RE: Custom defense

["Mike Bailey" <mike.bailey () sunbladesecurity com>]

Hmmmm, I didn't interpret Dave's post to mean custom attack / defenses in
that fashion..  I was thinking along the lines of defenses implemented that
are very specific to the applications and infrastructures in place on a
given system instead of general use techniques and tools in place today.
Stuff to ponder I guess

Dave's Direction 2: I think we're already there. Banking for example, If you
look at the 15,000+ banks out there you will find a very small percentage
that really want to be secure or even know what insecurities they have. They
want to know the FFIEC is not going to lower their rating (or worse let
their customers know) due to findings that don't meet the assessment
criteria the FDIC, OCC and Federal Reserve examiners are looking for. I'm
sure it will be the same for HIPPA as soon as they get an federal level
audit division for it. It's my opinion that companies want to know they
won't get in trouble more so than protecting themselves and others from
security incidents.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: dailydave-bounces () lists immunitysec com 
> [mailto:dailydave-bounces () lists immunitysec com] On Behalf Of 
> David Maynor
> Sent: Monday, August 23, 2004 9:49 PM
> To: Dave Aitel
> Cc: dailydave () lists immunitysec com
> Subject: Re: [Dailydave] Custom defense
>
> I dunno Dave....I am gonna have to go ahead and disagree with 
> you on this one.
> If you believe in custom attacks then you are not a fan of 
> the hype of companies like ISS. You see, ISS writes their 
> sigs for the vulns, and not for exploits. People like Tipping 
> Point claim this, but in fact don't. Further proof your 
> custom attack market is not very large is the HIPS market. 
> Lack of code coverage and poor design will keep players like 
> Cisco and Entercept from ever stopping anything of any worth. 
> What does this mean, why am I spouting it? Simple, its still 
> the wild, wild, west. Custom attacks, generic attacks, they 
> are all still owning everybody with out protection of REAL security
> companies**********************
>
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 17:02:48 -0400, Dave Aitel 
> <dave () immunitysec com> wrote:
> > So I think the real market for future security is in custom attacks 
> > and defenses. This is what I see people starting to work 
> on, although 
> > they call it by many names (IPS, etc).
> _______________________________________________
> Dailydave mailing list
> Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
> http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave

_______________________________________________
Dailydave mailing list
Dailydave () lists immunitysec com
http://www.immunitysec.com/mailman/listinfo/dailydave