
|
 |
|
It’s
About Time:
The Metric for Information Security
By
Winn Schwartau
(General
Session: 45 mins. Highly
interactive. Good for
any audience with a basic
knowledge of security
in enterprises. I can
provide up to 50 free
copies of the book upon
which this presentation
is based.)
During
the Cold War, the US defended
us poor, soon-to-be-nuked
citizenry, with time.
If
the Soviets got it into
their heads to send over
a six-pack of MIRV, the
US had somewhere in the
vicinity of 18-22 minutes
to launch our thermonuclear
response over the pole.
The point wasn’t to defend
we the citizens; it was
to kill as many of their
comrades as we could in
response. The 18 minute
window was how long we had
to respond before their
nukes nuked our nukes. Yeah,
a ton of people would die
and then there was that
10,000 year uninhabitable
planet issue to work out,
but the real point was MAD:
deterrence through Mutual
Assured h Destruction. Looks
like it worked.
Physical
home and business protection
is also measured in time
and we see it in a staple
of cops and robbers movies:
A crook breaks into a jewelry
store (or home). The alarm
goes off. It dials the cops
(20 seconds); the cops examine
the call to make sure it
looks real (20 seconds);
the cops go to the scene
of the crime, presumably
not across the street from
the police station (1-5
minutes). To be on the safe
side, the robbers give themselves
a maximum of two minutes
for the whole heist. The
quantifiable question is,
how much can they steal
in two minutes?
At
the office, time is often
the first tier of protection.
You unlock the door, open
it and then run like heck
to the supply closet so
you can enter the security
code into the alarm system.
You have 25 seconds to do
that or, in theory, the
rent-a-cops come a running
in a few minutes.
But
There is No Protection
The
history of conflict has
been based upon the military
concept of Risk Avoidance
through Fortress Mentality.
How high can we build the
walls to keep the marauding
masses out of our wheat
fields, lakes and castles?
Did that approach work?
The Great Wall of China
was an historical insignificance.
The Berlin Wall was purely
symbolic and the Maginot
Line was ignored by the
Germans. Hunkering down
in defense for an attacker’s
seven year siege hasn’t
worked (Troy, Hussein, e.g.)
and the same approach hasn’t
worked for the Internet-style
hunkering down we have attempted
to defend against on-line
punkersterism. Just look
at what’s happening out
there!
-
Using
Fortress Mentality in
computer and network
technology as a defensive
method assumes that
things will work as
they should - but we
all know they don’t
and won’t. Take a look:
-
Increasing
complexity causes software
and networks fail regularly
in undepredictable ways.
-
Networks
grow and thus change
every day, thus changing
its security posture
no matter how hard we
try.
-
Administrators
do not know every single
network ingress and
egress of their network.
Modems, PC Anywhere,
unknown phone lines
and secret subnets plague
organizations.
-
Connecting
enterprise networks
to partner organizations
with unknown security
can weaken a network’s
defensive strength.
-
Seemingly
harmless applications
often innocently create
security vulnerabilities.
-
New
hacks appear daily against
leading applications,
operating systems and
security mechanisms.
Organizations have a
terribly difficult time
keeping up with every
new one.
-
It
takes time and effort
to install new patches
to enhance security,
and they don’t always
work.
-
Well-designed
security mechanisms
are all too often installed
incorrectly and/or completely
misconfigured. ? Administrators
often turn off security
controls during audits
and maintenance and
forget to turn them
back on.
-
You
can’t adequately test
the protective value
of a network with any
degree of assurance
beyond the exact moment
it was tested.
-
We
cannot measure the efficacy
of security products
or protective systems
- yet. (Read on!)
Phew!
What
that means is, not matter
how many firewalls, passwords,
policies or O/S patches
you apply, it’s a sure bet
that you won’t be 100% protected.
There is no silver bullet,
right?
“What
about perfect firewalls
that only keep the bad guys
out?” I often get asked.
“Fine,”
I’ll answer. “Show me a
good IP and a bad IP address.”
"Oh.”
Sure,
you can put in the perfect
security - an air gap -
but that defeats the whole
purpose of networks in the
first place; allow businesses
to seamlessly communicate
and interact with as many
other networks and people
as they can for whatever
purpose they choose. So,
if the conventional protection
mechanisms of Fortress Mentality
don’t work, what will?
