Monday, April 30, 2018

Faulty Patch for Oracle WebLogic Flaw Opens Updated Servers to Hackers Again


Earlier this month, Oracle

patched

a highly critical Java deserialization remote code execution vulnerability in its WebLogic Server component of Fusion Middleware that could allow attackers to easily gain complete control of a vulnerable server.

However, a security researcher, who operates through the Twitter handle @pyn3rd and claims to be part of the Alibaba security team, has now

found

a way using which attackers can bypass the security patch and exploit the WebLogic vulnerability once again.

WebLogic Server acts as a middle layer between the front end user interface and the backend database of a multi-tier enterprise application. It provides a complete set of services for all components and handles details of the application behavior automatically.

Initially discovered in November last year by

Liao Xinxi

of NSFOCUS security team, the Oracle WebLogic Server flaw (CVE-2018-2628) can be exploited with network access over TCP port 7001.

If exploited successfully, the flaw could allow a remote attacker to completely take over a vulnerable Oracle WebLogic Server. The vulnerability affects versions 10.3.6.0, 12.1.3.0, 12.2.1.2 and 12.2.1.3.

Since a proof-of-concept (

PoC

) exploit for the original Oracle WebLogic Server vulnerability has already been made public on Github and someone has just bypassed the patch as well, your up-to-date services are again at risk of being hacked.

Although @pyn3rd has only released a short GIF (video) as a proof-of-concept (PoC) instead of releasing full bypass code or any technical details, it would hardly take a few hours or days for skilled hackers to figure out a way to achieve same.

Currently, it is unclear when Oracle would release a new security update to address this issue that has re-opened CVE-2018-2628 flaw.

In order to be at least one-step safer, it is still advisable to install April patch update released by Oracle, if you haven't yet because attackers have already

started scanning

the Internet for vulnerable WebLogic servers.



from The Hacker News https://ift.tt/2Kpm6Z3

Top 5 Recommendations from Cisco Incident Response Engagements

Lately, there are days I wake up and find it hard to believe it’s been 3 years since we began our Incident Response (IR) practice within Cisco’s walls. Coming in on the ground floor of such a monumental and important offering to our customers gave us the unique opportunity to define and shape our practice as it should be, without any baggage from the past. This allowed us to attract some of the best talent, grow extremely quickly, and assist our customers in both a proactive manner to shore up their defenses ahead of an issue as well as in a reactive state when the inevitable finally and unfortunately does happen.

As our team works through the process of assisting a customer during an emergency response, we constantly make recommendations, either tactical (e.g. you need to reset all your passwords), or strategic. Those recommendations vary from customer to customer and environment to environment. As I look through our recommendation data, I see some patterns that might be useful to share with the larger community. To that end, I present to you the top 5 IR recommendations that our IR team provides to our clients, along with some of my own insights on why we recommend them so often.

#1:  Incident Response Retainer

It should be no surprise that we recommend an incident response retainer – it’s the cornerstone of our own portfolio.  So, yes, you could argue we are biased on this one, however, simply put: there is a reason we are performing the emergency response in the first place. In this day and age, no company should go without having an incident response retainer, if not two or three IR firms on retainer – and, I don’t mean the zero-dollar some vendors ‘sell’ (remember, you get what you pay for).

It is extremely important to have independent firms you can partner with during a time of crisis. For example, at Cisco, we have the ability to bring in not only our IR team, but our Talos threat intelligence organization, crisis communications experts, product teams, project managers, and more. This is extremely powerful and helpful during a crisis. Additionally, the firm on retainer should not be passive.  They should work with you throughout the year to shore up defenses via table top exercises, enhancing plans and playbooks, and even proactively and independently hunting for adversaries. At the end of the day, it should be a true partnership and when a partnership is involved, a crisis will go much smoother.

#2:  Advanced Endpoint Protection

This is the first of two technology recommendations that cracked the top 5. When managing an active incident, a critical capability our responders require is insight into the larger environment and the ability to effectively respond. This is when we typically turn to Cisco Advanced Malware Protection (AMP). Having AMP’s built-in visibility and the response capabilities at our fingertips allows us to respond quicker and more efficiently than we would be able to otherwise. When coupled with other solutions in our Cisco security architecture, Cisco AMP also provides an extremely powerful and cohesive way to continuously monitor and respond to issues on the network.

