Well, we (collective we) have to stop giving them easy outs. They find ways to make sure that they can use hot-off-the-presses technology to get order entry or other more-direct-to-revenue projects done, and heads roll appropriately for not getting it done on time.
That same approach can be applied to security. Everyone knows that it isn't, and so we see the results that we see... It's not an insurmountable problem by any means, especially when you look at the technical -- and sometimes political -- complexity of the things which *are* accomplished properly. *ASB *(Professional Bio <http://about.me/Andrew.S.Baker/bio>) Harnessing the Advantages of Technology for the SMB market... On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> wrote: > Probably. But some executive sponsor will ask “is it secure? Did it pass > the security review?” > > Some PM, who knows nothing about IT, will answer “yes” > > Some people, in the security group, who are expected to know everything > about every app (even though they might be experts with FWs and SIEMs and > AV, don’t know anything about .NET / JSP etc) reviewed it and agreed > > And some poor shmuck developed this thing 10 years ago when this wasn’t an > issue. Or they needed to pass some data between disparate systems but > couldn’t find a good way to do it, so they went the easy way. > > > > Again, not excusing it – it’s really poor form, and so easy to protect > against. That said, maintaining session state “out of process” was expensive > 10 years ago. If that’s when the app was developed, the programmers probably > didn’t know better, and the solutions for scalability were expensive. > Quoting OWASP is fine (well, even that wasn’t really that well known 10 > years ago), but unless you do App Dev in an enterprise, you just can’t know > how difficult it is to get anything done. What was “state of the art” in > security 12 months ago when you started the project is obsolete by the time > it’s installed, and completely out-of-date by the time the next refresh > project is entering kick-off meetings. > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > *From:* Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, 15 June 2011 9:48 PM > > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > *Subject:* Re: [OT] Citibank worse at security than Sony > > > > Thou speakest truth... > > My comment about shareholder value is aimed more at the fact that the people > that should be concerned about whether or not these things are happening > properly are not concerned enough to even ask those questions, relative to > any questions that would result in revenue potentially going up... > > > > *ASB *(Professional Bio <http://about.me/Andrew.S.Baker/bio>) > *Harnessing the Advantages of Technology for the SMB market...* > > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 7:39 AM, Ken Schaefer <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hmm – at the individual application development level, in a large org, no > one cares about shareholder value. The problem with large organisations is > the huge amount of effort required to get anything implemented. The > application development was probably outsourced, the infrastructure is > handled by some other company, the security review was done at the > architectural level, and the annual pen test might not have picked it up. > And the auditors generally don’t know how anything actually works, and just > require ticks in the boxes (like hiding your server OS in the HTTP headers, > rather than actually trying to attack your application) > > > > Cheers > > Ken > > > > *From:* Andrew S. Baker [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, 15 June 2011 7:31 PM > > > *To:* NT System Admin Issues > > *Subject:* Re: [OT] Citibank worse at security than Sony > > > > *>>**As with Sony, one has to wonder where their priorities are with > data protection ..* > > > > It's all about shareholder value, and the shareholders value profits and > dividends... > > Plus, no one expects to be caught, or exposed, so it's not a problem until > it's a problem. > > Until they suffer some real penalties (huge SEC fine, real government > oversight, significant loss of customers, jail time for someone in senior > management), there will be little change. > > > > *ASB *(Professional Bio <http://about.me/Andrew.S.Baker/bio>) > *Harnessing the Advantages of Technology for the SMB market...* > > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:31 AM, Alan Davies <[email protected]> > wrote: > > What floors me is how sophisticated they are saying the attack is! > Honestly, this article makes me so angry! > > http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/technology/14security.html?_r=3 > > This is basic s**t! It's not APT. It's not sophisticated. It's > complete lack of good governance and due diligence. It's a high profile > web app with PII data that should be having significant PT work done at > a MINIMUM of quarterly. > > As with Sony, one has to wonder where their priorities are with data > protection .. > > > > a > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew B Ames [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 15 June 2011 07:24 > To: NT System Admin Issues > > Subject: RE: [OT] Citibank worse at security than Sony > > As a software engineer I would feel rather guilty to develop a system > that was that poor. I used to have a Citi credit card..... I had better > check it is no long active. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Scott [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 15 June 2011 04:36 > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: [OT] Citibank worse at security than Sony > > So... 200,000 or so Citigroup customers have had their person info > stolen. Someone logged in to one account properly, then changed the > account number in the URL to someone else, and the site happily served > up that account instead. I hesitate to even call the first party an > "attacker". Is it really an attack if the bank just leaves a pile of > money sitting on the sidewalk and someone takes it? > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2003393/How-Citigroup-hackers-br > oke-door-using-banks-website.html > > Some banker fat cats need to go to jail for this. This is > incompetence of the highest order. > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
