Securosis

Research

SIEM Kung Fu: Fundamentals [New Series]

Another SIEM blog series? Really? Why are we still talking about SIEM? Isn’t that old technology? Hasn’t it been subsumed by new and shiny security analytics products and services? Be honest – those thoughts crossed your mind, especially because we have published a lot of SIEM related research over the past few years. We previously worked through the basics of the technology and how to choose the right SIEM for your needs. A bit over a year ago we looked into how to monitor hybrid cloud environments. The fact is SIEM has become somewhat of a dirty word, but that’s ridiculous. Security monitoring needs to be a core, fundamental, aspect of every security program. SIEM – in various flavors, using different technologies and deployment architectures – is how you do security monitoring. So it’s not about getting rid of the technology – it’s more about how to get the most out of your existing investment, and ensuring you can handle the advanced threats facing organizations today. But we understand how SIEM got its bad name. Early versions of the technology were hard to use, and required significant integration just to get up and running. You needed to know what attacks you were looking for, and unfortunately most adversaries don’t send attack playbooks ahead of time. Operating an early SIEM required a ninja DBA, and even then queries could take hours (or days for full reports) to complete. Adding a new use case with additional searches and correlations required an act of Congress and a truckload of consultants. It’s not surprising organizations lost their patience with SIEM. So the technology was relegated to generating compliance reports and some very simple alerts, while other tools were used to do ‘real’ security monitoring. But as with most other areas of security technology, SIEM has evolved. Security monitoring platforms now support a bunch of additional data types, including network packets. The architectures have evolved to scale more efficiently and have integrated fancy new ‘Big Data’ analytics engines to improve detection accuracy, even for attacks you haven’t seen before. Threat intelligence is integrated into the SIEM directly, so you can look for attacks on other organizations before they are launched at you. So our new SIEM Kung Fu series will streamline our research to focus on what you need to know to get the most out of your SIEM, and solve the problems you face today by increasing your capabilities (the promised Kung Fu). But first let’s revisit the key use cases for SIEM and what is typically available out of the box with SIEM tools.     Alerting The original use case for SIEM was security alert reduction. IDS and firewall devices were pumping out too many alerts, and you needed a way to figure out which of them required attention. That worked for a little while, but then adversaries got a lot better and learned to evade many of the simple correlations available with first-generation SIEM. Getting actionable alerts from your SIEM is the most important use case for the technology. Many different techniques are used to detect these attacks. You can hunt for anomalies that kinda-sorta look like they could be an attack or you can do very sophisticated analytics on a wide variety of data sources to detect known attack patterns. What you cannot do any more is depend on simple file-based detection, because modern attacks are far more complicated. You need to analyze inbound network traffic (to find reconnaissance), device activity (for signs of compromise), and outbound network traffic (for command and control / botnet communications) as well. And that’s a simplified view of how a multi-faceted attack works. Sophisticated attacks require sophisticated analysis to detect and verify. Out of the box a SIEM offer a number of different patterns to detect attacks. These run the gamut from simple privilege escalation to more sophisticated botnet activity and lateral movement. Of course these built-in detections are generic and need to be tuned to your specific environment, but they can give you a head start for finding malicious activity in your environment. This provides the quick win which has historically eluding many SIEM projects, and builds momentum for continued investment in SIEM technology. SIEM technology has advanced to the point where it can find many attacks without a lot of integration and customization. But to detect advanced and targeted attacks by sophisticated adversaries, a tool can only get you so far. You need to evolve how you use security monitoring tools. You cannot just put a shiny new tool in place and expect advanced adversaries to go away. That will be our area of focus for the later posts in this series. Forensics Once you have determined an attack is under way – or more accurately, once you have detected one of the many attacks happening in your environment – you need to investigate the attack and figure out the extent of the damage. We have documented the incident response process, especially within the context of integrating threat intelligence, and SIEM is a critical tool to aggregate data and provide a platform for search and investigation. Out of the box a SIEM will enable responders to search through aggregated security data. Some tools offer visualizations to help users see anomalous activity, and figure out where certain events happened in the timeline. But you will still need a talented responder to really dig into an attack and figure out what’s happening. No tool can take an incident response from cradle to grave. So the SIEM is not going to be the only tool your incident responders use. But in terms of efficiently figuring out what’s been compromised, the extent of the damage, and an initial damage assessment, the SIEM should be a keystone of your process. Especially given the ability of a SIEM to capture and analyze network packets, providing more granularity and the ability to build a timeline of what really happened during the attack. Compliance Finally, the SIEM remains instrumental for generating compliance reports, which are still a

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.