04.06.2018 Views

CS1805

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

total protection<br />

making identification of threats far more<br />

difficult."<br />

Increasingly sophisticated attack activity<br />

can only be detected by real-time internal<br />

network monitoring, which until now has<br />

proved to be an almost impossible task, due<br />

to the volume of data which flows through<br />

even the most basic of networks, he adds.<br />

"The traditionally applied security systems<br />

such as firewalls, Intrusion Detection Systems<br />

(IDS) and anti-virus should therefore form<br />

only part of modern cyber defences.<br />

An additional network layer is needed to<br />

quickly identify activity caused by malicious<br />

behaviours, regardless of whether it's a new<br />

threat, a novel technique or a malicious<br />

insider," adds Driver.<br />

Such a behavioural-based system, he states,<br />

"delivers incredibly high detection rates with<br />

equally low false alarms and would be equally<br />

powerful in identifying potentially exploitable<br />

weaknesses in a network before any attack<br />

actually occurs - enabling organisations to<br />

proactively increase the security of a network<br />

over time".<br />

Driver believes that this step change in<br />

the battle to combat the increasingly<br />

sophisticated cyber security threat would<br />

identify malware that actively outwits rulesbased<br />

or sandboxing appliances, as well<br />

as data being leaked by a trusted device.<br />

"Organisations could also proactively close<br />

vulnerabilities in a network, rather than<br />

reactively patching holes once they've already<br />

been exploited by an attacker," he points out.<br />

THANKLESS TASK<br />

We expend a lot of energy in cyber security,<br />

attacking and pillorying organisations that<br />

are successfully targeted, states Neil<br />

Anderson, director of cyber security at Assure<br />

APM. "A brief glance at Twitter after a major<br />

breach will often show an impressive level of<br />

disdain on the part of researchers and 'redteam'<br />

groups - people whose livelihoods rely<br />

on finding vulnerabilities and exploiting them<br />

- about an organisation's inability to stay<br />

secure." The critics have a point, he concedes.<br />

All too often, it is basic security failings that<br />

let attackers into organisations. "We often<br />

hear a recently breached company throw up<br />

its hands as it tells us that 'it was an advanced<br />

threat actor that attacked us, what could we<br />

do?' Well, patching your known vulnerabilities<br />

and not clicking on links in unsolicited emails<br />

wouldn't hurt."<br />

For all this worthy criticism, however,<br />

protecting an organisation can be a difficult<br />

and thankless task. "Security teams are often<br />

viewed as a cost centre and an obstacle to<br />

achieving business objectives, leaving them<br />

struggling to keep abreast of the firehose of<br />

new vulnerabilities, exploits and regulatory<br />

pressure," Anderson adds.<br />

"In the past, security vendors have been apt<br />

to try to sell us miracle solutions: tools that<br />

will solve all our security problems in one fell<br />

swoop, leaving security engineers free to<br />

concentrate on pondering strategy, petting<br />

unicorns, and fiddling with the occasional<br />

firewall. In those days, we tended towards<br />

a protect and prevent strategy, forming a<br />

perimeter around our networks and trying<br />

hard to stop any attacker, no matter how<br />

skilled, from getting in."<br />

These days, we are generally sadder, but also<br />

a little wiser, he comments. "As the network<br />

perimeter has disintegrated, the concept of<br />

complete protection has been shown to be<br />

an impossibility and we tend to focus our<br />

efforts on an infinitely more achievable riskbased<br />

approach. This basically involves<br />

working out what the risk of a given<br />

vulnerability being exploited is and then<br />

making a (mostly) objective decision on<br />

whether to stop that risk from ever being<br />

realised, to mitigate its effects should it<br />

happen or to accept the risk - in other words,<br />

gamble that it will never happen."<br />

The important thing to remember, Anderson<br />

says, is that none of these options is a perfect<br />

Daniel Driver, Chemring Technology<br />

Solutions: the biggest security threat that<br />

most organisations are exposed to exists<br />

within their own network.<br />

David Broad, Echoworx: many companies<br />

think that once they have a few tools<br />

deployed to control their perimeter they<br />

are done.<br />

www.computingsecurity.co.uk @CSMagAndAwards May/June 2018 computing security<br />

15

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!