Re: Article: "Security Absurdity: The Complete, Unquestionable, And Total Failure of Information Security."

[Jason Muskat <Jason () TechDude Ca>]

Hello,

There is a fundamental difference between consumer and say "black top
secret' urber military grade security:

Consumer:
A fire alarm station is pulled; magnetic door locks release so that people
can evacuate.

"black top secret' urber military:
A fire alarm station is pulled; full access restrictions remain in affect.

---
Consumer:
When power fails door locks release.

"black top secret' urber military
When power fails door locks cannot be disengaged.

---
Similarly,

A zero day threat is discovered. It uses a method of transmission that your
organization uses as part of its core dealings.

If one does anything other then fully block the method until the threat is
resolved, the organization cares more about the dealings then security.

I agree, "Welcome to life"! However, it is important to rise the bar on
this. More needs to be done at the consumer organization level. Security
sometimes means limiting if not stopping daily activities. Saying NO to
remote access; say NO to VPN; say NO to shared passwords; say NO to
unencrypted internal email....

Remove access from people that don't respect it and if this means they can
no longer complete their job activities, dismiss them. Treat this as one
would somebody with say bad credit, or as such.


Regards,

-- 
Jason Muskat  | GCUX - de VE3TSJ
____________________________
TechDude
e. Jason () TechDude Ca
m. 416 .414 .9934

http://TechDude.Ca/


> From: Craig Wright <cwright () bdosyd com au>
> Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 08:09:45 +1000
> To: Jason Muskat <Jason () TechDude Ca>, Saqib Ali <docbook.xml () gmail com>, Bob
> Radvanovsky <rsradvan () unixworks net>
> Cc: "Sadler, Connie" <Connie_Sadler () brown edu>, <email () securityabsurdity com>,
> <security-basics () securityfocus com>
> Conversation: Article: "Security Absurdity: The Complete, Unquestionable, And
> Total Failure of Information Security."
> Subject: RE: Article: "Security Absurdity: The Complete, Unquestionable, And
> Total Failure of Information Security."
>
>
> Hello,
> Security can never be correct 100% of the time. This is not true even in
> high level military establishments. I am not stating that you should not
> do the best you can given a set of circumstances, but security is based
> on risk.
>
>
> 100% secure systems for one do not exist nor can they. This is a
> computationally intractable issue.
>
> Users are also an issue. They will not put up with the costs, both
> fiduciary and to freedom that 100% security requires. Even enforcing MAC
> (mandatory access control) in an organisation is difficult.
>
> The old wire cutter firewall example fails to provide security as an
> example. CIA - the triumberant foundation of information security
> requires availability of information. Cutting the cable cuts the legs
> out of security. Nothing is ever 100% secure. Welcome to life.
>
> Regards,
> Craig
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason Muskat [mailto:Jason () TechDude Ca]
>
> Sent: Wednesday, 17 May 2006 12:14 PM
> To: Saqib Ali; Bob Radvanovsky
> Cc: Sadler, Connie; email () securityabsurdity com;
> security-basics () securityfocus com
> Subject: Re: Article: "Security Absurdity: The Complete, Unquestionable,
> And Total Failure of Information Security."
>
> Hello,
>
> Security has to be correct 100% of the time. One omission can lead to an
> exposure. Count yourself lucky that your vulnerabilities haven't been
> exposed (that you know of -- Think Ohio State's exposure
> <http://www.ohio.edu/datatheft/alumni/index.cfm>). Many organizations
> cover
> up (do not report to governmental authorizes) every exposure that
> occurs.
> This is the norm.
>
>
> Consider the following; 10 persons information were known to be stolen.
> Everything from address, SSN, account numbers, credit cards, driver
> lic.,
> health ins. forms, employment data, etc.. It goes unreported. Years
> later
> you receive letters for failing to pay your mortgage, credit cards,
> taxes,
> car lease, speeding tickets, you didn't show up for sentencing, and have
> a
> warrant for your arrest.
>
> Things like the above happen. I read how a case of mistaken identity had
> some fellow jailed for a few months before it was resolved. Imagine how
> it
> could have went if the perpetrator had stolen his ID.
>
> Once your information is exposed you soon realize that there is nothing
> you
> can do to protect yourself, it's too late. For evermore you, not the
> organization, has to check your credit reports, accounts, put flags up
> in
> your accounts over and over again until you die and all at your, not the
> organization's, expense. Most organizations don't even offer help to the
> people they adversely effected. At the very least an organization should
> set
> up a department to help the customers that have harmed.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> --
>
> Jason Muskat  | GCUX - de VE3TSJ
> ____________________________
> TechDude
> e. Jason () TechDude Ca
> m. 416 .414 .9934
>
> http://TechDude.Ca/
>
>
> > From: Saqib Ali <docbook.xml () gmail com>
> > Date: Fri, 12 May 2006 21:22:03 -0700
> > To: Bob Radvanovsky <rsradvan () unixworks net>
> > Cc: Jason Muskat <Jason () techdude ca>, "Sadler, Connie"
> > <Connie_Sadler () brown edu>, <email () securityabsurdity com>,
> > <security-basics () securityfocus com>
> > Subject: Re: Article: "Security Absurdity: The Complete,
> Unquestionable, And
> > Total Failure of Information Security."
>
> > > "Security" is a matter of perception.  If the companies don't see it
> as an
> > > issue, it (quite simply) is *not* an issue.
>
> > That is fine for the company in question. But NOT fine for the
> > customers / other companies interfacing with the company that does not
> > see INsecurity is an issue. I wouldn't wanna have my credit card info
> > stolen from an online merchant, neither would you.
>
> > One option is that I do not deal with compannies that do take security
> > seriously. But how do I know which companies do NOT take security
> > seriously? Maybe they should put a disclaimer on their website????
>
> > --
>
> > Saqib Ali, CISSP, ISSAP
> > Support http://www.capital-punishment.net
> > -----------
> > "I fear, if I rebel against my Lord, the retribution of an Awful Day
> > (The Day of Resurrection)" Al-Quran 6:15
> > -----------
>
>
>
>
> Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards
> Legislation in respect of matters arising within those States and Territories
> of Australia where such legislation exists.
>
> DISCLAIMER
> The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential.
> If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use or disclose the
> information. If you have received this email in error, please inform us
> promptly by reply email or by telephoning +61 2 9286 5555. Please delete the
> email and destroy any printed copy.
>
>
> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. You
> may not rely on this message as advice unless it has been electronically
> signed by a Partner of BDO or it is subsequently confirmed by letter or fax
> signed by a Partner of BDO.
>
> BDO accepts no liability for any damage caused by this email or its
> attachments due to viruses, interference, interception, corruption or
> unauthorised access.