CloudKnox Security, a vendor in identity privilege management, introduced new features to its Cloud Security Platform, including Privilege-on-Demand, Auto-Remediation for Machine Identities and Anomaly Detection.
The offerings intend to increase enterprise protection from identity and resource risks in hybrid cloud environments. According to CloudKnox Security, the new release is an improvement on its existing Just Enough Privileges Controller, which enables enterprises to reduce overprovisioned identity privileges to appropriate levels across VMware, AWS, Azure and Google Cloud.
Privileged accounts are often targets for attack, and a successful hacking attempt can result in full control of an organization’s data and assets. The 2019 Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report highlighted privileged account misuse as the top threat for security incidents and the third-leading cause of security breaches.
The Privilege-on-Demand feature from CloudKnox Security enables companies to grant privileges to users for a certain amount of time and on a specific resource on an as-needed basis. The options include Privilege-on-Request, Privilege Self-Grant or Just-in-Time Privilege that give users access to a specific resource within a set time to perform an action.
The Auto-Remediation feature can frequently and automatically dismiss unused privileges of machine identities, according to the vendor. For example, the feature can be useful dealing with service accounts that perform repetitive tasks with limited privileges, because when these accounts are overprovisioned, organizations will be particularly vulnerable to privilege misuse.
The Anomaly Detection feature creates risk profiles for users and resources based on data obtained by CloudKnox’s Risk Management Module. According to the vendor, the software intends to detect abnormal behaviors from users, such as a profile carrying out a high-risk action for the first time on a resource they have never accessed.
The company will demonstrate the new features at Black Hat USA in Las Vegas this year for the first time. CloudKnox’s update to its Cloud Security Platform follows competitor CyberArk‘s recent updates to its own privileged access management offering, including zero-trust access, full visibility and control of privileged activities for customers, biometric authentication and just-in-time provisioning. Other market competitors that promise insider risk reduction, identity governance and privileged access management include BeyondTrust and One Identity.
Proponents of a proposed federal bill are seeking the development of security standards for all government-purchased Internet-connected devices — a move that could spur improved security for IoT deployments across non-government entities as well.
The IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2019, co-sponsored by Reps. Robin Kelly (D-Ill.) and Will Hurd (R-Texas), would require the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to issue guidelines for the secure development, configuration and management of IoT devices. It would also require the federal government to comply with these NIST standards.
Perhaps more significantly, the bill would likely reach beyond the federal government if passed and made into law. Security experts predict that NIST standards would help elevate IoT security throughout private industry and during development of consumer products.
“Our bill establishes baseline cybersecurity standards for government purchased and operated IoT devices,” Rep. Kelly said in an emailed response to questions about the proposed legislation. “Right now, we are focused on securing government IoT devices. I think the most relevant piece to executives would be the ability to use NIST’s Considerations for Managing Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity and Privacy Risks as a model for internal standards.”
She added, “Our goal remains securing government IoT devices. If these standards are helpful to the private sector then that’s an additional benefit.”
IoT: Speed to market offsets cybersecurity
Security leaders said there’s a need for improved IoT security: Vendors work fast to bring IoT products to market, while enterprise leaders have moved just as quickly to capitalize on IoT deployments. In both cases, the desire for speed typically trumps security concerns, they said.
Now these security concerns are gaining new attention.
“People have been saying for at least three years that there’s a problem and we need to fix it,” says David Alexander, digital trust expert at PA Consulting.
Others agreed, adding that they think NIST is the right entity to take the lead on establishing security standards.
“We need government intervention,” said Balakrishnan Dasarathy, collegiate professor and program chair for Information Assurance at the Graduate School at the University of Maryland University College.
Robin Kelly U.S. Representative (D-Ill.)
Dasarathy said the ripple effect from federal action on IoT legislation would improve product security for consumers and private industry alike. It would also give appropriate IoT security guidance to chief information security officers (CISOs) and other organizational executives.
“Right now many CISOs struggle to determine adequate security,” Dasarathy said.
Weak IoT security has had significant consequences. The Mirai botnets, for example, exploited vulnerabilities in networked devices and led to a massive distributed denial of service attack in 2016.
