pen-test
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Vulnerability Assessment

To: dcdave@att.net
Subject: Re: Vulnerability Assessment
From: Pete Herzog <lists@isecom.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:58:48 +0200
Cc: John Hally <JHally@epnet.com>, pen-test@securityfocus.com
Delivered-to: sp-com-lists@consult.net
Delivered-to: pentest-list2@consult.net
Delivered-to: mailing list pen-test@securityfocus.com
Delivered-to: moderator for pen-test@securityfocus.com
In-reply-to: <072520070958.2687.46A71EB100044B4800000A7F21604666480A900E0B0C0B@att.net>
List-help: <mailto:pen-test-help@securityfocus.com>
List-id: <pen-test.list-id.securityfocus.com>
List-post: <mailto:pen-test@securityfocus.com>
List-subscribe: <mailto:pen-test-subscribe@securityfocus.com>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:pen-test-unsubscribe@securityfocus.com>
Mailing-list: contact pen-test-help@securityfocus.com; run by ezmlm
References: <072520070958.2687.46A71EB100044B4800000A7F21604666480A900E0B0C0B@att.net>
Resent-date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:00:19 -0600 (MDT)
Resent-from: pen-test-return-1078484692@securityfocus.com
Resent-message-id: <20070726010019.C42E6143FD0@outgoing2.securityfocus.com>
Resent-sender: listbounce@securityfocus.com
Sender: listbounce@securityfocus.com
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050716 Thunderbird/1.0.6 Mnenhy/0.7.2.0
Hi Dave,

A final point is that concentric layers of protection  have to be understood from a 
risk perspective; in that a vulnerability which requires local login to exploit, or 
physical presence (ALMOST ANY MACHINE) may be more or less at risk if the employees 
are trusted and trustable, and the physical access is more ore less controlled. In 
other words, if a Financial Server or Top Secret Server is running an MS Operating 
system (already a questionable practice <smile>), and is protected behind 
umpteen firewalls, AV, IDS/IPS, it may be more vulnerable if any joe could just walk 
up to it physically and do something like boot it up on CD (BackTrax it) or less 
vulnerable if there is no unauthorized physical access and the keyboard and monitor 
are controlled.

Your points before this one are well taken and I do hope some people learn from the DoS mistake of yours you mentioned.

Risk is a concept for choosing security and controls. Testing, however, is verifying to what level that security or those controls exist. To test, you don't make a risk assessment. Doing so would restrict your findings. You make a thorough test of everything within the business requirements, policy, regulations, etc. Remember, you're there to make sure they didn't forget anything. You can't do that if you're making the same guesses they are. That's why the OSSTMM can help you not miss anything.

In terms of analysis, where you need to trust employees or not, I think you make a good point about risk but it's the wrong thing to do. Even the most loyal employee can send the wrong mail by accident to the wrong person or be fooled into clicking on the phisher's link. You need to treat every interaction on the network as one of a business perspective where security provides a means to efficiency, less accidents, and a quicker reaction to mistakes. In that case it's not about who you trust inside or out but what you need to keep the business running efficiently. If locking down all the desktops means less help desk hassles (it doesn't) versus the cost of employee turn-over from unhappy employees, then make your decision that way. Not whether or not you trust Alice or Jack. If you really think we can make good trust choices as human beings, just watch a few daytime talk shows ;)

-pete.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is sponsored by: Cenzic

Need to secure your web apps NOW?
Cenzic finds more, "real" vulnerabilities fast.
Click to try it, buy it or download a solution FREE today!

http://www.cenzic.com/downloads
------------------------------------------------------------------------


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>