• 29Nov
    Author: admin Categories: IT Management Comments: 0

    WEP is dead.  Even your mother knows not to encrypt her Linksys wireless router with WEP.  For all of us that have played around with the aircrack-ng tool set (on our own networks of course :-) ), we know that by using aircrack in conjunction with packet injection/replay attacks WEP keys can be cracked within a couple minutes [EDIT: According to German researchers, WEP can now be cracked in an average of 20 seconds on an 802.11g network].

    Well, we should use WPA/WPA2 PSK then right?  Well yes, but with a couple constraints… Read more »

  • 24Nov
    Author: ned Categories: Green IT Comments: 0

    Last week’s 10 For Change meeting was a success – there was a great turnout and lots of good conversation.  I had fun sitting on the panel, and each of the other panelists had something interesting to share…

    Read more »

  • 23Nov
    Author: trent Categories: IT Management Comments: 2

    One of the most common queries I get from friends in the IT space is “Hey Trent, do you know someone that can help my organization with _______.”  The subject varies, but the goal is the same: to get a referral for a vendor that had a proven track record, is inexpensive, reliable, and will generally make the people who chose them look like a star. Of course, my hope is that when folks ask their buddies “Who do you use for IT Security and Infrastructure?”, the answer is Applied Trust.

    In my experience, finding those trusted IT vendors is very, very difficult.  Usually it takes actually trying a handful of vendors before one rises to the top.  Here’s the set of vendors that I personally trust, and where I often refer folks (and no, they didn’t pay me to mention them here!):

    Read more »

  • 19Nov
    Author: ben Categories: IT Management, Ramblings, Security Comments: 0

    The Lone Sysadmin, Bob Plankers, comments on the lack of vendor commitment to virtualization, and I fully concur. I see it especially with smaller, proprietary niche vendors. They’ll threaten to pull support entirely if their software is hosted on a virtual system.

    The core problem, in my view, is that they just don’t understand it. It’s not limited to virtualization, either. There’s push back on patching (on all platforms), joining systems to a Windows domain, changing account passwords or privilege levels, even locating multiple systems on different subnets!

    My take is that many of these vendors do not come from an IT background. They are experts in some field, identified a problem that needed automating, and hired somebody to write the code for them, with no understand of security or architectural implications. They’re often very good at solving the problems in that niche, but when that system plays a role in a larger enterprise there’s no understanding of the big picture.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Technorati] [StumbleUpon]
    Tags: ,
  • 19Nov
    Author: ned Categories: Green IT Comments: 0

    I’m excited to report that Applied Trust is sponsoring the 10 for Change Challenge in Boulder, and that I’ll be participating in tonight’s panel at the St. Julien.  The Challenge, to cut energy use by 10% in 2009, is open to Boulder businesses and will include regular meetings throughout the year.  Tonight’s meeting will be our first after the kickoff, and it sounds like there will be a great turnout.

    This is an incredible opportunity for businesses to share their experiences in facilities and infrastructure efficiency — I’m going to talk about our experiences with facilities power monitoring, IT efficency, and off-grid power generation during the panel today.

    You can also check out what we’re doing to reduce our ecological impact on the 10 for Change site: Applied Trust thinks and lives ‘green’.  Special thanks to Kevin Afflerbaugh at the City, Adrian Eissler at Hogan & Hartson, and Tim Tetreault at Cleantech for getting this exciting program rolling!

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Technorati] [StumbleUpon]
  • 16Nov
    Author: admin Categories: Security Comments: 0

    Recently, I’ve been doing a lot of application security assessments for clients of Applied Trust, the majority of them being black box or grey box testing, all dealing with some form of web application.  The most common problems I find deal with developers not or inadequately sanitizing user supplied input.

    Any time you write a user supplied value back to the page, you need to be leery of cross site scripting (XSS) attacks. Any time you are inserting user supplied input into a database, you need to guard against SQL injection attacks.

    The steps below will teach you how to guard against these attacks…

    Read more »

  • 12Nov
    Author: ben Categories: Infrastructure Comments: 0

    I occasionally need to pull mailbox data in PST format from Exchange, sometimes for archival, other times for legal review, or perhaps for some other reason altogether. This process has changed to use Export/Import with Exchange 2007, removing the 2GB file size limit and including a slew of other features, but some of us still need or prefer to use the handy exmerge tool.

    Luckily, it’s still possible to use exmerge if you keep a few considerations in mind.

