*** UPDATED 15-April 2014 ***
By now, almost everyone has heard of the OpenSSL Heartbleed vulnerability with CVE id CVE-2014-0160. The vulnerability has to do with the implementation of the TLS heartbeat extension (RFC6520) and could allow secret key or private information leakage in TLS encrypted communications. For more detailed information, visit the VRT’s analysis.
Cisco maintains an Cisco Event Response Page with details and network mitigations about the vulnerability
Read More »
Tags: Heartbleed, OpenSSL, psirt, security, vulnerability
The first blog of this series discussing the role of data security in the cloud can be found here.
In 2014 and onward, security professionals can expect to see entire corporate perimeters extended to the cloud, making it essential to choose a service provider that can deliver the security that your business needs.
While organizations can let business needs trade down security we’ve begun to see how a recent slew of data breaches are encouraging greater vigilance around security concerns. For example, a recent CloudTweaks article highlights the need for organizations to be confident in their choice of cloud providers and their control over data. IT leaders have the power to control where sensitive information is stored. They also have the power to choose how, where and by whom information can be accessed.
An important driver in mitigating risk and increasing security is to ask the right questions.
Institute Control By Asking the Right Questions
However, adding to fears about ceding the control of data to the cloud is lack of transparency and accountability about how cloud hosting partner/ providers secure data and ensure a secure and compliant infrastructure. Cloud consuming organizations often don’t ask enough questions about what is contained in their service-level agreements, and about the process for updating security software and patching both network and API vulnerabilities.
Organizations need reassurance that a cloud provider has a robust set of policies, process and than is using automated as well as the latest technologies to detect, thwart and mitigate attacks, while in progress as well as be prepared to mitigate after an attack.
An important driver in mitigating risk and increasing security is to ask the right questions. When evaluating cloud service providers, IT leaders need to ask: Read the full blog here.
Tags: 2014 annual security report, CIO, Cisco Security, Cisco Security Grand Challenge, CiscoCloud, CiscoSecurityGrandChallenge, cloud, cloud security, cloudtweaks, data security, Gartner, IoT, ITaaS, Network World, security, Service Provider
Long before becoming a part of Cisco, the Sourcefire team was aggressively addressing the advanced malware challenges our customers face daily. We believe that the most effective way to address these challenges is a continuous Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) approach that does more than just track malware at a point in time, but is also unrelenting in both monitoring and applying protection. Cisco shares this vision, which is why the combination of our technologies is so powerful. It’s not just about the network, or just about the endpoint— it’s about connecting these and everything in between for complete protection.
While our customers knew it and we knew it, the industry at large can now be certain that this continuous approach is the most effective for addressing advanced threats. NSS Labs tested AMP along with other security solutions for its 2014 Breach Detection System Security Value Map (SVM) and Product Analysis Report (PAR). NSS Labs defines Breach Detection Systems as solutions that provide enhanced detection of advanced malware, zero-day and targeted attacks that could bypass traditional defenses. The SVM results speak for themselves:
The SVM is a unique graphical representation of the security effectiveness and value of tested products. It’s no surprise to us that AMP scored as high as it did, but the results are great validation of our commitment to delivering this leading protection with the best total cost of ownership (TCO).
The SVM is also further proof that solutions marketed at addressing targeted advanced persistent threats (APT) and zero-day attacks can’t stop at only offering point-in-time detection. Advanced Malware Protection is the only solution to offer continuous analysis, retrospective security, and multi-source Indicators of Compromise (IoC) for protection before, during and after attacks across the extended network. These capabilities address an important gap that exists in all point-in-time products. Our AMP solution provides the continuous capability to “go back in time” and retrospectively identify and then remediate files that initially evade defenses.