The skyrocketing number of connected devices also increases the amount of infrastructure to protect. Gartner, the technology research and advisory firm, predicted that 14.2 billion connected things will be used this year, a figure that will hit 25 billion by 2021. That growth means CISOs will be responsible for more than three times as many endpoints in 2023 than they were in 2018.
The emergence of IoT security standards
Despite often treating security as an afterthought, the IoT community — including vendors, executives engaged in IoT initiatives and regulatory bodies — has already started to address security and data privacy issues. This recognition helped create an emerging collection of standards, best practices and regulations such as California’s IoT device law known as SB-327. –It is the first such state law in the United States, and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute has developed similar rules.
However, the IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act could push IoT safety to the forefront for IoT device makers and end users. This is because of the clout that NIST has in setting standards and that the federal government has in purchase power. The federal bill was advanced out of the House Oversight and Reform Committee in June.
“It will set a direction that will make it easy for others to follow,” said Gus Hunt, managing director and cyber strategist for Accenture Federal Services.
If the bill passes, IoT device makers that want to sell to the federal government would have to design and manufacture products according to NIST standards. To avoid designing a second-tier product for the nongovernment market, those makers would bring those same government devices to the broader market, Hunt explained.
Even if the IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act doesn’t pass, Hunt said vendors now recognize that buyers want better security features in their products.
“Many manufacturers realize that they have to find a way [to make sure] that whatever they sell is safe, secure and doesn’t place people at higher risk simply by buying the device,” he added.
Security becoming an IoT priority
Meanwhile, private sector CISOs and CIOs could benefit if the bill is passed and NIST develops security standards that give them guidelines to adopt for their own IoT deployments.
“NIST standards could give them leverage in their discussions about budget, controls and selection of products,” Alexander said, as NIST protocols in other areas have often become the basis for best practices in private sector organizations seeking to strengthen their own programs.
However, the bill’s future is uncertain. A similar measure was introduced in 2017 and failed to move forward. On the other hand, the IoT Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2019 does have bipartisan sponsors — which security experts said gives them some hope that Congress will take favorable action on this issue.
Yet that hope comes with a caveat: They said lawmakers — in Congress and elsewhere — must pay attention to each other’s IoT legislation to ensure they’re all moving in the same direction.
Also, they said NIST should work with industry to craft standards. This cooperative approach is one that NIST typically takes, and it would help ensure that all the various laws share common elements so that vendors understand what they must deliver to the market.
“These things cannot be contradictory. All these versions of [IoT] legislation need to be aligned because vendors want to make one version of their product. All the legislation has to be pointing in the same direction, otherwise it’s not going to work,” Alexander said.
D3 Security has released Attackbot, a proactive response matrix that combines security orchestration automation response technology and the Mitre ATT&CK framework to identify the entire kill chain of complex cyberattacks.
Building on existing SOAR capabilities to predict attacker behavior, Attackbot enables security teams to monitor attack progress in real time, correlate incidents with known adversary behaviors and take action with the aid of decision tree-based playbooks. Attackbot’s capabilities give security teams the ability to focus remediation efforts for a more conclusive incident response.
The Mitre Adversarial Tactics, Techniques and Common Knowledge (ATT&CK) framework, developed by Mitre Corp., is a document of threat tactics and techniques observed from millions of attacks on enterprise networks. Used by security vendors and consultants, ATT&CK classifies attacks for researchers to identify common patterns, see who authored campaigns and track malware development.
Embedding the Mitre ATT&CK framework into its SOAR 2.0 platform, D3’s Attackbot brings the following capabilities:
automatically identify and map security events against the Mitre ATT&CK matrix to focus incident response;
visualize and predict the kill chain, including searching backward across events in addition to focusing analysts on next steps; and
automated response triggering a D3 kill chain playbook to remediate the threat.
According to a Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report, phishing is involved in 32% of all data breaches and 78% of all cyberespionage incidents. D3 claims that Attackbot actively searches for steps that an adversary might take after a phishing attempt — such as credential dumping — in an effort to augment phishing investigations.
Additionally, Attackbot automatically searches and correlates relevant events, narrows a list of compromised computers, analyzes logs for evidence of compromise and identifies an adversary’s techniques through the Mitre ATT&CK framework and the D3 database. Typically, an analyst would have to sort through those hundreds of events manually to find the compromised computer.
