321367 1 En Bookbackmatter 257..281

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

321367 1 En Bookbackmatter 257..281 Conclusions In our increasingly connected world, security has become a mandatory feature. The threats are continuously growing. Hacking moved from a fun hobby activity of amateurs to a professional activity with strong financial incentives. A significant element of the security toolbox is awareness and knowledge. The ten laws and their associated rules are good starting points for educating, training and analyzing. These laws may be useful indicators of the soundness of a system or a service provider. They can be used as heuristics within a larger framework of risk man- agement. They may be used as discussion topics to create a common ground and to start building mutual trust with new partners. They may be used for educational purposes when introducing security. These rules may seem common sense. Security involves in most cases obeying common sense rules. Unfortunately, people have not imported common sense- based practices when migrating from the physical world to the digital world and embracing dematerialization. The only area of security that does not obey common sense is the interaction with users (for instance, through social engineering). Humans are predictably irrational [122]. The initial cautionary note of the introduction has to be repeated at the end of this book. Security is a complex problem. It does not fit well with a Manichean vision. Security is about equilibrium. Security is relative, never absolute. Thus, the rules must never be taken literally and considered as absolute rules. The reader will have to use his judgment when analyzing something through the prism of these ten laws. I urge the reader to never forget that security is an extremely complex task. Security systems and the development of secure solutions should be handled exclusively by well-trained security experts. As illustrated by the inserts “The Devil Is in the Detail,” it is far too easy to mess up the overall security with a small mistake or a minor detail in an implementation. Security is hard, and we cannot rely on amateurs. I will maintain some resources about these ten laws on the website https://eric- diehl.com/ten-laws/, such as a poster with the ten laws, and new examples. The reader may contact me at [email protected]. © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 257 E. Diehl, Ten Laws for Security, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-42641-9 Appendix A A Brief Introduction to Cryptography A.1 Symmetric Cryptography Symmetric cryptography is the oldest form of cryptosystem (Fig. A.1). Alice and Bob share the same key K. She applies to message m an algorithm E, called K c E m encryption, using the shared key . The result ciphertext is ¼ fgK ðÞ. To retrieve the clear text, Bob applies to message c an algorithmÀÁD, called K D c D E m m decryption, using the shared key i such that fgK ðÞ¼ fgK fgK ðÞ¼ . The most deployed symmetric cryptosystem is AES. The key length of 128 bits is considered secure. A.2 Asymmetric Cryptography In 1976, two researchers, Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman, in a famous seminal paper [204] built the foundations of a new type of cryptosystem: asymmetric cryptography (Fig. A.2). Here, Bob owns a pair of keys: the public key Kpub and the private key Kpri. Both keys are linked with a mathematical relationship. To securely Fig. A.1 Symmetric cryptography © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 259 E. Diehl, Ten Laws for Security, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-42641-9 260 Appendix A: A Brief Introduction to Cryptography Fig. A.2 Asymmetric cryptography send a message m to Bob, Alice obtains a copy of Bob’s public key Kpub. She applies to message m an algorithm E, called encryption, using Bob’s public key Kpub. The resulting ciphertext is c ¼ E K ðÞm . fgpub To retrieve the clear text, Bob applies to message c an algorithm D, called decryption, using his private key Kpri such that D K ðÞ¼c D K fgpri fgpri E K ðÞm ¼ m. fgpub The encryption and decryption algorithms are designed such that, at least in theory, without the knowledge of the private key Kpri, it would be infeasible for Eve to find m from c. More precisely, Eve does not find out any information about m except its length (except by breaking the underlying hard-to-solve mathematical problem). Therefore, it is paramount that Bob keeps his private key secret. However, Bob, as its name indicates, can safely distribute his public key to everybody, even to the malicious Eve. Asymmetric cryptography can provide both integrity and authentication. Bob wants to send a message m to Alice. He does not look for confidentiality, but he wants Alice