Some highlights from testing:
- AMP has the lowest TCO of any product tested
- AMP is a leader in security effectiveness achieving detection of 99 percent of all tested attacks
- AMP excelled in time-to-detection, catching threats faster than competing Breach Detection Systems
When we talk about AMP with our customers, we call it “AMP Everywhere” because it can protect from the cloud to the network to the endpoint. It has been available as a connector for endpoints and mobile devices, a standalone appliance, and as part of Next-Generation Firewall and Next-Generation IPS for the last two years. It has also recently been integrated into Cisco’s portfolio of Web and Email Security Appliances and Cloud Web Security. With web and email interactions remaining one of the primary vectors for malware infection in organizations, AMP integration on our leading email appliance and web security gateways provides our customers with even stronger protection wherever a threat can manifest itself.
“AMP Everywhere” is a reality. An extremely effective one, at that. I encourage you to see the results for yourself. Download a free copy of the 2014 NSS Labs Breach Detection Systems SVM and PAR for Advanced Malware Protection.
Tags: Advanced Malware Protection, AMP, malware, PAR, Product Analysis Report, Security Value Map, Sourcefire, SVM, tco, total cost of ownership
Editor’s Note: This post is a response to EN Mobility Workspace. Please see that post for full context.
A colleague of mine here at Cisco, Jonathan, recently spoke well to the Evolution of Cisco Mobility Workspace Journey. Like all technologies, there is an adoption and engagement cycle based on maturity and risk level. We begin at the device-focused phase with a simple “get me on the network.” Following is the application-focused phase, “now that I am on what can I do with my ability to move around without a wire and work anytime and anywhere.” And the final is the overall experience, which is tailored to the user based on who they are, where they are, what they need or can do. And one can argue the next mobility phase for organizations is IoT (Internet of Things) as more single purpose devices (not necessarily with a user behind it) move to the wireless network.
What is critical to point out is the consistent requirement (not a nice to have) for security as the mobile user experience expands. Why is this so important? According to IDC over 47 percent of organizations see security enhancements required with their mobility initiative. The questions to consider are:
- What are the secure mobility issues today and potentially tomorrow?
- What are the implications?
- What is likelihood of these threats?
The top secure mobility concerns noted by numerous surveys indicate the following:
- Data protection
- Application access
- Lost and stolen device
- Rogue devices
Read More »
Tags: application access, cyber security, data protection, interop, lost device, mobile, MobileIron, Ponemon, rogue device, security, stolen device
Editor’s Note: This is the second part of a four-part series featuring an in-depth overview of Infosec’s (Information Security) Unified Security Metrics Program. In this second installment, we discuss where to begin measuring.
H. James Harrington, noted author of Business Process Improvement, once said “Measurement is the first step that leads to control and eventually to improvement. If you can’t measure something, you can’t understand it. If you can’t understand it, you can’t control it. If you can’t control it, you can’t improve it.” Good piece of wisdom, but where do you start? How do you mine data through the use of metrics in order to provide greater insight into your organization’s security posture, while simultaneously using it as a vehicle to protect your most critical assets?
For Infosec’s Unified Security Metrics (USM) team, there’s plenty of statistical data sources available to mine information from, particularly from IT system logs and dashboards. In fact, early research conducted by the team identified 30 different types of meaningful data to track. Comprehensive, yes, but not realistically feasible, nor sustainable to implement long-term across Cisco. The USM team’s solution centered on the primary outcomes they were trying to achieve, namely, driving security process improvement behaviors and actions within IT. Subsequently, the list was narrowed down to five key measurements:
- Stack compliance: measures vulnerabilities found on the TCP/IP stack (i.e. network devices, operating systems, application servers, middleware, etc.)
- Anti-malware compliance: quantifies whether malware protection software has been properly installed and is up-to-date
- Baseline application vulnerability assessment: computes whether automatic vulnerability system scans have been performed in accordance with Cisco policy and, if post-scan, any open security weaknesses remain
- Deep application vulnerability assessment: computes whether penetration testing has been performed on our most business-critical applications in accordance with Cisco policy and, if post-testing, any open security weaknesses remain
- Design exceptions: measures the total number of open security exceptions, based on deviations from established security standards and best practices
Read More »
Tags: infosec, metrics, security