D3’s Attackbot supports over 200 out-of-the-box integrations across threat intelligence, IT service management and network security software.
Zoom was caught flatfooted this week by the reaction to a security researcher’s report on the vulnerabilities of a web server it had quietly installed on Apple computers. The debacle raised broader questions on whether unified communications vendors were too quick to sacrifice privacy and security for ease of use.
The Zoom security issue stemmed from the use of the web server as a workaround for a privacy feature on version 12 of the Safari web browser, which Apple released for the Mac last fall. The feature forced users to consent to open Zoom’s video app every time they tried to join a meeting. In contrast, browsers like Chrome and Firefox let users check a box telling them to automatically trust Zoom’s app in the future.
Zoom felt the extra click in Safari would undermine its frictionless experience for joining meetings, so it installed the web server on Mac computers to launch a meeting immediately.
That left Mac users vulnerable to being instantly joined to a Zoom meeting by clicking on a spam link or loading a malicious website or pop-up advertisement. A similar risk still exists for all Mac and PC users who choose to have their web browsers automatically launch Zoom.
Another issue with the Mac web server was that it would remain in place even after users deleted the Zoom app, and would automatically reinstall Zoom upon receiving a request to join a meeting, according to the security researcher. It also created an avenue for denial-of-service attacks, a risk that Zoom released an optional patch for in May.
In a broader sense, the permanent installation of a web server on local devices troubled independent researcher Jonathan Leitschuh, who sparked this week’s events with a blog post Monday.
“First off, let me start off by saying having an installed app that is running a web server on my local machine with a totally undocumented API feels incredibly sketchy to me,” Leitschuh wrote in his public disclosure. “Secondly, the fact that any website that I visit can interact with this web server running on my machine is a huge red flag for me as a security researcher.”
Leitschuh’s disclosure forced Zoom to issue multiple statements as user outrage grew. The security threat received widespread international news coverage, with many headlines containing the chilling combination of “hacker” and “webcam.” In an interview Wednesday, Zoom’s chief information security officer, Richard Farley, said the news coverage caused “maybe some panic that was unnecessary.”
“Part of the challenge for us, of course, is controlling that message out there that this was not as big a deal as it’s been made out to be,” Farley said. “There’s a lot of misinformation that went out there. … People just didn’t understand it.”
Zoom initially tried to assuage fears about the Mac web server without removing it. The company pointed out that it would be obvious to users they had just joined a meeting because a window would open in the foreground and their webcam’s indicator light would flash on. Also, a hacker couldn’t gain access to a webcam in secret or retain access to that video feed after users exited a meeting.
Ultimately, Zoom reversed its original position and released a software update Tuesday that removed the web server from its Mac architecture. The next day, Apple pushed out a software patch that wiped the web server from all Mac devices, even for users who had previously deleted Zoom.
“We misjudged the situation and did not respond quickly enough — and that’s on us,” Zoom CEO Eric Yuan wrote in a blog post. “We take full ownership, and we’ve learned a great deal.”
Zoom’s default preferences added fuel to the fire. Unless users go out of their way to alter Zoom’s out-of-the-box settings, their webcams will be on by default when joining meetings. Also, Zoom does not by default have a pre-meeting lobby in which users confirm their audio and video settings before connecting.
Zoom said it would release an update over the July 13 weekend to make it easier for new users to control video settings. The first time a user joins a meeting, they will be able to instruct the app to join them to all future sessions with their webcams turned off.
Zoom has also taken heat for allowing embedded IFrame codes to launch Zoom meetings. In a statement, the company said IFrames — a method for adding HTML content to webpages — was necessary to support its integrations.
Leitschuh first raised the security issues with Zoom in March. The company invited him to its private bug bounty program, offering money in exchange for Leitschuh agreeing not to disclose his research publicly. Leitschuh, who said the proposed bounty was less than $1,000, declined because of the demand for secrecy.
Despite clashing over whether to remove the web server, Leitschuh and Zoom were able to agree on the severity of the risk it posed. They gave it a Common Vulnerability Scoring System rating of 5.4 out of 10. That score is in the “medium” range — riskier than “low” but not as severe as “high” or “critical.”