#3: Network Segmentation

Many a network and organization has been taken down due to lack of controlling devices via network segmentation. We have had the unfortunate duty to work with client after client on fairly basic attacks that have decimated their environment and infected or locked up (via ransomware) hundreds to tens of thousands of machines. Yes, tens of thousands of machines. Additionally, in over 75% of ransomware cases we deal with, the backup server has been encrypted as well. The one item that may have provided a glimmer of hope as we begin to move forward in our initial call. In the past, segmentation was considered either a compliance issue or a way to control access to data. To me, segmentation is a required control mechanism and basic network hygiene.

Interested in learning more about building a better incident response program? Join our Security Webinar on May 10. For a technical demo of Breach Response Tools, register for our May 11 Demo Friday session.

#4: Security Monitoring

This one should be fairly self-explanatory, but it still does not get the attention it deserves which is why it lands so high up at #4. Still, in 2018, too many organizations seem to rely on outside organizations such as the FBI, or security news outlets to inform them that they have a security problem. These organizations should be doing sufficient internal security monitoring so that they can discover – and deal with – security issues on their own.

I have always felt that before you can purchase any security product, the vendor must provide a required resource estimate: an accounting of resources (e.g. people) required to run, configure, maintain, and monitor the product to be successful given the size of the environment.  In addition, you must agree to hire and maintain that staffing level (I can dream). Too often tools are purchased as a crutch, and in place of humans, when they should be augmenting them. I recall a recent engagement where the incident response team logged into a security console to see what data was available and found it was lit up like a Christmas tree. The tool was doing its job of showing the alerts – if someone had been monitoring it, a massive crisis could have been prevented.

#5: Network-based Security

This is the final item to crack the top 5, and only the 2ndtechnology recommendation. Network-based security controls should be layered to prevent attacks from web and email-based threats. These controls should include items such as a spam filtering service or appliance, blocking uncategorized traffic at the proxy if possible, and DNS protection services to filter content, block further malware, protect against, botnets, and prevent issues with URL typos, such as Cisco Umbrella. Additionally, implementing these controls allows for monitoring to detect and restrict machines requesting domains associated with attacker activity or malware.

Outside of these recommendations, we do provide other ones on a routine basis such as two factor, penetration testing, and more focus on governance, risk and compliance (GRC). In regards to GRC, it is still surprising how many organizations have not done a basic security assessment and do not have a roadmap to get healthy. This becomes very apparent when working an active incident and the customer lead has a title of something outside of Security (e.g. Networking). Security is still not a priority to some organizations. Unfortunately, in this new era, security needs to be built into everything and everyone in IT needs to be working towards a common goal of protecting the company, its customers and users.

I hope you’ve found this data useful. Perhaps it validates what you see, know, or perhaps are working on yourself. I’d also recommend you check out the Cisco 2018 Annual Cybersecurity Report.

Please leave a comment below if you agree/disagree with these top 5 incident response best practices, or feel free to reach me on Twitter @SeanAMason.

 

Tags:



from Cisco Blog » Security https://ift.tt/2raa1ya

DevSecOps: Lessons Learned

This is Part 4 in our Four Part DevSecOps Blog Series

In Part 3 of our blog series DevSecOps: Automation for Assurance, we covered our automation journey to help us scale security across hundreds of development teams via our Continuous Security Buddy (CSB) capabilities. In the final blog of this series, we will share our success factors, lessons learned, and what we are thinking next as we continue on our DevSecOps journey.

Our Success Story

Adoption of DevSecOps and the security improvements thereof has been quite impressive and has exceeded our own initial expectations. For example, since rolling out CSB minimal viable tool 9 months ago, it is now running in 72% of accounts hosting Cisco’s Cloud offers. Additionally, 97% of these accounts, on average, received a health score of A or B in their daily report indicating a healthy security posture relative to the guardrails we published in part 2.

This has been a fantastic journey at Cloud Speed and along the way we have learned some valuable lessons that are important to share:

Cloud is about “Doing” more than “Telling”

Hackathons provided the opportunity to collaborate with all cross-functional disciplines and deliver on critical security areas mentioned in the guardrails. It also provided a platform for team members to learn from each other, develop empathy and create solutions together rather than being ‘told by InfoSec’. Many of the InfoSec participants had little to no experience in developing Cloud solutions and their security expertise in combination with hands-on doing helped them leap-frog very quickly.

