Jan 092012
 

Do you know your cyberthreats?

COMPUTER WORLD



The watchdogs at the Government Accountability Office this week issued a report that takes a look at what information, or guidance as they call it, is available to help government agencies and public sector companies bulk up their cybersecurity efforts.

Since a GAO report late last year showed reports of security incidents from federal agencies have increased more than 650% over the past five years, the need for a community of help on the cybersecurity front is needed.

MORE ON SECURITY: IRS: Top 10 things every taxpayer should know about identity theft

Inside the current report, the GAO included a list and definitions of some of the more common, and perhaps some not-so-common, security exploits that federal agencies and private firms are hit with. Here’s the list:

 

• Cross-site scripting (XSS):

An attack that uses third-party web resources to run script within the victim’s web browser or scriptable application. This occurs when a browser visits a malicious website or clicks a malicious link. The most dangerous consequences occur when this method is used to exploit additional vulnerabilities that may permit an attacker to steal cookies (data exchanged between a web server and a browser), log key strokes, capture screen shots, discover and collect network information, and remotely access and control the victim’s machine.

 

—–

 
• Denial-of-service (DoS):

An attack that prevents or impairs the authorized use of networks, systems, or applications by exhausting resources.

 
—–

 

• Distributed denial-of-service (DDoS):

A variant of the denial-of-service attack that uses numerous hosts to perform the attack.

 
—–

 

• Logic bomb:

A piece of programming code intentionally inserted into a software system that will cause a malicious function to occur when one or more specified conditions are met.

 
—–

 

• Phishing:

A digital form of social engineering that uses authentic-looking — but fake — e-mails to request information from users or direct them to a fake website that requests information.

 
—–

 

• Passive wiretapping:

The monitoring or recording of data, such as passwords transmitted in clear text, while they are being transmitted over a communications link. This is done without altering or affecting the data.

 
—–

 

• SQL injection:

An attack that involves the alteration of a database search in a web-based application, which can be used to obtain unauthorized access to sensitive information in a database.

 
—–

 

• Trojan horse:

A computer program that appears to have a useful function, but also has a hidden and potentially malicious function that evades security mechanisms by, for example, masquerading as a useful program that a user would likely execute.

 
—–

 

• Virus:

A computer program that can copy itself and infect a computer without the permission or knowledge of the user. A virus might corrupt or delete data on a computer, use e-mail programs to spread itself to other computers, or even erase everything on a hard disk. Unlike a computer worm, a virus requires human involvement (usually unwitting) to propagate.

 
—–

 

• War driving:

The method of driving through cities and neighborhoods with a wireless-equipped computer — sometimes with a powerful antenna — searching for unsecured wireless networks.

 
—–


• Worm:

A self-replicating, self-propagating, self-contained program that uses network mechanisms to spread itself. Unlike computer viruses, worms do not require human involvement to propagate.

 
—–

 

• Zero-day exploit:

An exploit that takes advantage of a security vulnerability previously unknown to the general public. In many cases, the exploit code is written by the same person who discovered the vulnerability. By writing an exploit for the previously unknown vulnerability, the attacker creates a potent threat since the compressed time frame between public discoveries of both makes it difficult to defend against.

 

Direct Link:  http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/security/do-you-know-your-cyberthreats

Dec 132011
 

Government Agencies Harbor The Most Vulnerable Applications

Newest Veracode State of Software Security report finds SQL injection flaws declining overall in all industries
Dark Reading
By Kelly Jackson Higgins
Dec 08, 2011

Software applications running in U.S. federal, state, and local government agencies contain more vulnerabilities than in other industries — and only 16 percent of applications overall from government as well as other industries aced their security tests in the first pass, according to a new report from Veracode.

Veracode adopted a more stringent, zero-policy approach to testing applications for cross-site scripting (XSS) and SQL injection flaws this time in its newly published State of Software Security Report, which analyzed testing data from the past 18 months for 9,910 applications submitted to the testing firm.

Why the zero-tolerance approach to XSS and SQL injection now? “It’s not acceptable anymore” to have these low-hanging fruit vulnerabilities, says Sam King, vice president of product marketing at Veracode. “More than eight in 10 applications failed with the new policy.”

That’s down from the 68 percent pass rate for apps under Veracode’s previously more permissive policy that allowed for a minimal number of the flaws. “Our objective is increasing the sense of urgency for people to take action,” King says.

Government applications had more vulnerabilities, with 40 percent of agency Web apps containing SQL injection issues versus 29 percent of apps in the finance industry and 30 percent in the software industry. One bit of good news: SQL injection overall is diminishing in all apps, but remained flat in government compared to previous reports. SQL injection vulnerabilities in apps had dropped from 38 percent two years ago to around 32 percent, according to Chris Wysopal, CTO of Veracode.