Zoom’s response to Leitschuh’s concerns was an indicator that companies have to verify the security architectures of UC vendors, analysts said.
“This event should be a clear reminder to both vendors and customers using UC and collaboration tools that there are very real threats to their platforms,” said Michael Brandenburg, analyst at Frost & Sullivan. “We are long past the days of only having to worry about toll fraud, and businesses have to be as mindful of the security risks on their UC platforms as they are with any other business application.”
Are software-defined WAN security features sufficient to handle the demands of most enterprises? That’s the question addressed by author and engineer Christoph Jaggi, whose SD-WAN security concerns were cited in a recent blog post on IPSpace. The short answer? No — primarily because of the various connections that can take place over an SD-WAN deployment.
“The only common elements between the different SD-WAN offerings on the market are the separation of the data plane and the control plane and the takeover of the control plane by an SD-WAN controller,” Jaggi said. “When looking at an SD-WAN solution, it is part of the due diligence to look at the key management and the security architecture in detail. There are different approaches to implement network security, each having its own benefits and challenges.”
Organizations contemplating SD-WAN rollouts should determine whether prospective products meet important security thresholds. For example, products should support cryptographic protocols and algorithms and meet current key management criteria, Jaggi said.
Read what Jaggi had to say about the justification for SD-WAN security concerns.
Wireless ain’t nothing without the wire
You can have the fanciest access points and the flashiest management software, but without good and reliable wiring underpinning your wireless LAN, you’re not going to get very far. So said network engineer Lee Badman as he recounted a situation where a switch upgrade caused formerly reliable APs to lurch to a halt.
“I’ve long been a proponent of recognizing [unshielded twisted pair] as a vital component in the networking ecosystem,” Badman said. Flaky cable might still be sufficient in a Fast Ethernet world, but with multigig wireless now taking root, old cable can be the source of many problems, he said.
For Badman, the culprit was PoE-related and once the cable was re-terminated and tested anew, the APs again worked like a charm. A good lesson.
See what else Badman had to say about the issues that can plague a WLAN.
The long tail and DDoS attacks
Now there’s something new to worry about with distributed denial of service, or DDoS, attacks. Network engineer Russ White has examined another tactic, dubbed tail attacks, which can just as easily clog networking resources.
Unlike traditional DDoS or DoS attacks that overwhelm bandwidth or TCP sessions, tail attacks concentrate on resource pools, such as storage nodes. In this scenario, a targeted node might be struggling because of full queues, White said, and that can cause dependent nodes to shut down as well. These tail attacks don’t require a lot of traffic and, what’s more, are difficult to detect.
For now, tail attacks aren’t common; they require attackers to know a great deal about a particular network before they can be launched. That said, they are something network managers should be aware of, White added.
BOSTON — IT organizations that plan to tackle developer security skills as part of a DevSecOps shift have started to introduce tools and techniques that can help.
Many organizations have moved past early DevSecOps phases such as a ‘seat at the table‘ for security experts during application design meetings and locked-down CI/CD and container environments. At DevSecCon 2018 here this week, IT pros revealed they’ve begun in earnest to ‘shift security left’ and teach developers how to write more secure application code from the beginning.
“We’ve been successful with what I’d call SecOps, and now we’re working on DevSec,” said Marnie Wilking, global CISO at Orion Health, a healthcare software company based in Boston, during a Q&A after her DevSecCon presentation. “We’ve just hired an application security expert, and we’re working toward overall information assurance by design.”
Security champions and fast feedback shift developer mindset
Orion Health’s plan to bring an application security expert, or security champion, into its DevOps team reflects a model followed by IT security software companies, such as CA Veracode. The goal of security champions is to bridge the gap and liaise between IT security and developer teams, so that groups spend less time in negotiations.
“The security champions model is similar to having an SRE team for ops, where application security experts play a consultative role for both the security and the application development team,” said Chris Wysopal, CTO at CA Veracode in Burlington, Mass., in a presentation. “They can determine when new application backlog items need threat modeling or secure code review from the security team.”
However, no mature DevSecOps process allows time for consultation before every change to application code. Developers must hone their security skills to reduce vulnerable code without input from security experts to maintain app delivery velocity.