to be sure that the message has originated from him (authentication) and that Charlie did not tamper with the message (integrity). For that purpose, Bob signs the message m. Bob applies to m a mathematical function called a signature using his private key Kpri. The result, r, called a signature, is r ¼ S K ðÞm .He fgpri sends m and r together to Alice. Alice verifies the signature using Bob’s public key Kpub. The signature r is valid if V K ðÞ¼r m, where V is an algorithm called fgpub Verification. In other words, the signature inverts the respective roles of the public and private keys. The main difference with MAC is that the signing entity and the verifying entity use different keys. In fact, most implemented signature schemes use an additional cryptographic hash function (Sect. A.3). Using the cryptographic hash function H, we obtain the new signature scheme r ¼ S K ðÞHmðÞ and the signature r is verified if fgpri Appendix A: A Brief Introduction to Cryptography 261 V K ðÞ¼r HmðÞ. Signing the hash of the message rather than the full message fgpub has several advantages such as a fixed length of signature, regardless of the size of signed data, and efficiency. Calculating the hash of a large dataset is faster than signing the same large dataset with asymmetric cryptography. The robustness of asymmetric cryptography relies on the difficulty of solving some difficult mathematical problems. Typical problems are the factorization of composite numbers made of two large prime numbers, or the difficulty of calcu- lating discrete logarithms in finite fields or on elliptic curves. Currently, the most widely used asymmetric cryptosystem is RSA. The name stems from the initials of its three inventors: Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman. RSA can be used for both encryption and signature. It was invented in 1977 [399] and is still considered secure. RSA Ltd. patented this algorithm. Since 2000, the algorithm is in the public domain; hence, it is not anymore protected by patents. It is currently estimated that RSA requires a key length of at least 2048 bits to be safe [52]. The security of a 2048-bit key of RSA is considered equivalent to the security of an 110-bit key for symmetric cryptography. In recent years, a new kind of asymmetric cryptosystem, Elliptic Curve Cryptosystems, has become mainstream. Here the size of the keys is smaller, and the footprint of the imple- mentation is smaller than RSA; 256-bit ECC keys are considered secure today. A.3 Hash Functions A cryptographic hash function, also sometimes called a one-way hash function, has the following characteristics: • The hash of any arbitrary size of data will always have a fixed size. • Changing any bit of the hashed data generates a very different hash result, e.g., it may change every bit of the hash with a probability of 0.5. • It is extremely difficult to find a message m such that its hash value is equal to an arbitrary value. • It is extremely difficult to find two messages m1 and m2 such that their respective hash values are equal. This property is called collision resistance. Currently, the most widely used hash function is SHA-1. However, in 2005, studies demonstrated that the robustness of SHA-1 was severely weakening [158, 400]. In October 2012, NIST selected KECCAK as the new SHA-3 [401] (Sect. 3.2.1). MD5 is another widely deployed hash function. MD5 hashes often serve as unique identifiers for torrents in P2P networks or file management. However, it was shown in 2004 that MD5 is not collision resistant. Appendix B Other Ten (or More) Laws of Security B.1 Microsoft Microsoft has published its ten laws of immutable security [219]. 1. If a bad guy can persuade you to run his program on your computer, it’s not your computer anymore. 2. If a bad guy can alter the operating system on your computer, it’s not your computer anymore. 3. If a bad guy has unrestricted physical access to your computer, it’s not your computer anymore. 4. If you allow a bad guy to upload programs to your website, it’s not your website anymore. 5. Weak passwords trump strong security. 6. A computer is only as secure as the administrator is trustworthy. 7. Encrypted data is only as secure as the decryption key. 8. An out-of-date virus scanner is only marginally better than no virus scanner at all. 9. Absolute anonymity is not practical, in real life or on the Web. 10. Technology is not a panacea. B.2 Building Secure Software In 2001, John Viega and Gary McGraw published a book describing how to build secure software [402]. They listed ten guidelines. 1. Secure the weakest link 2. Practice defense in depth 3. Fail securely 4. Follow the principle of least privilege 5. Compartmentalize 6. Keep it simple © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 263 E.