It’s
About Time.
Let’s
go back to the jewelry store.
The
owners know that the store’s
plate glass windows represent
no defense or protection
at all to their millions
of dollars in jewlery. It’s
there for show and to keep
the honest people out, not
the criminals.
Now,
for a bit of math. Let’s
say that Protection, P,
equals ‘0’, where P is measured
in time. One hammer and
it’s all over; the bad guys
are inside in an instant.
For
our network analysis purposes,
let’s assume that all of
our protective security
efforts are for naught for
the reasons listed above;
they only serve to keep
the good guys honest. Thus,
as above, the Protection
value in time, P = 0. (That
is, of course, unless your
favorite security vendor
is giving you a written
guarantee to the contrary.)
From a risk management standpoint,
how can we say anything
different? Do we have any
confidence or proof or trust
that our security mechanisms
will hold up in light of
new hacker attacks or glitch
discovery? And for how long
can we feel secure with
the latest O/S service pack?
One week? One minute? One
microsecond?
Our
jewelry store, though, probably
has good detection mechanisms
to detect the bad guys doing
bad guy things: taped windows,
cameras, heat, sound and
motion detectors. This represents
another piece of the Time
Based Security approach:
Detection, where D is also
measured in time. In this
case, a detection should
occur in something less
than a second; after all,
smashing though a plate
glass window is no small
sonic event. So, let’s say
that in this case D = 1
second.
The
next and last component
in the store’s security
is Reaction, or R. The reaction
has several steps: 1. Dial
the cops (or security force):
20 seconds 2. The cops analyze
the call: 20 seconds 3.
The cops call a cop car
to respond: 20 seconds 4.
The cop car comes to the
jewelry store: 1-4 minutes.
So,
the robbers are assuming
R = 2 minutes - that they
have 120 seconds to commit
the crime and hightail it
out of the area.
Since
we assume a value of P =
0, (no protection), the
store’s entire defensive
posture is then measured
by D + R, the combined time
it takes the detection and
reaction systems to work.
In this case, D + R = 121
seconds.
If,
however, we had any confidence
in the protection value
of the plate glass window
(bullet proof, hammerproof),
we might use the following
Time Based Security formula:
P
> D + R
which
says, “if the time value
afforded me by a protection
device is greater than the
amount of time it takes
to detect and respond (repair,
halt) to an attack, then
I have a secure environment.”
The
time value of P is the common
metric in many physical
examples of protection.
In banks or for home security,
the amount of security that
vaults offer is measured
in time: how long will it
take a given oxyacetylene
torch of a given temperature
to burn through the metal
wall? These numbers provide
a good metric base for choosing
what kind of P-products,
D-products and R-products
to use in a complete defensive
system.
But,
since we do not know the
measured protective strength
(P) of systems in the networking
world, we conservatively
assign P a value of 0, thus
giving us a new formula:
If
P = 0, then D + R =
E where E represents
Exposure, measured in
time.
For
the jewelry store their
E, or exposure time, means
that their greatest risk
is how much can be stolen
in 2 minutes. That value
is no longer an information
security number but one
to be used by the bean counters,
risk analysts and actuarial
management who assess insurance
rates. Assuming the D +
R systems work, E becomes
a quantifiable risk-measuring
tool. The goal of course,
is to make good business
decisions which do not eliminate
risk, but lower it to acceptable
limits. Thus, in TBS, we
want E 0, or Exposure time
to approach zero.
To
use Time Based Security
in our world, then, we merely
have to apply the same logic.
Let’s say that your network
is using really a whiz-bang
Intrusion Detection System
and that it can detect any
known attack in the universe
in 10 seconds.
D
= 10 seconds.
Now
for reaction , R, which
consist of three parts:
1.
Notification: The IDS
has to do something. Based
upon more than 30,000
live audience members,
that is generally to notify
the administrator in charge
either via page, email
or telephone. The average
time value for this step
is 2 minutes, or 120 seconds.
This assumes someone on
duty, of course. In some
cases this value is as
high as 64 hours.
2.
Transit: The person notified
has to get to a place
where he can do something
about the problem. Nominally
I allow audiences about
five minutes so as not
to embarrass them. But
think about the real world;
corporate campuses, lunch
hours, on the highway/airplane,
midnight at home, weekends.
