Category Archives: Application Firewall

The Money is in the Mash-Up: RESTFUL mash-ups to help under-staffed INFOSEC teams

In this post, we will couple ExtraHop’s wire data analytics, Anomali STAXX, a leading threat intelligence solution and Slack, a cloud-based collaboration platform to demonstrate how we can use orchestration and automation in a manner that helps today’s under-(wo)manned security teams meet today’s threats with the level of agility needed!

I was fortunate enough to be selected to speak at RSAC 2017 and it was surely a career highlight for me. As several analysts pointed out post-show, automation and orchestration seemed to be the flavor of the year. Over the last 36 months it has become glaringly obvious that we simply cannot keep bad actors and malicious software off of our networks. I have been preaching the folly of perimeter (only) based security since 2010. The speed with which systems are now compromised and the emergence of the “human vector” through phishing has all but assured us that the horde is behind the wall and needs to be directly engaged. The reliance on logs, SIEM products will give you a forensic view of what is going on but will do little to be effective against today’s threats where a system could be compromised by the time the log is written.

While the idea of automation and orchestration is a great one, there are issues with it and will not be the first time “self-defending networks” have been brought to market. Bruce Schneier makes a very good point in his “Schneier on Security” blog post when he states the following:

You can only automate what you’re certain about, and there is still an enormous amount of uncertainty in cyber security”. He also makes one of the greatest quotes in INFOSEC history when he states “Data does equal information and information does not equal understanding”.


Perhaps the battle here is to get to a place of certainty, I too was once an advocate of “log everything and sort it out later” but the process of sorting through the data become extremely tedious and the amount of work it took to get to “certainty” I believe, gave bad actors time to operate while I wrote SQL queries, batch processes and parsing scripts for my context-starved data sets.  Couple this with the fact that teams are digitally bludgeoned to death with alerts and warnings that the “INFOSEC death sentence” starts to take root as people get desensitized to the alerts.

So where do we find certainty and how do we use it?
While the industry is still developing, there have been great strides in Threat Intelligence. ISACs around the world are working together to build shared intelligence around specific threats and making the information readily available via TAXII, STIXX and CIF. There is even a confidence level associated with each record that we are able to use as a guide to determine if a specific action is needed. The challenge with good threat intelligence is how we make it usable. Currently most threat Intel is leveraged in conjunction with a SIEM or logging product. While I certainly advocate for logs, there are some limitations with them.

  • Not everything logs properly (IoT Systems normally have NO logging at all)
  • You have a data gravity issue (you have to move the data into the cloud to be evaluated or you have to store petabytes of data to evaluate)
  • In some cases, only a small portion of the log is usable (but you pay to index the entire log with most platforms)
  • Their use is largely forensic with many of today’s threats

The case for Wire Data Analytics:
The key difference that I want to point out here is that using Wire Data Analytics with ExtraHop you can perform quite a bit of analysis in flight. ExtraHop “takes” data off the wire and is not dependent on another system to “give” the data to it. The only prerequisite for ExtraHop is an IP address. Examples of how I have made a SIEM more effective using wire data include:

  • Reducing Logging by 5000% by looking at logins by IP and calculating the total THEN sending a syslog message to the SIEM for those IPs with more than 100 logins vs. sending tens of thousands of logs per minute to the SIEM and checking on the back end
  • Checking an EGRESS transaction to against threat intelligence THEN sending the syslog if there is a match
  • In an enterprise with tens of thousands of employees, rather than logging EVERY failed login, aggregate records into five minute increments then send those with more than 5 login failures to the SIEM.

The point here is that you can deliver some context when you leverage wire data analytics with your SIEM workflows. Using SIEM-only, you must achieve context by aggregating the logs and looking at them after they are written. Using ExtraHop with your SIEM, you are able to achieve context (and more importantly, get closer to Mr. Schneier’s certainty) BEFORE sending the data to the SIEM. You can keep all the workflows that are tied to the incumbent SIEM system, you are just getting better, and fewer, logs. Should I disable an account that has 50 login failures in the last five minutes (Locked out or not)…..HELL YES! While I don’t think that automation and orchestration are a panacea, I think there are SOME cases where the certainty level is high enough to orchestrate a response. Also, I believe that automation and orchestration is not just for responding but can be used to make your SOC more effective.