Recommended publications
  • Hacking the Web
    Hacking the Web (C) 2009-2020 Arun Viswanathan Ellis Horowitz Marco Papa 1 Table of Contents } General Introduction } Authentication Attacks } Client-Side Attacks } Injection Attacks } Recent Attacks } Privacy Tools 2 (C) 2009-2020 Arun Viswanathan Ellis Horowitz Marco Papa Why secure the Web? } The Web has evolved into an ubiquitous entity providing a rich and common platform for connecting people and doing business. } BUT, the Web also offers a cheap, effective, convenient and anonymous platform for crime. } To get an idea, the Web has been used for the following types of criminal activities (source: The Web Hacking Incidents Database (WHID) http://projects.webappsec.org/w/page/13246995/Web-Hacking-Incident-Database) } Chaos (Attack on Russian nuclear power websites amid accident rumors (5Jan09) } Deceit (SAMY XSS Worm – Nov 2005) } Extortion (David Aireys domain hijacked due to a CSRF (cross site request forgery) flaw in Gmail – 30Dec2007) } Identity Theft (XSS on Yahoo! Hot jobs – Oct 2008) } Information Warfare (Israeli Gaza War - Jan 2009 / Balkan Wars – Apr 2008 ) } Monetary Loss (eBay fraud using XSS) } Physical Pain (Hackers post on epilepsy forum causes migraines and seizures – May 2008) } Political Defacements (Hacker changes news release on Sheriffs website – Jul 2008) (Obama, Oreilly and Britneys Twitter accounts hacked and malicious comments posted – Jan 09) } Chinese Gaming sites hacked (Dec. 2011) 3 Copyright(C) 2009 (c) -20092020- 2019Arun Arun Viswanathan Viswanathan Ellis HorowitzEllis Horowitz Marco Marco Papa Papa
    [Show full text]
  • RSA-512 Certificates Abused in the Wild
    RSA-512 Certificates abused in the wild During recent weeks we have observed several interesting publications which have a direct relation to an investigation we worked on recently. On one hand there was a Certificate Authority being revoked by Mozilla, Microsoft and Google (Chrome), on the other hand there was the disclosure of a malware attack by Mikko Hypponen (FSecure) using a government issued certificate signed by the same Certificate Authority. That case however is not self-contained and a whole range of malicious software had been signed with valid certificates. The malicious software involved was used in targeted attacks focused on governments, political organizations and the defense industry. The big question is of course, what happened, and how did the attackers obtain access to these certificates? We will explain here in detail how the attackers have used known techniques to bypass the Microsoft Windows code signing security model. Recently Mikko Hypponen wrote a blog on the F-Secure weblog (http://www.f-secure.com/weblog/archives/00002269.html) detailing the discovery of a certificate used to sign in the wild malware. Specifically this malware was embedded in a PDF exploit and shipped in August 2011. Initially Mikko also believed the certificate was stolen, as that is very common in these days, with a large amount of malware families having support, or optional support, for stealing certificates from the infected system. Apparently someone Mikko spoke to mentioned something along the lines that it had been stolen a long time ago. During the GovCert.nl symposium Mikko mentioned the certificate again, but now he mentioned that according to the people involved with investigating the case in Malaysia it likely wasn't stolen.
    [Show full text]
  • Securing Information in a Mobile World
    Securing Information in a Mobile World Thu, Jan 21 | 2:00 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. PRESENTED BY: Charlie LeBlanc, William Figures, and Blad Slavens Schedulers & Dispatchers Conference | Tampa, FL | January 19 – 22, 2016 A Brief History of Computing and Software for Schedulers and Dispatchers Systems in the 80’s and early 90’s were computer- centric and pretty secure…. Why ????? And then came the Internet !!!! Highly technical description of the Internet “The Internet is a data network that connects “everything” together” (kind of like the phone system !) - William Figures 2007 The ‘Net(work) as a computing platform- Using WEB Services WEB SERVICES=FARS Is it safe to use public Wi-Fi? 6 Security challenges when using public Wi-Fi Some things to know about public Wi-Fi hotspots • Unlike your home Wi-Fi access point, most public Wi-Fi hotspots at hotels, restaurants, coffee shops, airports, etc. do not use encrypted communication. • This means that all your data may be sent in clear-text across the wireless network. Anyone with a “sniffer” could then snoop on your connection. • In order to secure their Wi-Fi properly, a business owner would have to issue a password to connect to the hotspot. To be truly secure, this password would be unique to a single person. • Since this isn’t feasible, you need to take other precautions to secure your data when using a public hotspot. Sources: http://www.networkworld.com/article/2904439/wi-fi/is-it-safe-to-use-public-wi-fi-networks.html 7 Case Study: Firesheep browser extension Coder exposed risk to Facebook users at public hotspots • To call attention to glaring security vulnerabilities with both Facebook – and other sites – and public Wi-Fi, a “white hat” hacker developed a Firefox extension that allowed a user to hijack the Facebook account of anyone logged into the same Wi-Fi hotspot.