Timing Matters

Timing the initial launch of CSB with the roll-out of an Enterprise Agreement with AWS allowed us to provide a carrot (volume discounts) along with the stick (access for security and cost management visibility). Teams were eager to benefit from the discounts and took the 15 minutes they needed to install CSB in order to join the master account for Cisco that helped with consolidated billing and discounts.

Start Small and Grow

Taking an MVP mind-set of releasing minimal capabilities initially and iterating based on learnings and user feedback was key. Though the teams went with the MVP initially, the CSB team needed to quickly deliver capabilities that created value for the DevOps teams. This continuous visibility via the daily security health reports enabled the teams to self-remediate issues and gain confidence in the security posture of their offer. Iterative development helped the CSB team design the solution in a way that scaled with usage.

Guard-rails vs. Pass/Fail

Security practitioners often dread the word “approval” as it is often situational and comes down to risk management. The Guard-rails approach provides the range of compliance needed based on the situation at hand and allows the teams to manage their risks, A CIS (Center for Internet Security) benchmark score of 80% is within the acceptable risk for an internal host than a hard pass/fail rating.

Cultivating Partnerships

Establishing key partnerships across Operations between IT, InfoSec, Procurement and Product Operations in supply-chain gave us the multiplying effect where the aligned efforts helped us move faster in the same direction ultimately helping the Business Units in their mission to deliver Cloud offers with agility.

Credibility built upon Trust

For the DevOps teams to allow the InfoSec team to have access into their accounts requires building credibility and trust. This means being open and transparent in what we do with the access provided and being available for support if there are any questions or issues. The CSB team along with the partnering organizations created a Spark room (Cisco’s product for team collaboration) and auto-enrolled anyone installing CSB to this chat room via a Bot. No more opening tickets and waiting for a help desk agent to answer questions or address issues. The CSB DevSecOps team are always on the Chat room answering queries and it’s amazing to see the community members support each other. Some went as far as offering code fixes when a feature failure happened.

Taking Risks

Members of the InfoSec team took this journey on boldly. An InfoSec Architect played the role of a Product Owner and trusted his peer as the Product Technical Lead rather than giving into the temptation of making technical decisions. The Product Owner, Product Technical Lead and Scrum Master worked in unison building out the vision and with a small scrum team delivered CSB as one unified team guided by a common goal – always a recipe for success.

Skill-sets Matter

Let’s face it, the InfoSec practitioners didn’t code. Complementing the team with resources from AWS professional services and Developers was important to deliver on the DevSecOps principles in CSB. Now we have developers learning more about Security and the InfoSec teams learning to code and sharpening their development skills.

Drinking our Champagne

Any security solutions we build need to be secure and can’t become the weakest link for our users. We practiced separation of duties to bring a peer group to review and approve the security practices in building and operating our CSB. Fortunately, there were only a couple of gaps that the team addressed quickly.

We hope this blog series helps many of you take on your own DevSecOps journey and that you find the practices we shared valuable.

To Recap,

Part 1 of our series shares the what and why on DevSecOps including our Manifesto,

Part 2 shares the Hack-a-thon approach to building the Security Guard-rails,

Part 3 shares the automation and tooling, and

Part 4 is about the valuable lessons learned and success factors

Looking ahead, we will be expanding on the DevSecOps practices to drive more automation across a Multicloud environment and also embedding more automation in the Continuous Integration/Continuous Delivery pipelines. I firmly believe that Security Automation integrated into DevOps workflows to address security more pervasively, consistently and quickly is the holy-grail to business agility, security talent shortage and dealing with increasing security threats.

We are looking forward to hearing your feedback and if there are practices you have put in place that can make us all more effective. It certainly takes a village and as our CISO often says – “getting everybody on the boat,” is key to our success!

 

 

Tags:



from Cisco Blog » Security https://ift.tt/2HDAS0E

Industroyer: An in-depth look at the culprit behind Ukraine's power grid blackout

Man who hacked jail systems to free associate sent behind bars

Reolink Argus 2, First Take: Good-value wireless security camera with improved power and imaging options

Who leaked the idea of ASD spying on Australians, and why?