses, and/or email addresses may have been accessed. In the spirit of transparency, we want to inform you of the issue. We took the site down immediately on Thursday and have been working around the clock since then. One of my fellow TidBITS writers noted the disruption on our staff list after the site had been down for over a day with no word. I suspected a security issue (and said so), in large part due to Apple’s complete silence – even more than usual. But until they sent out this notification, there were no facts and I don’t believe in speculating publicly on breaches without real information. Three key questions remain: Were passwords exposed? If so, how were they encrypted/protected? A password hash or something insecure for this purpose, such as SHA-256? Were any Apple Developer ID certificates exposed? Those are the answers that will let developers assess their risk. At this point assume names, emails, and addresses are in the hands of attackers, and could be used for fraud, phishing, and other attacks. Share:

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.