The good news is that developer security skills often emerge organically in CI/CD environments, provided IT ops and security pros build vulnerability checks into DevOps pipelines in the early phases of DevSecOps.
“If you’re seeing builds fail day after day [because of security flaws], and it stops you from doing what you want to get done, you’re going to stop [writing insecure code],” said Julie Chickillo, VP of information security, risk and compliance at Beeline, a company headquartered in Jacksonville, Fla., which sell workforce management and vendor management software.
Beeline built security checks into its CI/CD pipeline that use SonarQube, which blocks application builds if it finds major, critical or limiting application security vulnerabilities in the code, and immediately sends that feedback to developers. Beeline also uses interactive code scanning tools from Contrast Security as part of its DevOps application delivery process.
“It’s all about giving developers constant feedback, and putting information in their hands that helps them make better decisions,” Chickillo said.
Developer security training tools emerge
Application code scans and continuous integration tests only go so far to make applications secure by design. DevSecOps organizations will also use updated tools to further developer security skills training.
Mark FelegyhaziCEO, Avatao.com Innovative Learning Ltd
“Sooner or later, companies put security scanning tools in place, then realize they’re not enough, because people don’t understand the output of those tools,” said Mark Felegyhazi, CEO of Avatao.com Innovative Learning Ltd, a startup in Hungary that sells developer security skills training software. Avatao competitors in this emerging field include Secure Code Warrior, which offers gamelike interfaces that train developers in secure application design. Avatao also offers a hands-on gamification approach, but its tools also cover threat modeling, which Secure Code Warrior doesn’t address, Felegyhazi said.
Firms also will look to internal and external training resources to build developer security skills. Beeline has sent developers to off-site security training, and plans to set up a sandbox environment for developers to practice penetration testing on their own code, so they better understand the mindset of attackers and how to head them off, Chickillo said.
Higher education must take a similar hands-on approach to bridge the developer security skills gap for graduates as they enter the workforce, said Gabor Pek, CTO at Avatao, in a DevSecCon presentation about security in computer science curricula.
“Universities don’t have security champion programs,” Pek said. “Most of their instruction is designed for a large number of students in a one-size-fits-all format, with few practical, hands-on exercises.”
In addition to his work with Avatao, Pek helped create a bootcamp for student leaders of capture-the-flag teams that competed at the DEFCON conference in 2015. Capture-the-flag exercises offer a good template for the kinds of hands-on learning universities should embrace, he said, since they are accessible to beginners but also challenge experts.
Slack will soon give businesses an additional level of security by letting them manage their encryption keys. The feature will appeal to a small number of large organizations for now, but it could help the startup expand its footprint in the enterprise market.
Slack already encrypts the messages and files that flow through its premium platform for large businesses, called Enterprise Grid. Now, the vendor plans to give customers control of the keys that unlock that encryption.
“Enterprise key management is another significant step that Slack needs to take to meet increasing security demands — and according to their promise, without hurting speed or usability, [which are] common side effects of EKM,” said Wayne Kurtzman, analyst at IDC.
Slack touted the forthcoming feature as providing “all the security of an on-premises solution, with all the benefits of a cloud tool.” But the vendor clarified that the keys will be created and stored in Amazon’s public cloud.
“In the future, we may expand this offering to support an on-prem or private cloud [hardware security module] key store,” said Ilan Frank, director of Slack’s enterprise products.
Cisco Webex Teams lets businesses manage encryption keys on premises or in the cloud. It also provides end-to-end encryption. In contrast, Slack only encrypts data in transit and at rest, which means the data may get decrypted at certain routing points in the cloud.
Slack has no plans to change its encryption model, Frank said, citing potential “usability drawbacks” related to search and advanced app and bot features.
Symphony also offers end-to-end encryption and enterprise key management. Its team collaboration app has found a niche among banks and other financial firms, which generally have strict compliance and regulatory standards.
“I think, from Slack’s case, it’s a good first step in allowing customers to control their own keys,” said Zeus Kerravala, founder and principal analyst at ZK Research in Westminster, Mass. But Slack should also ensure businesses can store those keys in their own data centers and eventually pursue end-to-end encryption, he said.