“SQL injection is trending downward [due to more] awareness of it. More organizations are doing something about it,” Wysopal says. “Cross-site scripting, on the other hand, is flat … the same number of apps are affected by it.”

Another bright spot in the report: Eighty percent of the organizations were able to fix their software’s flaws within one week. “If you take action, it’s not hard to improve app security,” Wysopal says.

Bob Tarzey, director and analyst with Quocirca, says Veracode’s report shows that there are a lot of vulnerabilities in applications today, but that they “can be fixed pretty quickly.”

Meanwhile, Veracode’s King says the relatively poorer performance by government apps was a bit unsettling. “Those are alarming findings,” she says. “In more instances, they were more frequently exploited than other industries were.”

One explanation, she says, might have to do with the mix of Web programming languages employed in government agencies. “They tend to make greater use of ColdFusion as a Web app development language, which tends to be used by less experienced developers,” King says.

Among other findings by Veracode: More than 40 percent of Android apps contain hard-coded encryption keys in them, while around 17 percent of other Java apps did. Because Android apps are simple to decompile, an attacker could easily grab and leak the keys, for instance, according to Veracode. “In Web apps, an embedded encryption key is risky, but only the admin has access to that key,” Veracode’s Wysopal says. “With mobile apps, every single user who installs the app has access to the key, so it’s a more serious problem.”

This could expose a healthcare patient app, for instance, he says. “People don’t like to type in a password on a mobile device every time, so for usability, a lot of app developers are embedding the key that give access to the back-end Web service,” Wysopal says. “But that’s inherently insecure. Anyone who gets access to the app can authenticate to that service, which is OK if it’s a public app, but not if it [handles] patient information.”

As mobile app adoption increases by enterprises, so will the number of flaws, Quocirca’s Tarzey says. “Look for a continued increase in mobile application and firmware vulnerabilities,” he says.

Veracode’s State of Software Security report is available for download here.

Direct Link: http://www.darkreading.com/mobile-security/167901113/security/application-security/232300187/government-agencies-harbor-the-most-vulnerable-applications.html

Dec 072011
 

Cross-site scripting flaws plague web apps, report says
Code-scanning vendor Veracode found nearly a third of Web applications had SQL injection flaws
Computerworld
By Jeremy Kirk
December 7, 2011

IDG News Service – Cross-site scripting flaws are the most prevalent vulnerabilities found in Web applications, posing a risk to data and intellectual property, according to a study of thousands of applications by vendor Veracode.

Veracode, a company that specializes in finding vulnerabilities in code, analyzed more than 9,900 applications that were submitted to its cloud-based scanning service over the last 18 months.

For Web applications, 68% contained cross-site scripting flaws, Veracode found in its study. Cross-site scripting is an attack in which a script drawn from another website is allowed to run even though it shouldn’t and it can be used to steal information or potentially cause other malicious code to run.

Veracode also found that 32% of Web applications contained a SQL injection problem, a type of issue where commands entered into Web-based forms are executed, potentially returning sensitive data.

Other prevalent flaws Veracode found were CRLF (Carriage Return Line Feed) injection issues, which can allow an attacker to control a Web application or steal information, the report said.

Veracode said it tightened its risk-evaluation methodology for its latest report and adopted a zero-tolerance policy for applications found to have a cross-site scripting or SQL injection flaw.

“The result of this new policy on application performance was drastic,” the report said. “Over eight in 10 applications across all supplier types failed to pass when first tested.”

Cross-site scripting and SQL injection flaws are common avenues of attack for hackers, so “organizations should implement a program that allows for the discovery and timely remediation of such vulnerability types,” Veracode said.

For non-Web applications, Veracode found that error-handling flaws represented 19% of the vulnerabilities found, followed by buffer management issues at 15% and buffer overflow problems at 14%.

For the first time, Veracode also took a look at vulnerabilities in a small set of Android applications. Some 61% of the applications had at least one instance of “insufficient entropy.”

In Java applications, that can mean the use of statistical random-number generators that leave patterns or clusters of values that are more likely to occur than those calculated by a cryptographic random-number generator.

Another issue Veracode found was hard-coded cryptographic keys present in 42% of the Android applications. A hard-coded key can be extracted from a non-J2EE application by simply copying the application.

On another issue, the report found that close to one-third of the Android applications transmitted at least one piece of sensitive information. In some cases, it was hard to determine whether the behavior was intentional or not.

For example, it is probably not a privacy leak if GPS information is transmitted in the course of using FourSquare, which revolves around location-based information. But it may be for, say, a solitaire game, which could indicate malicious behavior, Veracode said.

Direct Link: http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9222474/Cross_site_scripting_flaws_plague_web_apps_report_says?taxonomyId=85