Risk base approach for security management fujitsu-fms event 15 aug 2011

Editor's Notes

• #8: Associated Press 01.23.06 SAN FRANCISCO -- A 20-year-old hacker pleaded guilty Monday to surreptitiously seizing control of hundreds of thousands of internet-connected computers, using the zombie network to serve pop-up ads and renting it to people who mounted attacks on websites and sent out spam.Jeanson James Ancheta, of Downey, California, pleaded guilty in Los Angeles federal court to four felony charges for crimes, including infecting machines at two U.S. military sites, that earned him more than $61,000, said federal prosecutor James Aquilina said.Under a plea agreement, which still must be approved by a judge, Ancheta will receive from 4 years to 6 years in prison, forfeit a 1993 BMW and more than $58,000 in profit and pay $19,000 in restitution to the federal government, according to court documents. He is to be sentenced May 1.Prosecutors called the case the first to target profits derived from use of "botnets," large numbers of computers that hackers commandeer and marshal for various nefarious deeds, their owners unaware that parasitic programs have been installed are being run by remote control.Botnets are being used increasingly to overwhelm websites with streams of data, often by extortionists. They feed off of vulnerabilities in computers that run Microsoft's Windows operating system, typically machines whose owners haven't bothered to install security patches.A November indictment charged Ancheta with 17 counts of conspiracy, fraud and other crimes connected to a 14-month hacking spree that started in June 2004 and that authorities say continued even after FBI agents raided his house the following December."Part of what's most troubling about those who commit these kinds of offenses is they think they'll never be caught," said Aquilina, who spent more than a year investigating Ancheta and several of Ancheta's online associates who remain uncharged co-conspirators.Ancheta's attorney, federal public defender Greg Wesley, did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment.The guilty plea comes less than a week after the FBI released a report that estimates viruses, worms and Trojan horse programs like the ones Ancheta employed cost U.S. organizations $11.9 billion each year.November's 52-page indictment, along with papers filed last week, offer an unusually detailed glimpse into a shadowy world where hackers, often not old enough to vote, brag in online chat groups about their prowess in taking over vast numbers of computers and herding them into large armies of junk mail robots and arsenals for so-called denial of service attacks on websites.Ancheta one-upped his hacking peers by advertising his network of "bots," short for robots, on internet chat channels.A website Ancheta maintained included a schedule of prices he charged people who wanted to rent out the machines, along with guidelines on how many bots were required to bring down a particular type of website.In July 2004, he told one chat partner he had more than 40,000 machines available, "more than I can handle," according to the indictment. A month later, Ancheta told another person he controlled at least 100,000 bots, and that his network had added another 10,000 machines in a week and a half.In a three-month span starting in June 2004, Ancheta rented out or sold bots to at least 10 "different nefarious computers users," according to the plea agreement. He pocketed $3,000 in the process by accepting payments through the online PayPal service, prosecutors said.Starting in August 2004, Ancheta turned to a new, more lucrative method to profit from his botnets, prosecutors said. Working with a juvenile in Boca Raton, Florida, whom prosecutors identified by his internet nickname "SoBe," Ancheta infected more than 400,000 computers.Ancheta and SoBe signed up as affiliates in programs maintained by online advertising companies that pay people each time they get a computer user to install software that displays ads and collects information about the sites a user visits.Prosecutors say Ancheta and SoBe then installed the ad software from the two companies -- Gamma Entertainment of Montreal, Quebec, and Loudcash, whose parent company was acquired last year by 180Solutions of Bellevue, Washington -- on the bots they controlled, pocketing more than $58,000 in 13 months."It's immoral, but the money makes it right," Ancheta told SoBe during one online chat, according to the indictment."I just hope this (Loudcash) stuff lasts a while so I don't have to get a job right away," SoBe told Ancheta during a different conversation.Aquilina, the assistant U.S. attorney prosecuting the case, wouldn't say whether authorities plan to charge SoBe or any of the people accused of renting out Ancheta's bots, many of whom are described as "unindicted co-conspirators."During the course of their scheme, Ancheta and SoBe infected U.S. military computers at the China Lake Naval Air Facility and the Defense Information System Agency headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia, according to a sworn declaration signed by Ancheta.