Slack’s enterprise key management feature will be particularly useful for external communications done through Slack, said Alan Lepofsky, a vice president and principal analyst at Constellation Research, based in Cupertino, Calif.
When partners communicate through a shared channel in Slack, the company that established the channel will have control over the encryption keys.
“I think this will be a very important use case, as it’s that external communication where you really want to ensure security and privacy,” Lepofsky said.
Slack expects to make enterprise key management available for purchase to Enterprise Grid customers sometime this winter.
Slack looks to appeal to more large enterprises
Slack launched Enterprise Grid last year in an attempt to expand beyond its traditional base of teams and small businesses. The platform lets large organizations unify and manage multiple Slack workspaces.
Election security continues to be a hot topic, as the 2018 midterm elections draw closer. So, the Voting Village at DEF CON 26 in Las Vegas wanted to re-create and test every aspect of an election.
Jake Braun, CEO of Cambridge Global Advisors, based in Arlington, Va., and one of the main organizers of the DEF CON Voting Village, discussed the pushback the event has received and how he hopes the event can expand in the future.
What were the major differences between what the Voting Village had this year compared to last year?
Jake Braun: The main difference is it’s way bigger. And we’ve got, end to end, the voting infrastructure. We’ve got voter registration, a list of voters in the state of Ohio that are in a cyber range that’s basically like a county clerk’s network. Cook County, Illinois, their head guy advised us on how to make it realistic [and] make it like his network. We had that, but we didn’t have the list of voters last year.
That’s the back end of the voter process with the voter infrastructure process. And then we’ve got machines. We’ve got some new machines and accessories and all this stuff.
Then, on the other end, we’ve got the websites. This is the last piece of the election infrastructure that announces the results. And so, obviously, we’ve got the kids hacking the mock websites.
What prompted you to make hacking the mock websites an event for the kids in R00tz Asylum?
Braun: It was funny. I was at [RSA Conference], and we’ve been talking for a long time about, how do we represent this vulnerability in a way that’s not a waste of time? Because the guys down in the [Voting Village], hacking websites is not interesting to them. They’ve been doing it for 20 years, or they’ve known how to do it for 20 years. But this is the most vulnerable part of the infrastructure, because it’s [just] a website. You can cause real havoc.
I mean, the Russians — when they hacked the Ukrainian website and changed it to show their candidate won, and the Ukrainians took it down, fortunately, they took it down before anything happened. But then, Russian TV started announcing their candidate won. Can you imagine if, in November 2020, the Florida and Ohio websites are down, and Wolf Blitzer is sitting there on CNN saying, ‘Well, you know, we don’t really know who won, because the Florida and Ohio websites are down,’ and then RT — Russian Television — starts announcing that their preferred candidate won? It would be chaos.
Anyway, I was talking through this with some people at [RSA Conference], and I was talking about how it would be so uninteresting to do it in the real village or in the main village. And the guy [I was talking to said], ‘Oh, right. Yeah. It’s like child’s play for them.’
I was like, ‘Exactly, it’s child’s play. Great idea. We’ll give it to R00tz.’ And so, I called up Nico [Sell], and she was like, ‘I love it. I’m in.’ And then, the guys who built it were the Capture the Packet guys, who are some of the best security people in the planet. I mean, Brian Markus does security for … Aerojet Rocketdyne, one of the top rocket manufacturers in the world. He sells to [Department of Defense], [Department of Homeland Security] and the Australian government. So, I mean, he is more competent than any election official we have.
The first person to get in was an 11-year-old girl, and she got in in 10 minutes. Totally took over the website, changed the results and everything else.
How did it go with the Ohio voter registration database?
Braun: The Secretaries of State Association criticized us, [saying], ‘Oh, you’re making it too easy. It’s not realistic,’ which is ridiculous. In fact, we’re protecting the voter registration database with this Israeli military technology, and no one has been able to get in yet. So, it’s actually probably the best protected list of voters in the country right now.
Have you been able to update the other machines being used in the Voting Village?
Braun: Well, a lot of it is old, but it’s still in use. The only thing that’s not in use is the WinVote, but everything else that we have in there is in use today. Unlike other stuff, they don’t get automatic updates on their software. So, that’s the same stuff that people are voting on today.
Have the vendors been helpful at all in providing more updated software or anything?