Now that I have, hopefully, established the merits of using Wire Data Analytics, let’s keep in mind orchestration does NOT have to be a specific action or response. Orchestration can also be used to make your team more agile and hopefully, more effective. Most security teams I come across have at least one, two and in some cases, three open positions. The fact is, at a time when threats are becoming more complex, finding people with the needed skills to confront them is harder than ever. The situation has gotten so bad that the other day I typed “Human Capital Crisis” in Google and it auto-filled “in cybersecurity”. The job is getting tougher and there are fewer of us doing it, what I am going to show you in this post will never replace a human being but it might ease some of the heavy lifting that goes into achieving situational awareness.


PHISHING: “PHUCK YOU, YOU PHISHING PHUCKS!!!”
Anyone who has ever been phished or worked in an organization that is experiencing a phishing/spear phishing campaign has felt exactly as the section title says.  Lets have a look at how we can help our security teams get better data by leveraging the API’s of three unique platforms to warn them when a known phishing site has been accessed.

For those of us who are working too hard to bring context to the deluge of data, my suggestion…get some REST!!! Below I am going to walk you through how I can monitor activity to known phishing sites by doing a mash up of three technologies using the RESTFUL API of all three platforms.

Solution Roster:

  • ExtraHop Discovery/Explorer appliance
    ExtraHop provides wire data analytics and surveillance by working from a mirror of the traffic. Think of it as a CCTV for packets/transactions.
  • Anomali STAXX Virtual Machine
    Anomali STAXX provides me lists of current threat intelligence. Think of this as equipping the CCTV operator with a list of suspicious characters to look for.
  • Slack Collaboration Community
    Slack provides me a community at packetjockey.slack.com where my #virtualsoc team operations from anywhere in the world.
  • A python peer (Windows or Linux)
    This is the peer system that accesses the threat intelligence and pulls it off of the STAXX system and uploads the threat intelligence to the ExtraHop appliance.

How it works:
As you can see in the drawing below, the Linux peer uses the REST API to get a list of known phishing sites then executes a Python script to upload the data into the memcache on the ExtraHop appliance equipping it with the threat intelligence it needs. The ExtraHop appliance uses an application inspection trigger that checks every outgoing URI to see if it is a known phishing site. If there is a match, an alert is sent to Slack, Email/SMS in addition to being logged on their own internal dashboards and search appliance.

 

EH_SLACK_STAXX

Click Image

 

What the final product looks like:
From my Linux box, (I don’t dare go to these sites on my Windows or Mac laptop) I do a “wget” on one of the known phishing sites and within milliseconds (Yes milliseconds, watch the video if you don’t believe me). We get the client IP, Server IP and the site that they went to. From here we can find out who owns that client machine and get them to change their password immediately as well as issue an ACL for the server in case this is a spear phishing campaign and they are targeting specific uses. Also, before you ask, “Yes” we can import the list of known malicious email addresses and monitor key executive recipients in case one of them gets an email from a known malicious address. We can also check HTTP referrers against the phish_url threat intelligence.

In the screenshot below, you see my “wget” command and the result at 11:23:53 and you can see that the Slack warning came in at 11:26.  If you watch the video you will see it takes milliseconds.

I believe that by using slack you can also color code certain messages and program in that awesome “WTF” emoji (if one exists) for specific messages ExtraHop sends. Also, if you are not comfortable with specific information being sent to slack, we can configure the appliance to send you a link to the LOCAL URI that ONLY you and your team can access.

