Information Security News mailing list archives
Re: Random rants
From: "Curt Bryson (NTI)" <cbryson () TELEPORT COM>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 11:28:39 -0700
-----Original Message-----
I still think that it's foolhardy to advertise internal information so promiscuously because the first step in attacking a site is gathering as much information about the site as possible [...]
I'm in agreement. If there's any way of making it more difficult for someone to break in, then do it. Today's piece of secure software is the subject of tomorrow's Bugtraq posting. Knowing what I know about the
modus
operandi of many crackers (who often scan thousands of hosts checking for security flaws), I think it's a good idea to avoid allowing your IP address to appear on the list of sites vulnerable to the latest 0-day exploit.
OK, I cannot argue this at all, as it IS smart security. But I have to make mention of the fact that the "suits" in the company also have another issue to deal with... that of liability. I have worked many cases in the past year wherein the IP address and other info in the email address OR SMTP server logs has allowed me to see when and from whence an email came. In one case, it allowed me to ID an employee who sent threats from his home ISP. But in another case, it allowed me to assist a software (game) company ID an employee who used corporate email to send trade secret information out to an accomplice (not the sharpest knife in the drawer). Header and routing info should, IMHO, at least be kept by the two servers involved; else complete anonymity could work against us as much as for us. Unfortunately, as long as the current protocol for sending mail behaves in the same manner it does now, the final connection still exists. That connection, through some elegant pre-planning by the cracker can continue to be an achilles heel, and is loggable by the OS, regardless of facilities in the software. All we really do by removing the information is make it a bit more difficult for the cracker, but also for us when it comes time to see who's been messing around using our system for no good. I don't have the answer, before you ask... the question being "well how much do we want to balance security with accountability?" This was simply a parallel rant, meant to bring discourse and an additional angle. Curt Bryson Computer Forensics/Internet Investigations Consultant New Technologies, Inc. http://www.forensics-intl.com 2075 NE Division St. Gresham, OR 97030 Ph: (503) 661-6912 Fx: (503) 674-9145 Email: curt () forensics-intl com NTI is an Armor Holdings company NYSE: AH ISN is hosted by SecurityFocus.com --- To unsubscribe email LISTSERV () SecurityFocus com with a message body of "SIGNOFF ISN".
Current thread:
- Random rants on the subject of: ISN Digest - 5 Oct 2000 to 6 Oct 2000 (#2000-185) The Dodger (Oct 09)
- Re: Random rants Curt Bryson (NTI) (Oct 10)
