US Power Infrastructure at risk of an attack

compliance, Recent News | Posted by Dave
Apr 08 2009

WASHINGTON — Cyberspies have penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and left behind software programs that could be used to disrupt the system, according to current and former national-security officials.

The spies came from China, Russia and other countries, these officials said, and were believed to be on a mission to navigate the U.S. electrical system and its controls. The intruders haven’t sought to damage the power grid or other key infrastructure, but officials warned they could try during a crisis or war.

“The Chinese have attempted to map our infrastructure, such as the electrical grid,” said a senior intelligence official. “So have the Russians.”

The espionage appeared pervasive across the U.S. and doesn’t target a particular company or region, said a former Department of Homeland Security official. “There are intrusions, and they are growing,” the former official said, referring to electrical systems. “There were a lot last year.”

Many of the intrusions were detected not by the companies in charge of the infrastructure but by U.S. intelligence agencies, officials said. Intelligence officials worry about cyber attackers taking control of electrical facilities, a nuclear power plant or financial networks via the Internet.

Authorities investigating the intrusions have found software tools left behind that could be used to destroy infrastructure components, the senior intelligence official said. He added, “If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on.”

Officials said water, sewage and other infrastructure systems also were at risk.

“Over the past several years, we have seen cyberattacks against critical infrastructures abroad, and many of our own infrastructures are as vulnerable as their foreign counterparts,” Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair recently told lawmakers. “A number of nations, including Russia and China, can disrupt elements of the U.S. information infrastructure.”

Officials cautioned that the motivation of the cyberspies wasn’t well understood, and they don’t see an immediate danger. China, for example, has little incentive to disrupt the U.S. economy because it relies on American consumers and holds U.S. government debt.

But protecting the electrical grid and other infrastructure is a key part of the Obama administration’s cybersecurity review, which is to be completed next week. Under the Bush administration, Congress approved $17 billion in secret funds to protect government networks, according to people familiar with the budget. The Obama administration is weighing whether to expand the program to address vulnerabilities in private computer networks, which would cost billions of dollars more. A senior Pentagon official said Tuesday the Pentagon has spent $100 million in the past six months repairing cyber damage.

Overseas examples show the potential havoc. In 2000, a disgruntled employee rigged a computerized control system at a water-treatment plant in Australia, releasing more than 200,000 gallons of sewage into parks, rivers and the grounds of a Hyatt hotel.

Last year, a senior Central Intelligence Agency official, Tom Donohue, told a meeting of utility company representatives in New Orleans that a cyberattack had taken out power equipment in multiple regions outside the U.S. The outage was followed with extortion demands, he said.

The U.S. electrical grid comprises three separate electric networks, covering the East, the West and Texas. Each includes many thousands of miles of transmission lines, power plants and substations. The flow of power is controlled by local utilities or regional transmission organizations. The growing reliance of utilities on Internet-based communication has increased the vulnerability of control systems to spies and hackers, according to government reports.

[Chart]

The sophistication of the U.S. intrusions — which extend beyond electric to other key infrastructure systems — suggests that China and Russia are mainly responsible, according to intelligence officials and cybersecurity specialists. While terrorist groups could develop the ability to penetrate U.S. infrastructure, they don’t appear to have yet mounted attacks, these officials say.

It is nearly impossible to know whether or not an attack is government-sponsored because of the difficulty in tracking true identities in cyberspace. U.S. officials said investigators have followed electronic trails of stolen data to China and Russia.

Russian and Chinese officials have denied any wrongdoing. “These are pure speculations,” said Yevgeniy Khorishko, a spokesman at the Russian Embassy. “Russia has nothing to do with the cyberattacks on the U.S. infrastructure, or on any infrastructure in any other country in the world.”

A spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, Wang Baodong, said the Chinese government “resolutely oppose[s] any crime, including hacking, that destroys the Internet or computer network” and has laws barring the practice. China was ready to cooperate with other countries to counter such attacks, he said, and added that “some people overseas with Cold War mentality are indulged in fabricating the sheer lies of the so-called cyberspies in China.”

Utilities are reluctant to speak about the dangers. “Much of what we’ve done, we can’t talk about,” said Ray Dotter, a spokesman at PJM Interconnection LLC, which coordinates the movement of wholesale electricity in 13 states and the District of Columbia. He said the organization has beefed up its security, in conformance with federal standards.

In January 2008, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved new protection measures that required improvements in the security of computer servers and better plans for handling attacks.

Last week, Senate Democrats introduced a proposal that would require all critical infrastructure companies to meet new cybersecurity standards and grant the president emergency powers over control of the grid systems and other infrastructure.

