And that's already mitigated by the cases of ammo being stockpiled!

 John W. Cook
Network Operations Manager
Partnership For Strong Families
5950 NW 1st Place
Gainesville, Fl 32607
Office (352) 244-1610
Cell     (352) 215-6944
MCSE, MCP+I, MCTS,
CompTIA A+, N+, Security+
VSP4, VTSP4

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On 
Behalf Of Steven M. Caesare
Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 2:32 PM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] man-in-the-middle attack

Well given that it's occurrence is a 100% certainty, I didn't think that it 
really was fair to consider there being "odds" of it's happening...

-sc

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On Behalf Of William Robbins
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 2:27 PM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] man-in-the-middle attack

I notice there's been no mention of the coming zombie apocalypse.


 - WJR

On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Steven M. Caesare 
<scaes...@caesare.com<mailto:scaes...@caesare.com>> wrote:
Substitute any risk you what in any circumstance you want.

As long as the odds are > 0 then you have to consider mitigating that risk... 
it then becomes a matter of cost to do so, the value proposition of which 
depends on the potential damage from the event occuring.

How unlikely does an event have to be in order to spend $X on it?

-sc

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Micheal Espinola Jr
Sent: Friday, August 2, 2013 11:40 AM

To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] man-in-the-middle attack

Again, apples/oranges.  I'm speaking of specific circumstance, and I'm not 
about to include natural disasters in the debate.  You can either choose to see 
what I'm saying for what I'm saying, or don't.  I'm not generalizing.  I'm 
speaking of data loss to remote access intrusion.

--
Espi


On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 6:53 AM, Steven M. Caesare 
<scaes...@caesare.com<mailto:scaes...@caesare.com>> wrote:
> The odds dont matter if the risk will result in catastrophic loss to the 
> business.

Sure they do.

A meteor that wipes out your facility in North America can be mitigated by 
having a completely redundant $50bil factory in Europe.

Are you recommending that?

-sc


From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Micheal Espinola Jr
Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2013 7:55 PM

To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] man-in-the-middle attack

IMO, its a matter of recreational gambling vs. professional (done for a living) 
gambling[1].  You know the odds, or you don't - doesn't matter.  What matters 
is if you can continue to profit from the risk.  Will the risk hurt the 
continuity of business operations in terms of revenue loss.  The extreme 
example of this is Russian roulette.

The resulting exposed data in a MitM scenario is unique and has substantial 
potential.  What is important to monetize here is the loss resulting from a 
MitM attack at all levels of remote access for the organization.

The odds dont matter if the risk will result in catastrophic loss to the 
business.  As someone that has discovered corporate espionage intrusions, and 
systematically prevented the loss of future business deals worth millions of 
dollars (whose loss would have otherwise collapsed the business) - I have a 
specific view of this issue.  The only additional info on this that I will 
provide is that the intrusion allowed a bidding competitor access to corporate 
communications as well as business plans and bidding documents.  My discoveries 
led to the prevention of a competitor from staying one step ahead of us in 
business planning and bidding, and eventual Federal prosecution of the intruder.


1. I'm not a gambler, but I have known professional gamblers.

--
Espi


On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Ken Schaefer 
<k...@kj.net.au<mailto:k...@kj.net.au>> wrote:
> In any event, the odds are irrelevant - the issue is the business risk of 
> intrusion/loss.

How can you say that "odds are irrelevant" if the issue is business risk?

Risk is "potential for loss", and potential includes a weighting for likelihood 
(i.e. "the odds")?

Can you clarify what you mean?

Cheers
Ken

From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> 
[mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>] 
On Behalf Of Micheal Espinola Jr
Sent: Thursday, 1 August 2013 1:43 AM

To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com<mailto:ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com>
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] man-in-the-middle attack

Odds would be very difficult to extrapolate with any legitimate accuracy, as 
you need to know and control the possible environments and habits of your 
remote employees.  In any event, the odds are irrelevant - the issue is the 
business risk of intrusion/loss.

--
Espi


On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 8:07 AM, David Lum 
<david....@nwea.org<mailto:david....@nwea.org>> wrote:
I need to present management with the odds of this actually getting exploited, 
as I'd want to force TLS 1.2 for ADFS but that takes Chrome and more 
importantly Safari (iOS devices) out of the mix, so I suspect management might 
say "we want compatibility instead of protection from some obscure attack that 
is unlikely to happen.

In short, what are the odds of a MITM attack actually happening between my 
remote employee and our ADFS server?
David Lum
Sr. Systems Engineer // NWEATM
Office 503.548.5229<tel:503.548.5229> // Cell (voice/text) 
503.267.9764<tel:503.267.9764>






________________________________

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: The information transmitted, or contained or 
attached to or with this Notice is intended only for the person or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain Protected Health Information (PHI), 
confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, transmission, 
dissemination, or other use of, and taking any action in reliance upon this 
information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient without 
the express written consent of the sender are prohibited. This information may 
be protected by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 
(HIPAA), and other Federal and Florida laws. Improper or unauthorized use or 
disclosure of this information could result in civil and/or criminal penalties.
Consider the environment. Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need 
to.

Reply via email to