    [Show full text]
  • Why We Should Consider the Plurality of Hacker and Maker Cultures 2017
    Repositorium für die Medienwissenschaft Sebastian Kubitschko; Annika Richterich; Karin Wenz „There Simply Is No Unified Hacker Movement.“ Why We Should Consider the Plurality of Hacker and Maker Cultures 2017 https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/1115 Veröffentlichungsversion / published version Zeitschriftenartikel / journal article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Kubitschko, Sebastian; Richterich, Annika; Wenz, Karin: „There Simply Is No Unified Hacker Movement.“ Why We Should Consider the Plurality of Hacker and Maker Cultures. In: Digital Culture & Society, Jg. 3 (2017), Nr. 1, S. 185– 195. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/1115. Erstmalig hier erschienen / Initial publication here: https://doi.org/10.14361/dcs-2017-0112 Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Creative Commons - This document is made available under a creative commons - Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell - Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 Attribution - Non Commercial - No Derivatives 4.0 License. For Lizenz zur Verfügung gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu dieser Lizenz more information see: finden Sie hier: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 “There Simply Is No Unified Hacker Movement.” Why We Should Consider the Plurality of Hacker and Maker Cultures Sebastian Kubitschko in Conversation with Annika Richterich and Karin Wenz Sebastian Kubitschko is a postdoctoral researcher at the Centre for Media, Communication and Information Research (ZeMKI) at the University of Bremen in Germany. His main research fields are political communication, social movements and civil society organisations. In order to address the relevance of new forms of techno-political civic engagement, he has conducted qualitative, empirical research on one of the world’s oldest and largest hacker organisations, the Chaos Computer Club (CCC).
    [Show full text]
  • Anatomy of Data Breaches and Its Impact on Security
    International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Index Copernicus Value (2013): 6.14 | Impact Factor (2013): 4.438 Anatomy of Data Breaches and Its Impact on Security Anshu1, Monika Sharma2 1M.Tech Scholar, Computer Science Department, TIT & S, Bhiwani, India 2Assistant Professor, Information Technology Department, TIT & S, Bhiwani, India Abstract: In cloud computing, the word cloud is used as a metaphor for "the Internet," so the phrase cloud computing means "a type of Internet-based computing," where different services - such as servers, storage and applications -- are delivered to an organization's computers and devices through the Internet [14]. Every user access cloud services through internet without knowing the security aspects. Today security threats are increasing rapidly and data breach is top of them. Breach in the security of any component in the cloud can be both disaster for the organization and the provider. In this research paper we focus on main security issue in cloud like data breach, different forms of data breaches and how it occurs in cloud. It also explore where major breaches occur in cloud in past years. Keywords: cloud, data breaches, security 1. Data Breaches two categories i.e. accidental breach or intentional breach The term data breach means when an unauthorized user or a) Accidental breach: also called as employee error when hacker or an attacker attacks an authorized data, access or an employee by mistake sends data to wrong receipts, retrieves it by an individual or service without the and by not understanding security protocols and permission. A data breach results in loss of sensitive, procedures.