Specialists at the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit, a nonprofit research institute, said attack programs search for openings in a network, much as a thief tests locks on doors. Once inside, these programs and their human controllers can acquire the same access and powers as a systems administrator.

NERC Letter

The North American Electric Reliability Corporation on Tuesday warned its members that not all of them appear to be adhering to cybersecuirty requirements. Read the letter.

The White House review of cybersecurity programs is studying ways to shield the electrical grid from such attacks, said James Lewis, who directed a study for the Center for Strategic and International Studies and has met with White House reviewers.

The reliability of the grid is ultimately the responsibility of the North American Electric Reliability Corp., an independent standards-setting organization overseen by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

The NERC set standards last year requiring companies to designate “critical cyber assets.” Companies, for example, must check the backgrounds of employees and install firewalls to separate administrative networks from those that control electricity flow. The group will begin auditing compliance in July.

—Rebecca Smith contributed to this article

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123914805204099085.html

Brother can you spare $100,000,000?

Recent News, Security Tools | Posted by Dave
Apr 07 2009

File this under “It really is less expensive to prevent an attack then to pay for cleaning up an attack”

Pentagon spends $100 million to fix cyber attacks

WASHINGTON – The Pentagon spent more than $100 million in the last six months responding to and repairing damage from cyber attacks and other computer network problems, military leaders said Tuesday.

Air Force Gen. Kevin Chilton, who heads U.S. Strategic Command, said the military is only beginning to track the costs, which are triggered by constant daily attacks against military networks ranging from the Pentagon to bases around the country.

“The important thing is that we recognize that we are under assault from the least sophisticated — what I would say the bored teenager — all the way up to the sophisticated nation-state, with some pretty criminal elements sandwiched in-between,” said Chilton, adding that the motivations include everything from vandalism to espionage. “This is indeed our big challenge, as we think about how to defend it.”

According to Army Brig. Gen. John Davis, deputy commander for network operations, the money was spent on manpower, computer technology and contractors hired to clean up after both external probes and internal mistakes. Strategic Command is responsible for protecting and monitoring the military’s information grid, as well as coordinating any offensive cyber warfare on behalf of the U.S.

Officials would not say how much of the $100 million cost was due to outside attacks against the system, versus viruses and other problems triggered accidentally by Defense Department employees. And they declined to reveal any details about suspected cyber attacks against the Pentagon by other countries, such as China.

Speaking to reporters from a cyberspace conference in Omaha, Neb., the military leaders said the U.S. needs to invest more money in the military’s computer capabilities, rather than pouring millions into repairs.

“You can either pay me now or you can pay me later,” said Davis. “It would be nice to spend that money proactively … rather than fixing things after the fact.”

Officials said that while there has been a lot of anecdotal evidence on the spending estimate, they only began tracking it last year and are still not sure they are identifying all the costs related to taking computer networks down after a problem is noticed.

The Pentagon has acknowledged that its vast computer network is scanned or probed by outsiders millions of times each day. Last year a cyber attack forced the Defense Department to take up to 1,500 computers off line. And last fall the Defense Department banned the use of external computer flash drives because of a virus threat officials detected on the Pentagon networks.

The cost updates come as the Obama administration is completing a broad government-wide review of the nation’s cybersecurity.

 

The twits tweeting on Twitter..

Best Practices, compliance | Posted by Dave
Apr 03 2009

So I know this post will be a very unpopular among many of my social marketing friends who feel that tweeter is the best thing since sliced bread.  I will admit while I find most technologies coming out today as fairly useful.  I could not find any useful purpose for twitter in my daily life.  Until Today….

Electronic Survellance

When you are trying to pull off an attack, any attack, the first thing you have to do is gain as much intelligence about your target as you can.  When performing a social engineering attack, we have to find as much information about our victim employees as   possible.  If I am going to successfully trick you into clicking an unsolicitated email, I must send you an email that will perk your interest.  Before, this involed scouring websites, forums, and social networking sites.  While these were very useful, it could be static, you were into cars 6 months ago, but now not so much.   The key to a successful social engineering based attack is simple – If you know enough information, the victim will never suspect you are an attacker.

So what is Twitter?  It is a micro blogger that only allows 140 characters at a time.  So people are forced to blog on very small timely subject.  From what they ate for breakfast to about current events, ”Tweets” are frequent and the subjects are far reaching.  This can be likened to a cyber glimpse into someone’s life.  And that is a dream for a malicous attacker.  If I as an attacker am trying to find information about you that I can use,  then twitter becomes a must read for me.  Granted it may seem like what song your listening to doesn’t seem like a security issue.  Remember, a successful social engineering attack conviences you I am someone harmless.  Sending an email from the Hannah Montanna fan club saying to join may not be a draw for alot of people, but if I find that employee who is Tweeting about Hannah Montana then I have found my ticket in.