Braun: No. And, of course, the biggest one sent out a letter in advance to DEF CON again this year saying, ‘It’s not realistic and it’s unfair, because they have full access to the machines.’
Do people think these machines are kept in Fort Knox? I mean, they are in a warehouse or, in some places, in small counties, they are in a closet somewhere — literally. And, by the way, Rob Joyce, the cyber czar for the Trump administration who’s now back at NSA [National Security Agency], in his talk [this year at DEF CON, he basically said], if you don’t think that our adversaries are doing exactly this all year so that they know how to get into these machines, your head is insane.
The thing is that we actually are playing by the rules. We don’t steal machines. We only get them if people donate them to us, or if we can buy them legally somehow. The Russians don’t play by the rules. They’ll just go get them however they want. They’ll steal them or bribe people or whatever.
They could also just as easily do what you do and just to get them secondhand.
Braun: Right. They’re probably doing that, too.
Is there any way to test these machines in a way that would be acceptable to the manufacturers and U.S. government?
Braun: The unfortunate thing is that, to our knowledge, the Voting Village is still the only public third-party inspection — or whatever you want to call it — of voting infrastructure.
Jake BraunCEO of Cambridge Global Advisors
The vendors and others will get pen testing done periodically for themselves, but that’s not public. All these things are done, and they’re under [nondisclosure agreement]. Their customers don’t know what vulnerabilities they found and so on and so forth.
So, the unfortunate thing is that the only time this is done publicly by a third party is when it’s done by us. And that’s once a year for two and a half days. This should be going on all year with all the equipment, the most updated stuff and everything else. And, of course, it’s not.
Braun: Yes. This is why DEF CON is so great, because everybody is here. I was just talking to them yesterday, and they were like, ‘Hey, can you get us the report as soon as humanly possible? Because we want to take it into consideration as we are putting together our guidelines.’ And they said they used our report last year, as well.
How have the election machines fared against the Voting Village hackers this year?
Braun: Right, of course, they were able to get into everything. Of course, they’re finding all these new vulnerabilities and all this stuff.
The greatest thing that I think came out of last year was that the state of Virginia wound up decommissioning the machine that [the hackers] got into in two minutes remotely. They decommissioned that and got rid of the machine altogether. And it was the only state that still had it. And so, after DEF CON, they had this emergency thing to get rid of it before the elections in 2017.
What’s the plan for the Voting Village moving forward?
Braun: We’ll do the report like we did last year. Out of all the guidelines that have come out since 2016 on how to secure election infrastructure, none of them talk about how to better secure your reporting websites or, since they are kind of impossible to secure, what operating procedures you should have in place in case they get hacked.
So, we’re going to include that in the report this year. And that will be a big addition to the overall guidelines that have come out since 2016.
And then, next year, I think, it’s really just all about, what else can we get our hands on? Because that will be the last time that any of our findings will be able to be implemented before 2020, which is, I think, when the big threat is.
A DEF CON spokesperson said that most of the local officials that responded and are attending have been from Democratic majority counties. Why do you think that is?
Braun: That’s true, although [Neal Kelley, chief of elections and registrar of voters for] Orange County, attended. Orange County is pretty Republican, and he is a Republican.
But I think it winds up being this functionally odd thing where urban areas are generally Democratic, but because they are big, they have a bigger tax base. So then, the people who run them have more money to do security and hire security people. So, they kind of necessarily know more about this stuff.
Whereas if you’re in Allamakee County, Iowa, with 10,000 people, the county auditor who runs the elections there, that guy or gal — I don’t know who it is — but they are both the IT and the election official and the security person and the whatever. You’re just not going to get the specialized stuff, you know what I mean?
Do you have any plans to try to boost attendance from smaller counties that might not be able to afford sending somebody here or plans on how to get information to them?
Braun: Well, that’s why we do the report. This year, we did a mailing of 6,600 pieces of mail to all 6,600 election officials in the country and two emails and 3,500 live phone calls. So, we’re going to keep doing that.
And that’s the other thing: We just got so much more engagement from local officials. We had a handful come last year. We had several dozen come this year. None of them were public last year. This year, we had a panel of them speaking, including DHS [Department of Homeland Security].