Conclusion:
While there is a lot of buzz around Orchestration and Automation I believe the pessimism around it is justified. Security teams have been promised a lot over the last few years and what we have found, especially lately, is that a lot of tried-and-true solutions either lack the shutter-speed or context to be effective. Here we are doing some orchestration and automation but we are doing so in order to give the HUMAN BEING better information. Our security director made a very good point to me the other day when he said the last thing a security team wants is more data. What we have hopefully shown in this post is that if you have open platforms like Anomali, SLACK and ExtraHop, you can craft an automation and orchestration solution that can actively help security teams in a manner that still leverages the nuance and rationalization that only exists in a human being. While there will be solutions that will effectively automatically block certain traffic, issue ACLs, Disable accounts, etc. We can also use automation to do some of the heavy lifting for today’s out(wo)manned security teams. To get where I think the Cyber Security space needs to be, it is going to take more than one product/tool/platform. If you have a solution that is closed and does not support any kind of RESTFUL API or open architecture, unless it fulfills a specific niche, get rid of it. If you are a vendor and you are selling a solution that is closed, do so at your own peril as I believe closed systems are destined to go the way of the dinosaur. By leveraging wire data with existing workflows, you can drastically reduce your TTWTF (time to WTF!??) and be better positioned to trade punches with tomorrow’s threats.

Thanks so much for reading, please watch the video.

John M. Smith

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advanced Persistent Surveillance: Threat Intelligence and Wire Data equals Real-time Wire Intelligence

Please watch the Video!!

As the new discipline of Threat Intelligence takes shape, Cyber Security teams will need to take a hard look at their existing tool sets if they want to take advantage of the dynamic, ever changing threat intelligence feeds providing them with information on which hosts are malicious and whether or not any of their corporate nodes have engaged in any sort of communications with any of the malicious hosts, DNS names or hashes that you are collecting from your CTI (Cyber Threat Intelligence) feeds. Currently the most common way that I see this accomplished is through the use of logs. Innovative products like Alienvault and Splunk have the ability to check the myriad of log files that they collect and cross reference them with CTI fees and check to see there have been any IP based correspondence with any known malicious actors called out by such feeds.

Today I want to talk about a different, and in my opinion, better way of integrating with Cyber Threat Intelligence using Wire Data and the ExtraHop Platform featuring the Discover and Explorer Appliances respectively.

How does it work? Well let’s first start with our ingredients.

  1. A threat analytics feed (open source, subscription, Bro or CIF created text file)
  2. A peer Unix-based system to execute a python script (that I will provide)
  3. An ExtraHop Discover Appliance
  4. An ExtraHop Explorer Appliance

Definitions:

  • ExtraHop Discover Appliance:
    An appliance that can passively (no agents) read data at speeds from 1GB to 40GB. It can also scale horizontally to handle large environments.
  • ExtraHop Explore Appliance:
    ExtraHop’s Elastic appliance that allows for grouping and string searching INTEL gathered off the wire.
  • Session Table: ExtraHop’s memcache that allows for instant lookup of known malicious hosts.

The solutions works by using the Unix peer to execute a python script that will collect the threat intelligence data. It then uploads the malicious hosts into the Discover Appliance’s Session Table (up to 32K records). The Discover appliance then waits to observe a session that connects with one of these known malicious sites. If it sees a session with a known site from the TI feed activities include, but are not limited to the following:

  • Updates a Threat Intelligence dashboard
  • Triggers an alert that warns the appropriate Incident Response team(s) about the connection to the malicious host
  • Writes a record to the ExtraHop Explorer Device
  • Triggers a Precision PCAP capturing the entire session/transaction to a PCAP file to be leveraged as digital evidence in the event that “Chet” the security guard needs to issue someone a cardboard box! (not sure if any of you are old enough to remember “Chet” from weird science)

Please Click Image:

ThreatIntel

Below you see the ExtraHop Threat Intelligence Monitoring Dashboard (last 30 minutes) showing the Client/Server and Protocol as well as the Alert and a running count of violations: (this is all 100% customizable)