    [Show full text]
  • TLS Attacks & DNS Security
    IAIK TLS Attacks & DNS Security Information Security 2019 Johannes Feichtner [email protected] IAIK Outline TCP / IP Model ● Browser Issues Application SSLStrip Transport MITM Attack revisited Network Link layer ● PKI Attacks (Ethernet, WLAN, LTE…) Weaknesses HTTP TLS / SSL FLAME FTP DNS Telnet SSH ● Implementation Attacks ... ● Protocol Attacks ● DNS Security IAIK Review: TLS Services All applications running TLS are provided with three essential services Authentication HTTPS FTPS Verify identity of client and server SMTPS ... Data Integrity Detect message tampering and forgery, TLS e.g. malicious Man-in-the-middle TCP IP Encryption Ensure privacy of exchanged communication Note: Technically, not all services are required to be used Can raise risk for security issues! IAIK Review: TLS Handshake RFC 5246 = Establish parameters for cryptographically secure data channel Full handshake Client Server scenario! Optional: ClientHello 1 Only with ServerHello Client TLS! Certificate 2 ServerKeyExchange Certificate CertificateRequest ClientKeyExchange ServerHelloDone CertificateVerify 3 ChangeCipherSpec Finished ChangeCipherSpec 4 Finished Application Data Application Data IAIK Review: Certificates Source: http://goo.gl/4qYsPz ● Certificate Authority (CA) = Third party, trusted by both the subject (owner) of the certificate and the party (site) relying upon the certificate ● Browsers ship with set of > 130 trust stores (root CAs) IAIK Browser Issues Overview Focus: Relationship between TLS and HTTP Problem? ● Attacker wants to access encrypted data ● Browsers also have to deal with legacy websites Enforcing max. security level would „break“ connectivity to many sites Attack Vectors ● SSLStrip ● MITM Attack …and somehow related: Cookie Stealing due to absent „Secure“ flag… IAIK Review: ARP Poisoning How? Attacker a) Join WLAN, ● Sniff data start ARP Poisoning ● Manipulate data b) Create own AP ● Attack HTTPS connections E.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Web and Mobile Security
    Cyber Security Body of Knowledge: Web and Mobile Security Sergio Maffeis Imperial College London bristol.ac.uk © Crown Copyright, The National Cyber Security Centre 2021. This information is licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence, visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/. When you use this information under the Open Government Licence, you should include the following attribution: CyBOK Web & Mobile Security Knowledge Area Issue 1.0 © Crown Copyright, The National Cyber Security Centre 2021, licensed under the Open Government Licence http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/. The CyBOK project would like to understand how the CyBOK is being used and its uptake. The project would like organisations using, or intending to use, CyBOK for the purposes of education, training, course development, professional development etc. to contact it at [email protected] to let the project know how they are using CyBOK. bristol.ac.uk Web & Mobile Security KA • This webinar covers and complements selected topics from the “Web & Mobile Security Knowledge Area - Issue 1.0” document [WMS-KA for short] • “The purpose of this Knowledge Area is to provide an overview of security mechanisms, attacks and defences in modern web and mobile ecosystems.” • We assume basic knowledge of the web and mobile platforms – The WMS-KA also covers some of the basic concepts assumed here Web and Mobile Security 3 Scope • The focus of WMS-KA is on the intersection of mobile and web security, as a result of recent appification and webification trends. – The KA does not cover specific mobile-only aspects including mobile networks, mobile malware, side channels.
    [Show full text]
  • Darpa Starts Sleuthing out Disloyal Troops
    UNCLASSIFIED (U) FBI Tampa Division CI Strategic Partnership Newsletter JANUARY 2012 (U) Administrative Note: This product reflects the views of the FBI- Tampa Division and has not been vetted by FBI Headquarters. (U) Handling notice: Although UNCLASSIFIED, this information is property of the FBI and may be distributed only to members of organizations receiving this bulletin, or to cleared defense contractors. Precautions should be taken to ensure this information is stored and/or destroyed in a manner that precludes unauthorized access. 10 JAN 2012 (U) The FBI Tampa Division Counterintelligence Strategic Partnership Newsletter provides a summary of previously reported US government press releases, publications, and news articles from wire services and news organizations relating to counterintelligence, cyber and terrorism threats. The information in this bulletin represents the views and opinions of the cited sources for each article, and the analyst comment is intended only to highlight items of interest to organizations in Florida. This bulletin is provided solely to inform our Domain partners of news items of interest, and does not represent FBI information. In the JANUARY 2012 Issue: Article Title Page NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT NEWS FROM GOVERNMENT AGENCIES: American Jihadist Terrorism: Combating a Complex Threat p. 2 Authorities Uncover Increasing Number of United States-Based Terror Plots p. 3 Chinese Counterfeit COTS Create Chaos For The DoD p. 4 DHS Releases Cyber Strategy Framework p. 6 COUNTERINTELLIGENCE/ECONOMIC ESPIONAGE THREAT ITEMS FROM THE PRESS: United States Homes In on China Spying p. 6 Opinion: China‟s Spies Are Catching Up p. 8 Canadian Politician‟s Chinese Crush Likely „Sexpionage,‟ Former Spies Say p.