So, that’s a big difference. Despite the stupid letter that the Secretary of State Association sent out, a lot of these state and local folks are embracing this.
And it’s not like we think we have all the answers. But you would think if you were in their position and with how cash-strapped they are and everything, that they would say, ‘Well, these guys might have some answers. And if somebody’s got some answers, I would love to go find out about those answers.’
SAN FRANCISCO — Box shops will have the ability to get granular with a new built-in Box security feature, but organizations will have to find a role for the tool alongside their other security platforms.
Box Shield, which was introduced at the file-sharing company’s annual conference, BoxWorks, will detect anomalies and risky user behavior within Box. Experts here discussed the potential behind Box Shield and how it might integrate with existing security and identity management tools within businesses.
“Security is such a tough problem,” said James Sinur, vice president at Aragon Research, based in Morgan Hill, Calif. “I haven’t found any security software that covers all aspects of it.”
How Box Shield works
Box Shield has three main functionalities: smart access, anomaly detection and a content firewall.
James Sinurvice president at Aragon Research
Smart access enables end users and IT admins to classify Box files according to their level of confidentiality. Then, IT admins can apply policies based on those classifications.
Anomaly detection helps IT to discover compromised accounts and identify access abuse. For example, if an end user accesses Box from Guatemala and downloads large amounts of data, Box Shield will flag that as risky behavior.
The content firewall feature can go beyond two-factor authentication to verify external users and check the security of devices.
IT can also use Box Shield to uncover historical data about a user’s activity and access analytics about their behavior.
Box Shield tries to play nice with other security
Sinur said he expects customers to use Box Shield in conjunction with other security platforms.
“Where I think [Box] will make their contribution is by adjusting policies that govern those pieces of [content],” he said.
Box is well-known for a plethora of integrations with third-party platforms — from Google and Slack to Microsoft and Okta. The company is already identifying places where Box Shield would integrate with other cloud access security broker (CASB) services, CEO Aaron Levie said in a press conference. Customers with an existing security information management tool, for example, would be able to use Box Shield in conjunction with it, he said.
An IT security analyst at a financial institution who wanted to remain anonymous was very interested in the new tool. His company already has several security technologies in place, such as Symantec and Okta, and would use Box Shield in addition to those services, he said.
“From a nonmanaged versus managed device, it would help us keep track of what’s going in and what’s going out based off of the device control,” he added.
VMware has introduced features that improve the use of its NSX network virtualization and security software in private and public clouds.
At VMworld 2018 in Las Vegas, VMware unveiled an NSX instance for AWS Direct Connect and technology to apply NSX security policies on Amazon Web Services workloads. Also, VMware said Arista Networks’ virtual and physical switches would enforce NSX policies — the result of a collaboration between the two vendors.
The latest AWS feature is in NSX-T Data Center 2.3, which VMware introduced at VMworld. Other features added to the newest version of NSX-T include support for containers and Linux-based workloads running on bare-metal servers. NSX-T uses Open vSwitch to turn a Linux host into an NSX-T transport node and to provide stateful security services.
VMware plans to release NSX-T 2.3 by November.
NSX on AWS Direct Connect
To help companies connect to AWS, VMware introduced integration between NSX and AWS Direct Connect. The combination will provide NSX-powered connectivity between workloads running on VMware Cloud on AWS and those running on a VMware-based private cloud in the data center.
AWS Direct Connect lets companies bypass the public internet and establish a dedicated network connection between a data center and an AWS location. Direct Connect is particularly useful for companies with rules against transferring sensitive data across the public internet.
Finally, VMware introduced interoperability between Arista’s CloudVision and NSX. As a result, companies can have NSX security policies enforced on Arista switches running either virtually in a public cloud or the data center.
Arista CloudVision manages switching fabrics within multiple cloud environments. Last year, the company released a virtualized version of its EOS network operating system for AWS, Google Cloud Platform, Microsoft Azure and Oracle Cloud.
VMware is using its NSX portfolio to connect and secure infrastructure and applications running in the data center, branch office and public cloud. For the branch office, VMware has integrated NSX with the company’s VeloCloud software-defined WAN to provide microsegmentation for applications at the WAN’s edge.
VMware competes in multi-cloud networking with Cisco and Juniper Networks.