Please Click Image:

On the Explorer Appliance, we see the custom data format for Malicious Host Access and we can note the regularity of the offense
Please Click Image:

And finally we have the Precision Packet Capture showing a PCAP file for forensics, digital evidence and if needed, punk busting.
Please Click Image:

Conclusion:
The entire process that I have outlined above took less than one minute to complete every single task (Dashboard, Alert, EXA, PCAP). According to Security Week, the average time to detect a breach has “Improved” to 146 days in their 2015 report. Cyber Threat Intelligence has a chance to drastically reduce the amount of time it takes to detect a breach but it needs a way to interact with existing data.  ExtraHop positions your Threat Intelligence investment to interact directly with the network, and in real time.  Many incumbent security tools are not built to accommodate solutions like CTI feeds via API or do not have an open architecture to leverage Threat Intelligence, much less use memcache to do quick lookups. The solution outlined above using ExtraHop with a Threat Intelligence feed positions INFOSEC teams to be able to perform Advanced Persistent Surveillance without the cost of expensive log indexing SIEM solutions. Since the data is analyzed in flight and in real time, you have a chance to greatly reduce your time to detection of a breach, maybe even start the Incident Response process within a few minutes!

What you have read here is not a unicorn, this exists today, you just need to open your mind to leveraging the network as a data source (in my opinion the richest) that can work in conjunction with your log consolidation strategy and maximize your investment in Cyber Threat Intelligence.

Incidentally, the “Malicious Host” you see in my logs is actually wiredata.net.  I did NOT want to browse any of the hosts on the blacklist so I manually added my host to the blacklist the accessed it.  Rest assured, WireData.net is not on any blacklists that I am aware of!

Thanks for reading!

John M. Smith

Advanced Persistent Surveillance: Insider “Hating” with ExtraHop and Wire Data

My last few posts have been centered around how we can go about finding potential breaches in your environment using ExtraHop’s wire data analytics platform. Most of these have involved placing a logical boundary around a set of CIDR blocks and reporting on L4 transactions that fall outside defined boundaries. In the case of our Stream Analytics Critical Control Points post, we look at connections from PROD to networks other than PROD and taking a packet capture when we note a violation. (Please see SACCP post).

In this next post, I want to talk about how we can provide surveillance around L7 security. In today’s post we are going to look at monitoring database traffic at Layer 7.

Scenario:

A disgruntled employee is about to start querying a sensitive database to steal important information.  Since the user has approved credentials and will be accessing the database over approved ports and using approved protocols, many standard security tools will not detect this insider’s behavior as they are operating in the “Behind the Perimeter Blind Spot” that exists in most organizations.  In this hypothetical scenario, we have a table called “Employees” that we want to audit any/all ad hoc selections against it.  The way the CRM application is set up, the only transactions we should observe against this table would involve stored procedures.  Any “Select, Insert, Update or Drop” methods should be alerted on immediately.

Database: CRM
Sensitive Table: Employees

We set up the audit trigger below telling us to start a PCAP capture in the event that we see any sort of database transaction that includes “from employees”.

IH_1

 

We assign this trigger to the Database server housing our CRM Application and we should then be alerted any time someone runs an ad hoc query against the database.

Now, when an insider makes an ad hoc query, we can alert, send a syslog or, as in the case of the trigger above, initiate a packet capture.  As you can see below, we see a number of SENSITIVE TABLE PCAP files pertaining to the client that ran the report as well as the server it was run against.

IH_2

 

When we look at the PCAP we can see the Ad Hoc query that they ran as well as use the PCAP file as digital evidence to begin the process of dealing with the individual violating the policy.  As you can see, the user ran the query “select LastName from Employees”.  This is demo data but that could have been Select * from Customers or CCards.