    First, you must have at least “View-Only Administrator” privileges in the 2007 environment. To do this, open an Exchange command shell, and run:

    Add-ExchangeAdministrator -Identity '<your domain>.local/Users/ExMerge' -Role 'ViewOnlyAdmin'

    You’ll also need SendAs and ReceiveAs permissions on the mailbox store where the user’s mailbox lives. To find which store this is, open the Exchange Management Console and navigate to Recipient Configuration -> Mailbox. Double click the user, and on the General tab note the value of the “Mailbox database” line. Then run:

    Get-MailboxDatabase -identity "<YourServer>\<Value from Mailbox database>" | Add-ADPermission -user "<YourDomain>\<Your AD Account>" -ExtendedRights Receive-As, Send-As

    Finally, and this one got me for a while, you may have problems if the user is hidden from Exchange address lists. You can check this in the user properties on the General tab. Make sure “Hide from Exchange Address lists” is not checked.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Technorati] [StumbleUpon]
  • 06Nov
    Author: ned Categories: Security Comments: 0

    It’s kooky that some organizations are still using FTP for exchanging sensitive files.  Almost every security standard (and plain common sense) requires using encrypted data transfer, and with a great free solution in OpenSSH and WinSCP, there really is no excuse for FTP.

    This solution provides the following important security features:

    • Strong user authentication with DSA keys (almost two-factor authentication)
    • Complete segregation between users (using a chrooted jail)
    • Detailed activity logging
    • Uses time and industry-tested open source OpenSSH server software
    • Familiar “drag-n-drop” user interface thanks to WinSCP

    Read on for four easy steps to make it happen:
    Read more »

  • 02Nov
    Author: trent Categories: IT Management, Security Comments: 1

    Today, November 2, 2008, is the 20th anniversary of “Black Thursday” – a significant, defining moment in Internet and information security history.  On this day in 1988, the Robert Morris Jr.  worm was unleashed on the Internet.  Sometimes called the Great Worm, this was the first time that the world had proof of what we all knew to be true: significant damage could occur if a malicious party exploited known vulnerabilities across the network en masse.  As silly as it sounds now, prior to that date we always talked about how a worm “could” happen; now we fret about “when.”

    RTM’s worm brought significant change to the Internet world.  The damage it caused (possibly upwards of $100M) and media attention it received ultimately provided the foundation for much of what we know as modern-day, non-military Information Security.  For the first time ever, the Internet became well-known to the mainstream media.  DARPA provided funds to form CERT at Carnegie Mellon, which also directly or indirectly resulted in most clueful organizations establishing their own information security or security incident response teams. Many of the security standards we take for granted are based on early work done at CERT.  I’ll save the debate about whether the worm was ultimately good or bad for our community as a whole for some later post.

    Personally, this date also marks the start of my career in Information Security.  I was in the Computer Science system support group at the University of Colorado at the time, and vividly remember sleeping on my office floor for the last half of that week.  Our primary production systems – mostly VAX 11/780’s, 11/750’s, and Sun 3’s – were all infected.  Lacking any formal incident coordination and communication  infrastructure, we reached out to our friends at UC Berkeley and the University of Utah to collaborate on how to contain and mitigate the situation.  We provided data to the teams working on dissecting the worm, some of which ultimately led to Donn Seeley’s USENIX paper which is still regarded as the most complete and accurate technical analysis.

    It’s great to reminisce about history, but where are we 20 years later?  Although I’m not currently planning on sleeping on my office floor tonight, ironically today I am again worried about the potential for a worm to spread uncontrolled due to lack of patching.  Specifically, the Microsoft MS08-067 vulnerability that was released out-of-cycle 11 days ago represents a significant threat to almost every Windows system out there.  In the last week, I’ve heard all the same arguments against patching that we did 20 years ago — too much effort, too much risk to availability, not enough threat.

    It’s true that overall we have better mitigating controls in place than we did 20 years ago — most organizations have a firewall, virus protection, an incident response plan, and maybe even IDS/IPS.  The bottom line, though, is that none of this eliminates the need for patching serious vulnerabilities.  As an industry, we MUST patch known serious vulnerabilities, and it takes the same amount of time to patch them now as it does later.  It’s just a question of whether you want to suffer the pain and embarassment of looking like a fool in between doing it “now” vs. “later.”

    I admit to being an “old dog” (and certainly, this particular anniversary rubs that in) but personally, I’d rather make the effort to apply a patch than look like a fool.  Any day.

    [Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Technorati] [StumbleUpon]