    [Show full text]
  • SSL/TLS Interception Proxies and Transitive Trust Jeff Jarmoc Dell Secureworks Counter Threat Unit℠ Threat Intelligence
    SSL/TLS Interception Proxies and Transitive Trust Jeff Jarmoc Dell SecureWorks Counter Threat Unit℠ Threat Intelligence Presented at Black Hat Europe – March 14, 2012. Introduction Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) [1] and its successor Transport Layer Security (TLS) [2] have become key components of the modern Internet. The privacy, integrity, and authenticity [3] [4] provided by these protocols are critical to allowing sensitive communications to occur. Without these systems, e- commerce, online banking, and business-to-business exchange of information would likely be far less frequent. Threat actors have also recognized the benefits of transport security, and they are increasingly turning to SSL to hide their activities. Advanced Persistent Threat (APT) attackers [5], botnets [6], and even commodity web attacks can leverage SSL encryption to evade detection. To counter these tactics, organizations are increasingly deploying security controls that intercept end- to-end encrypted channels. Web proxies, data loss prevention (DLP) systems, specialized threat detection solutions, and network intrusion prevention systems (NIPS) offer functionality to intercept, inspect, and filter encrypted traffic. Similar functionality is present in lawful intercept systems and solutions enabling the broad surveillance of encrypted communications by governments. Broadly classified as “SSL/TLS interception proxies,” these solutions act as a “man in the middle,” violating the end-to-end security promises of SSL. This type of interception comes at a cost. Intercepting SSL-encrypted connections sacrifices a degree of privacy and integrity for the benefit of content inspection, often at the risk of authenticity and endpoint validation. Implementers and designers of SSL interception proxies should consider these risks and understand how their systems operate in unusual circumstances.
    [Show full text]
  • Cybersecurity Forum Für Datensicherheit, Datenschutz Und Datenethik 23
    3. JAHRESTAGUNG CYBERSECURITY FORUM FÜR DATENSICHERHEIT, DATENSCHUTZ UND DATENETHIK 23. APRIL 2020, FRANKFURT AM MAIN #cyberffm Premium-Partner: Veranstaltungspartner: 3. JAHRESTAGUNG CYBERSECURITY DEUTSCHLAND — DIGITAL — SICHER — BSI Die Schadsoftware »Emotet« hat uns in den letzten Wochen und Monaten erneut schmerzhaft vor Augen geführt, welche Auswirkungen es haben kann, wenn man die Vorteile der Digitalisierung genießt, ohne die dafür unabdingbar notwendige Infor- mationssicherheit zu gewährleisten. Stadtverwaltungen, Behörden, Krankenhäuser und Universitäten wurden lahmgelegt, Unternehmen mussten zeitweise den Betrieb einstellen. Die Folgen sind für jeden von uns spürbar: Arbeitsplätze sind in Gefahr, Waren und Dienstleistungen können nicht mehr angeboten und verkauft werden, Krankenhäuser müssen die Patientenannahme ablehnen. Stadtverwaltungen sind nicht mehr arbeitsfähig und schließen ihre Bürgerbüros. Bürgerinnen und Bürger konnten keine Ausweise und Führerscheine beantragen, keine Autos anmelden und keine Sperrmüllabfuhr bestellen. Sogar Hochzeiten mussten verschoben werden. Und wie würde die Lage wohl erst aussehen, wenn wir tatsächlich in einer voll digitalisierten Welt lebten? Das BSI beschäftigt sich damit, in welchen Anwendungsfeldern der Digitalisierung Risiken entstehen könnten und wie wir diese Risiken kalkulierbar und beherrschbar machen können. Unsere Stärke ist es, Themen der Informationssicherheit gebündelt fachlich zu analysieren und aus der gemeinsamen Analyse heraus konkrete Angebote für unterschiedliche Zielgruppen
    [Show full text]