IH_3

 

Conclusion:

As I recall, the Anthem breach was actually a system owner who notices someone running Ad Hoc queries against their customer database.  By providing Layer 7 visibility into the actual transaction, insiders can be effectively “named and shamed” when auditing with ExtraHop’s Wire Data platform.  In today’s world, credentials are a joke (trust me, I sit at the core and look at packets all day).  When an insider is using approved credentials and coming in over approved ports and protocols, the aperture needs to be increased to provide visibility into the L7 transactions to ensure that they are appropriate and that an insider is not running unauthorized queries against your sensitive data.

Layer 7 auditing with ExtraHop positions you to give insiders a cardboard box, not access!

Thanks for reading!

John

No End in Sight: Cyber Security and the Digital Maginot Line

whackamalware1

Yesterday my spouse was informed by a laboratory company where she was having some blood work done that she needed to provide them a credit card number that they could put on file in case our insurance company could not pay or did not pay the bill for the lab costs. This after showing our insurance card and providing proof that we are insured. Having lived with me the last 7 years she asked the woman at the counter for a copy of the InfoSec strategy asking them to “please include information on encryption ciphers, key lengths as well as information on how authentication and authorization is managed by their system and if her credit card information would be encrypted at rest”. Needless to say, they had no idea what she was talking about much to the exasperation of the people waiting behind her in line as well as the front office staff. She ended up getting her tests done but was told she would not be welcomed back if she was going to continue to be unwilling to surrender her Credit Card number to their front office for them to, digitally, keep on file.

Between the two of us, we have replaced 4 or 5 cards in the last 3 years due to various breaches, I have had to replace two and, I believe, she has had to replace 3 of them. In my case, each incident cost me around $800 that I had to wait weeks to get back and only after I went into the bank and filled out forms to attest that I did not make the charges. Each incident was about 4 hours of my time by the time all was said and done. Yes, there were lawsuits and lawyers were paid six figure sums as a result and I am sure they deserved it but at the end of the day, I was without my $800-$1600 for an extended period of time and I had to run through a regulatory maze just to get back what I had lost. No…..I never got any settlement money, I hope they spent it well. Fortunately for me, I am 46 years old now and have a great job, if this had happened to 26 year-old (still a screw-up) John, it would have been utterly devastating as I likely would have been evicted from my apartment and had bill collectors calling me. I can’t imagine calamity this creates for some folks.

I am somewhat dumbfounded that any company at any level would seek to get people to surrender their information digitally given the egregious levels of retail breaches that have plagued the industry the last few years. Forget that consumer advocacy is non-existent, while some retailers have been very forward in understanding the impact to their consumers, I simply do not see things getting better, EVER. The current method by which Cyber Security is practiced today is broken and there seems to be no motivation to fix it. This in spite of extremely costly settlements and damage to brands, the way we practice security today is deeply flawed and it’s not the Security team’s fault. Until system owners start taking some responsibility for their own security, these breaches will simply never end.

Bitching about the lack of responsibility of system owners isn’t new to me, my first “documented” rant on it was back in early 2010. As a system owner, I, almost compulsively, logged everything that went on and wrote the metrics to a centralized console. In a way, it was a bit of a poor-man’s DevOps endeavor. In doing so, I was able automate reporting so that when I came into work each morning, I would spend 15 minutes sipping my coffee and looking at all of the non-standard communications that went on the previous day (basically all internet traffic that did not use a web browser and all traffic outside the US). No, it wasn’t full IDS/IPS production but on two separate occasions, I was able to find malware before several seven figure investments in malware detection software. That is two instances in four years or 2/1000 mornings (approximately 4 years’ worth of work minus vacations, holidays etc.) where I noted actionable intelligence. That may not have been a lot but if you are one of the dozens of retailers who have had breaches in the last few years, I think it is plausible to assume the systems teams could have had an impact on the success of a breach had they been a little more involved in their own security. Don’t underestimate the value of human observation.