• #16: Security must be pervasive. Every aspect of a company should be security conscious. Security Policies, Standards And ProceduresPersonnel SecurityPhysical SecurityNetwork SecuritySystems SecuritySystem AuditRisk ManagementApplications Security - Authentication - Access ControlAudit LogsIncident ManagementDisaster Recovery And Business ContinuitySecurity AssuranceSecurity Training And Awareness Requirements
• #17: Security and Risk ManagementAsk any network administrator what he needs security for, and he can describe the threats: web site defacements, corruption and loss of data due to network penetrations, denial-of-service attacks, viruses and trojans. The list seems endless, and an endless series of news stories proves that the threats are real.Asl that same network administrators how security technologies help. And he’ll discuss avoiding the the threats. This is the traditional paradigm of computer security, born out of a computer science memtality: figure out what the threats are, and build technologies to avoid them. The conceit is that technologies can somehow “solve” computer security, and the end result is a security program that becomes an expense and a barrier to business. How many times has a security officer said: “You can’t do that; it would be insecure?”.The paradigm is wrong. Security is a people problem, not a technology problem. There is no computer security product-of even suite of pfoducts-that acts as magical security dust, imbuing a network with the property of “secure”. It can’t be done. And it’s not the way business works. Business manage risks. They manage all sorts of risks; network security is just another one. And there are many different ways to manage risks. The ones you choose in a particular situation depend on the detail of that situation. And failures happen regularly; many business manage their risks improperly, pay for their mistakes, and soldier on. Businesses are remarkably resilient.To take a concrete example, consider a physical store and the risk of shoplifting. Most grocery stores accept the risk as a cost of doing business. Clothing stores might put tags on all their garments and sensors at the doorways; they mitigate the risk with a technology. A jewelry sotre might mitigate the risk through procedures: all merchandise stays locked up, customers are not allowed to handle anything unattended, etc. And that same jewelry store will carry theft insurance, another risk management tool. More security isn’t always better. You could improve the security of a bank by strip-searching everyone who walks through the front door. But if you did this, you would have no business. Studies show that most shoplifting at department stores occurs in dressing rooms. You could improve security by removing the dress rooms, but the losses in sales would more than make up for the decrease in shoplifting. What all of these business are looking for is adequate security at a reasonable cost. This is what we need on the internet as well-security that allows a company to offer new services, to expand into new markets, and to attract and retain new customers. And the particular computer security solutions they choose depend on who they are and what they are doing.
• #21: Security is not a single solution. Security is a pervasive, ongoing process of reviewing and revising based on changes to the environment. It is the culmination of interaction between People, process, and technology. 1. People – People are the most important security component. People define Policy and process and procedures. Often, People are weakest link in any security infrastructure. Educating users on security awareness, and rewarding them when they follow you procedures, is a great way to build a security-conscious environment. 2. Process – “Security is a process, not a product”. Security product is only a one-step process. As the corporate environment change, these products should be analyzed and reconfigured. Overall, security is not something you can “get”. There is not out-of-the-box, plug-and-play solutions that provide you with an adequate security infrastructure. Building an effective security infrastructure requires analysis and planning along with the development of policies and procedures and a little help from security products. Policies form the foundation of your security infrastructure. Policies define how a company approaches security, how employees should handle security, and how certain situations will be addressed. Without strong policies implemented in the company and reviewed on a regular basis, you do not have a security infrastructure. 3. Technology – You might have a few security products installed, but you do not have and infrastructure because you do not have the foundation to build on. Surprisingly, technology is the least import component of a security infrastructure. All technology does is provide you with the means to implement your policies. I am not saying that technology is not import, but it is less important than strong policies and security-conscious employees. Now that people are aligned, and the process developed and clarified, technology can be applied to ensure consistently in the process and to provide the thin guiding rails to keep the process on track - to make it easier to follow the process than not do so.Security must be pervasive. Every aspect of a company should be security conscious. Employees need to understand the importance of security and the role they play in maintaining and effective security infrastructure. Management should realize that security is critical to the success of the company and set an example for all employees to follow regarding security consciousness.
• #23: Security and Risk ManagementAsk any network administrator what he needs security for, and he can describe the threats: web site defacements, corruption and loss of data due to network penetrations, denial-of-service attacks, viruses and trojans. The list seems endless, and an endless series of news stories proves that the threats are real.Asl that same network administrators how security technologies help. And he’ll discuss avoiding the the threats. This is the traditional paradigm of computer security, born out of a computer science memtality: figure out what the threats are, and build technologies to avoid them. The conceit is that technologies can somehow “solve” computer security, and the end result is a security program that becomes an expense and a barrier to business. How many times has a security officer said: “You can’t do that; it would be insecure?”.The paradigm is wrong. Security is a people problem, not a technology problem. There is no computer security product-of even suite of pfoducts-that acts as magical security dust, imbuing a network with the property of “secure”. It can’t be done. And it’s not the way business works. Business manage risks. They manage all sorts of risks; network security is just another one. And there are many different ways to manage risks. The ones you choose in a particular situation depend on the detail of that situation. And failures happen regularly; many business manage their risks improperly, pay for their mistakes, and soldier on. Businesses are remarkably resilient.To take a concrete example, consider a physical store and the risk of shoplifting. Most grocery stores accept the risk as a cost of doing business. Clothing stores might put tags on all their garments and sensors at the doorways; they mitigate the risk with a technology. A jewelry sotre might mitigate the risk through procedures: all merchandise stays locked up, customers are not allowed to handle anything unattended, etc. And that same jewelry store will carry theft insurance, another risk management tool. More security isn’t always better. You could improve the security of a bank by strip-searching everyone who walks through the front door. But if you did this, you would have no business. Studies show that most shoplifting at department stores occurs in dressing rooms. You could improve security by removing the dress rooms, but the losses in sales would more than make up for the decrease in shoplifting. What all of these business are looking for is adequate security at a reasonable cost. This is what we need on the internet as well-security that allows a company to offer new services, to expand into new markets, and to attract and retain new customers. And the particular computer security solutions they choose depend on who they are and what they are doing.