How long does it really
take?
3.
Rectification: Fixing
most problems appears
to be the easiest for
the common ones, and is
often less than a couple
of two minutes according
to hundreds of administrators.
So
the R (reaction) component
now equals 2 minutes +
5 minutes + 2 minutes
= 9 minutes, for a total
of
D
+ R = 9 minutes, 10 seconds
= E
The
question the systems administrator
in combination with his
risk management equivalents,
legal staff and auditors
need to ask - and answer
- is: “How much damage can
occur to our networks and
our company in 9 minutes
and 10 seconds of unlimited
access by a bad guy.” (We’re
not looking at the insider
problem yet.)
Only
you can come up with that
answer, but the groans are
physically evident when
I put audiences to this
very test.
Putting
it Together
This
Time Based Security technique
creates a new view of networks
and their vulnerabilities
by providing a common metric
- time - to be used to gauge
both risk and security under
the same umbrella. We know
(or should know) how fast
our existing Detection and
Reaction process is, even
if we have no earthly idea
how strong or weak our protective
products and processes are.
The
quantification of time to
lost revenues, profits and
image is not an exact science,
but the DDOS attacks of
February 2000 demonstrated
that big e-commerce sites
are already looking at time=money
in web site terms.
Now
the acute reader will have
already thought that Time
Based Security does not
equally apply across the
CIA infosec triad, and he
is right. TBS does work
in each case, but each one
needs to be thought through
and measured separately
as breaches occur in different
ways and over different
time periods. There are
charts and processes to
apply TBS to each security
fundamental.
Nonetheless,
the most critical component
of Time Based Security is
reaction, a completely overlooked
component of security. Just
as companies need to have
a policy to implement security,
they need to develop and
be prepared to use a policy
for reactions. Developing
a reaction matrix is crucial
for solving real-time security
problems, but also for follow-up
forensics, legal involvement,
law enforcement investigation
and prosecution.
The
administrator needs to get
the buy-off from management
that under detected condition
‘A’ it is corporate policy
for him to take reaction
‘B’, and then call management,
the lawyers, police of aliens
if necessary. I have seen
companies come to a virtual
halt because of a hacking
incident because they had
no policies or procedures
in place to respond. Ideally,
someone will always be on
duty or available in a short
period to manage security
events.
Some
people unfortunately think
that buying the strongest
firewall or other security
device is the answer to
their problems. Wrong. Using
TBS, we find that the first
steps are measure existing
detection and reaction systems,
then determine if they are
acceptable. Getting several
values to approach 0 is
core to TBS. We want:
Only
once we understand how the
detection/response systems
work with respect to our
time metric can we realistically
begin to choose the appropriate,
risk managed choice, or
protective systems.
There
are many more Time Based
Security formulas which
really help make the information
security process quantitative
rather than mere guess work,
but are outside the scope
of this short article.
1.
How to determine exactly
which files in a network
are vulnerable.
2.
How to protect those files
with non-traditional security
techniques that require
next to no products.
3.
Solving Denial of Service
4.
Applying Defense in Depth
to Time Based Security
5.
Extreme Intrusion Detection
6.
Protecting against the insider
7.
Tracking down the culprits
For
the offensive information
warrior who cares, we have
also developed a set of
equations for methods of
safe attacks against target
networks which use similar
methods and metrics.
Time
Based Security is not a
panacea to solve all security
problems, but it does offer
tools to rethink the traditional
view of security, and adds
the necessary dynamics to
reflect defense in ever-changing
environments. But perhaps
most importantly, TBS adds
a common metric to security,
where we can each measure
aspects of our security
environment, quantify them,
replicate them and use them
as benchmarks for performance
today in the future.
If
you have any comments or
thoughts on how TBS can
be expanded or improved,
I look forward to hearing
from you.
Suggested
Reading: Time
Based Security.
Learn More About Interpact:
E-mail
|
Phone
|
Fax
|
|
727.393.6600
|
727.393.6361
|
Kelley
Walker,
Development
|
727.796.8484 |
727.393.6361 |
|
727.360.4061
|
727.368.0051
|

Copyright
© 2000-2001 Interpact, Inc. All Rights Reserved
For comments about this page, contact: Kelley
Walker, Interpact, Inc.
Copyright Policy Privacy
Policy

|
 |

|