Why the INFOSEC is not enough?
Short of a crystal ball, I am not sure how we expect INFOSEC teams to be able to know what communication is acceptable and what communications are not. In the last few years “sophisticated persistent advanced super-duper complex malware” generally means that someone compromised a set of credentials and ran amuck for months on end stealing the digital crown jewels. Even if a policeman is parked outside my house, if they see someone walk up, open the door with a key and walk out with my safe, 60 TV (Actually, I don’t have a 60 inch TV) and other valuables how the hell are they supposed to know they should or should not be doing that. In most cases, this is the digital equivalent of what is happening in some of these breaches accept that digitally, I am sitting at my couch while all of this is going on in front of me. If an attacker has gotten credentials or has compromised a system and is stealing, expecting the security team to see this before extensive damage is done is unrealistic. With some of the social engineering techniques that exist and some of the service accounts used with elevated privileges, you don’t always have the 150 login failures to warn you. If I am actually paying attention, I can actually say, “Hey, what the hell are you doing, put that TV down before I call the cops!” (Or, my step-daughter is a foodie and she has some cast iron skillets that could REALLY leave a lump on someone’s head).

The presence of an INFOSEC team does not absolve system owners of their own security any more than the presence of a police department in my city means I don’t have to lock my doors or pay attention to who comes and goes from my house.

Police: “911 operator what is your emergency?”

Me: “I’ve been burgled, someone came into my house and stole from me”

Police: “When did this happen? Are they still in your house?”

Me: “It happened six months ago but I don’t know if they are still in my house stealing from me or not”

Police: “Ugh!!”

If someone has made a copy of the keys to my house it is not the police’s fault if they don’t catch them illegally entering my home in the same manor that the police cannot be everywhere, all the time, you INFOSEC team cannot inspect every digital transaction all the time.

Thought Exercise:
If someone has compromised a set of credentials or, say a server in your REST/SOAP tier and they are running ad hoc queries against your back end database, let’s evaluate how that would look to the system owner vs. the INFOSEC practitioner.

To the INFOSEC Practitioner: They see approved credentials over approved ports, since they are not the DBA or the Web Systems owner so this, likely, does not trigger any responses because the INFOSEC resource is not privy to the day to day behavior or design.
The DBA: The DBA should notice that the types of queries have changed and fall out of their chair.
Web Properties team: They should have a similar “WTF!?!?” moment as they note that the change from what is normally stored procedures or even recognizable SQL statements to custom ad hoc queries of critical data.

In this scenario, one in which I covered on wiredata.net in May of 2014, it is obvious that the INFOSEC professional is not as well positioned to detect the breach as he or she does not manage the system on a day to day basis and while several processes have INFOSEC involved during the architecture the idea that your INFOSEC team is going to know everything about every application is neither practical or reasonable. It is imperative that system owners take part in making sure their own systems are secure by engaging in a consistent level of intelligence gathering and surveillance. In my case, it was 15 minutes of every morning. Ask yourself, do you know every nonstandard communication that sourced from your server block? Will you find out within an hour, 8 hours, a single day? These are things that are easily accomplished with wire data or even log mongering but to continue to be utterly clueless of who your systems are talking to outside of normal communications (DNS, A/D, DB, HTTP) to internal application partners is to perpetuate the existing paradigm of simply waiting for your company to get breached. While we give the INFOSEC team the black eye, they are the least likely group to be able to see an issue in spite of the fact that they are probably going to be held accountable for it.

There are services from companies like FireEye and BeyondTrust that offer innovative threat analytics and offer a number of “non-charlatan” solutions to today’s security threats. I’ve struggled to avoid calling Cyber Security an abject failure but we are reaching the point where the Maginot line was more successful than today’s Cyber Security efforts. I am not a military expert and won’t pretend to be one but as I understanding, the Maginot line, the French solution to the German invasion during WWI, was built on the strategies of the previous war (breach) and was essentially perimeter centric and the enemy simply went around it (sound familiar?). So perimeter centric was it that apparently upon being attacked from behind they were unable do defend themselves as the turrets were never designed to turn all the way around. The thought of what to do once an enemy force got inside was apparently never considered. I find the parallels between today’s Cyber Security efforts and the Maginot line to be somewhat surprising. I am not down on perimeter security but a more agile solution is needed to augment perimeter measures. One might even argue that there really isn’t a perimeter anymore. The monitoring of peer-to-peer communications by individual system owners is an imperative. While these teams are stretched thin already (don’t EVEN get me started on morale, workload and all around BS that exists in today’s Enterprise IT) what is the cost of not doing it? In every high profile breach we have noted in the last three years, all of these “sophisticated persistent threats” could have been prevented by a little diligence on the part of the system owners and better integration with the INFOSEC apparatus.