  • Certificate Transparency: New Part of PKI Infrastructure
    Certificate transparency: New part of PKI infrastructure A presentation by Dmitry Belyavsky, TCI ENOG 7 Moscow, May 26-27, 2014 About PKI *) *) PKI (public-key infrastructure) is a set of hardware, software, people, policies, and procedures needed to create, manage, distribute, use, store, and revoke digital certificates Check the server certificate The server certificate signed correctly by any of them? Many trusted CAs NO YES Everything seems to We warn the user be ok! DigiNotar case OCSP requests for the fake *.google.com certificate Source: FOX-IT, Interim Report, http://cryptome.org/0005/diginotar-insec.pdf PKI: extra trust Independent Trusted PKI source certificate DANE (RFC 6698) Certificate pinning Limited browsers support Mozilla Certificate Patrol, Chrome cache for Google certificates Certificate transparency (RFC 6962) Inspired by Google (Support in Chrome appeared) One of the authors - Ben Laurie (OpenSSL Founder) CA support – Comodo Certificate Transparency: how it works • Log accepts cert => SCT Client • Is SCT present and signed correctly? Client • Is SCT present and signed correctly? Auditor • Does log server behave correctly? Monitor • Any suspicious certs? Certificate Transparency: how it works Source: http://www.certificate-transparency.org Certificate Transparency how it works Source: http://www.certificate-transparency.org Certificate Transparency current state Google Chrome Support (33+) http://www.certificate-transparency.org/certificate-transparency-in-chrome Google Cert EV plan http://www.certificate-transparency.org/ev-ct-plan Certificate Transparency current state Open source code 2 pilot logs Certificate Transparency: protect from what? SAVE from MITM attack ü Warning from browser ü Site owner can watch logs for certs Do NOT SAVE from HEARTBLEED! Certificate transparency and Russian GOST crypto Russian GOST does not save from the MITM attack Algorithm SHA-256 >>> GOSTR34.11-2012 Key >>> GOST R 34.10-2012 Q&A Questions? Drop ‘em at: [email protected] .
    [Show full text]
  • NAVIGATING the CYBERSECURITY STORM
    NAVIGATING the CYBERSECURITY STORM A Guide for Directors and Officers BY PAUL A. FERRILLO EDITED BY BILL BROWN published by sponsored by sponsored by 1 © 2015 by Paul A. Ferrillo. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any other information storage or retrieval system without prior written permission. To use the information contained in this book for a greater purpose or application, contact Paul A. Ferrillo via [email protected] 2 Is your company protected from the Internet of RiskSM? With CyberEdge® cyber insurance solutions you can enjoy the Business Opportunity of Things. 20 billion objects are connected to the Internet, what everyone is calling the Internet of Things. This hyperconnectivity opens the door both to the future of things, and to greater network vulnerabilities. CyberEdge end-to-end cyber risk management solutions are designed to protect your company from this new level of risk. So that you can turn the Internet of Things into the next big business opportunity. To learn more and download the free CyberEdge Mobile App, visit www.AIG.com/CyberEdge Insurance, products and services are written or provided by subsidiaries or affiliates of American International Group, Inc. Insurance and services may not be available in all jurisdictions, and coverage is subject to actual policy language. For additional information, please visit our website at www.AIG.com. ABOUT PAUL A. FERRILLO Paul Ferrillo is counsel in Weil’s Litigation Department, where he focuses on complex securities and business litigation, and internal investigations.
    [Show full text]