3 ms·

I don’t think that’s a fair comparison. I think a fair comparison would be 80,000 companies buy the same vault door from supplier X. But suddenly one criminal g

I don’t think that’s a fair comparison. I think a fair comparison would be 80,000 companies buy the same vault door from supplier X. But suddenly one criminal group has found a universal key to the vault that no one else knows about, and can now access all 80,000 vaults nearly simultaneously and clandestinely even though they still look closed and secure from outside observers.

Sebb767 5y ago
... but this was 5 years ago and everyone and their dog knows it by now, the company just didn't bother to change that door. Also, the criminal group doesn't hit doors with cameras, but nobody bothered to install one. --- What you described is a zero day, which is very rarely used - most ransomware simply uses the absolutely low hanging fruit of companies lagging behind years in security updates combined with highly insufficient backups.
- beermonster 5y ago
  Companies generally do not have a sufficient tested backup strategy and plan (though backups have only one part to play). Those same companies have probably never suffered any major consequences as a result - which might explain why it’s so usual for this to be a common gap. Sloppy/incomplete backups can probably wing/firefight the more common ‘single server dies’ ‘single directory needs recovering from accidental deletion on file server’ ‘need to restore database following botched upgrade’ type scenarios creating a false sense of security. In the same way companies do not have sufficient HA for their critical systems or processes. HA means being actively resistant to events impacting availability by having (typically automated) redundancy to remove SPoFs. It doesn’t mean HA owing to luck the server hasn’t died in 10 years owing to lack of/poor maintenance. But both with HA and backups companies can dodge bullets (until a real emergency) and maybe never even have a major incident. Ransomware kind of exploits this lack of organisation level sufficient backing up of all critical information assets. It really is as you say, low hanging fruit.
  - blablabla123 5y ago
    The backup thing is really weird, I think only very small non-startup companies care about them a lot because they just cannot afford not having them. In all other places when I bring up the topic everybody seems to be lightly surprised and the sense of urgency just isn't there. Personally I find this just puzzling, in my home folder I loose files at least once a year and I also lost whole partitions. So having no backup at all is no option for me at home. I cannot understand how no or unmaintained backups can be an option at companies.
542354234235 5y ago
80,000 planes use the same bolts to secure the engine pylons to the wing. It is found that the bolt can sheer in cold weather due to a casting defect. This does not cause a catastrophic failure because the aircraft are designed in such a way that an individual compromise will not bring down the entire system. Bank vault doors don’t open to the street for a reason. If your entire system is relying on the security of that one vault door, you have already failed. If you are storing sensitive data on millions of users in plaintext, you have already failed.
- salawat 5y ago
  Even plaintext can be secure with the right other measures. Air gapped in a physically secured, access controlled location, with all egress/exit points covered by sufficiently rigorous security measures? You're fine. Encryption introduces it's own SPOF's. If you'very never had a power failure in the middle of a key rotation, you've never been bitten back by your attempt at securing everything with cryptography. Or worse, corrupted by sketchy hardware. Defense in depth, and proper threat modeling is key. There is also the very real question of "Do you really need that Internet connected anyway?"

Sebb767 5y ago

... but this was 5 years ago and everyone and their dog knows it by now, the company just didn't bother to change that door. Also, the criminal group doesn't hit doors with cameras, but nobody bothered to install one. --- What you described is a zero day, which is very rarely used - most ransomware simply uses the absolutely low hanging fruit of companies lagging behind years in security updates combined with highly insufficient backups.

beermonster 5y ago
Companies generally do not have a sufficient tested backup strategy and plan (though backups have only one part to play). Those same companies have probably never suffered any major consequences as a result - which might explain why it’s so usual for this to be a common gap. Sloppy/incomplete backups can probably wing/firefight the more common ‘single server dies’ ‘single directory needs recovering from accidental deletion on file server’ ‘need to restore database following botched upgrade’ type scenarios creating a false sense of security. In the same way companies do not have sufficient HA for their critical systems or processes. HA means being actively resistant to events impacting availability by having (typically automated) redundancy to remove SPoFs. It doesn’t mean HA owing to luck the server hasn’t died in 10 years owing to lack of/poor maintenance. But both with HA and backups companies can dodge bullets (until a real emergency) and maybe never even have a major incident. Ransomware kind of exploits this lack of organisation level sufficient backing up of all critical information assets. It really is as you say, low hanging fruit.
- blablabla123 5y ago
  The backup thing is really weird, I think only very small non-startup companies care about them a lot because they just cannot afford not having them. In all other places when I bring up the topic everybody seems to be lightly surprised and the sense of urgency just isn't there. Personally I find this just puzzling, in my home folder I loose files at least once a year and I also lost whole partitions. So having no backup at all is no option for me at home. I cannot understand how no or unmaintained backups can be an option at companies.

542354234235 5y ago

80,000 planes use the same bolts to secure the engine pylons to the wing. It is found that the bolt can sheer in cold weather due to a casting defect. This does not cause a catastrophic failure because the aircraft are designed in such a way that an individual compromise will not bring down the entire system. Bank vault doors don’t open to the street for a reason. If your entire system is relying on the security of that one vault door, you have already failed. If you are storing sensitive data on millions of users in plaintext, you have already failed.

salawat 5y ago
Even plaintext can be secure with the right other measures. Air gapped in a physically secured, access controlled location, with all egress/exit points covered by sufficiently rigorous security measures? You're fine. Encryption introduces it's own SPOF's. If you'very never had a power failure in the middle of a key rotation, you've never been bitten back by your attempt at securing everything with cryptography. Or worse, corrupted by sketchy hardware. Defense in depth, and proper threat modeling is key. There is also the very real question of "Do you really need that Internet connected anyway?"