Cyber Insurance Policies could change things?
Actually, we are starting to see insurance providers force companies to purchase a separate rider for cyber breach insurance. I can honestly say, this may bring about some changes to the level of cyber responsibility shown by different companies. I live in Florida where we are essentially the whipping boys for the home owners insurance industry and I have actually received notification that if I did not put a hand rail on my back porch that they would cancel my policy. (The great irony being that I fell ass over teakettle on that very back porch while moving in). While annoyed, I had a hand rail installed post haste as I did not want to have my policy cancelled since, at the time, we only had one choice for insurance in Florida and it was the smart thing to do.

Now imagine I call that same insurance company with the following claim:
“Hello, yes, uh, I am being sued by the Girl Scouts of America because one of them came to my door to sell me cookies and she fell through my termite eaten front porch and landed on the crushed beer bottles that are strewn about my property cutting herself and then she was mauled by my five semi-feral pit bulls that I just let run around my property feeding them occasionally”.

Sadly, this IS Florida and that IS NOT an entirely unlikely phone call for an adjuster to get, however, even more sad is the fact that this analogy likely UNDERSTATES the level of cyber-responsibility taken by several Enterprises when it comes to protecting critical information and preventing a breach. If you are a Cyber Insurance provider and your customer cannot prove to you that they are monitoring peer-to-peer communications, I would think twice about writing the policy at all.

In the same manor that insurance agents drive around my house, expect auditors to start asking questions about how your enterprise audits peer-to-peer communications. If you cannot readily provide a list of ALL non-standard communications within a few minutes, you have a problem!! These breaches are now into the 7-8 digit dollar amounts and those companies who do not ensure proper diligence do so at their own peril.

Conclusion:
As an IT professional and someone who cares about IT Security, I am somewhat baffled at the continued focus on yesterday’s breach. I can tell you what tomorrow’s breach will be, it will involve someone’s production system or servers with critical information on them having a conversation with another system that it shouldn’t. This could mean a compromised web tier server running ad hoc queries; this could be a new FTP Server that is suddenly stood up and sending credit card information to a system in Belarus. This could be a pissed of employee emailing your leads to his gmail account. The point is, there ARE technologies and innovations out there that can help provide visibility into non-standard communications. While I would agree that today’s attacks are more complex, in many cases, they involve several steps to stage the actual breach itself. With the right platform, vigilant system owners can spot these pieces being put into place before they start or at least maybe detect the breach within minutes, hours or days instead of months. Let’s accept the fact that we are going to get breached and build a strategy on quelling it sooner. As a consumer who looks at his credit card expiration date and thinks to himself “Yeah right!” basically betting it gets compromised before it expires. I see apathy prevailing and companies who really don’t understand what a pain in the ass it is when I have to, yet again, get another Debit or Credit card due to a breach and while they think it is just their breach, companies need to keep in mind that your breach may be the 3rd or 4th time your customer has had to go through this and it is your brand that will suffer disproportionately as a result. Your consumers are already fed up and companies need to assume that the margin of error was already eaten up by whichever vendor previously forced your customers through post-breach aftermath. I see system owners continuing to get stretched thin and kept out of the security process and not taking part in the INFOSEC initiatives at their companies, either due to apathy or workload. And unfortunately, I see no end in sight….

Thanks for reading

John M. Smith