The key to gathering successful intelligence is to first linking the employee’s business information to a personal identity.  Tweeter can again help.  If I am trying to find information on a  Dr. Jane Doe who is a chemical engineer.  I do a search for a Jane Doe on Twitter and I find a tweeter who is tweeting about working on a chemical molacule chances are I have found a match.  From there I would look at her handle and see if that handle is used anywhere else on the internet.

Tweeter to a Jailbird

Your employees are twittering, do you know what they are saying?  Have they said anything negative about your company?  Have they let out any company/trade secrets? I did a twitter search for Layoffs and check out some of these hits I found. (These are hits from within the last hour) 

“I can’t “publicly” confirm or deny any layoffs. You will see a press release soon on Q1 results with details contained therein. “
My co. offered 65 + 5 yrs. employees or 20 yr. employees a BUYOUT that sucks. Insulting offer. I sense layoffs are coming next.
“Just entered the ranks of the unemployed!!! Layoffs at *****! Couldn’t have come on a brighter, sunshiney-er day!!! “
“They have bhind scenes. So far I’m ok but they can’t cut too much from me. We knew layoffs in works. Fred always said he wouldn’t “
 

Most companies have a procedure in place to determine  what company information is release, when it is release, and who releases it.  I find it highly unlikely that these  tweets were approved by the company’s management as offical statements from the company.  Let’s think about other instances, is your company about ready to release a new offering that is secret right now?  Do you have an expected new offering that has some issue?  Were your financials not quite where they were expected? 

If your company is a publically traded company, Tweets of secret information could be seen as insider information.  At that point you better have a PDA that will survive 5-7 years (with good behavior :) ).

Plugging the holes

Again as with many security fixes it comes down to your end-user employees.  Security Awareness training and proper policies put in place.  Have policies that state what business information that should not be release by unauthorized employees under any form.  Make sure your employees know the risks of tweeting business information and ensure these policies are enforced.

Article exposes flaws in PCI-DSS

compliance, Recent News | Posted by Dave
Apr 02 2009

Payment Card Industry Swallows Its Own Tail

By Anthony M. Freed, Information-Security-Resources.com Financial Editor

PCI DSS, the self-regulatory set of guidelines that the payment card industry and retail merchants use to encourage financial information security, may well have entered it’s death throes Tuesday, as evidenced by revealing testimony during the House of Representative’s Committee on Homeland Security hearings.

Why the dire prognosis?

Anyone who has been following the cascade of security failures plaguing the payment card industry in the last year, and punctuated by the still-shrouded breaches at RBS WorldPay (RBS) and Heartland Payment systems (HPY), has to acknowledge that there are major problems with security that need to be addressed pronto.

But the greatest threat to the survival of PCI DSS (Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard) may not be the ever-evolving tactics of the criminal hackers intent on a “big score,” but instead the dysfunctional nature of the relationships between the very parties the standards are meant to serve.

The squabbling and finger pointing displayed during the first quarter of 2009 within the industry itself has resulted in nothing less than a public relations nightmare in my opinion, as major card brands, processors, and merchants each seek to deflect responsibility onto the others.

Someone on the sidelines, intently watching the game, would have to wonder what the heck these people are thinking.

First, RBS WorldPay and Heartland maintain that because they had been PCI DSS compliant at some point before their systems were breached, they can essentially shrug off any any culpability for the security lapses, offering only the caveat that they are doing the best they can with what they have.

Almost simultaneously, the PCI Security Standards Council was staunchly asserting that no company that suffers a breach can be considered PCI compliant – regardless of their being listed as in good standing with the council at the time of the breach.  From Securosis.com:

Businesses that are compliant with PCI standards have never been breached, says Bob Russo, general manager of the PCI Security Standards Council, or at least he’s never seen such a case. Victims may have attained compliance certification at some point, he says, but none has been in compliance at the time of a breach, he says.

Visa (V) echoed this sentiment in an interview with BankInfoSecurity.com:

“We’ve never seen anyone who was breached that was PCI compliant,” Phillips says without specifically naming – or excluding — Heartland. “The breaches that we have seen have involved a key area of non-compliance.”

To add to the confusion, Visa issued statements that RBS WorldPay and Heartland had been belatedly removed from the PCI Compliant list, in what has been widely considered to be merely legal maneuvering to effectively shield themselves from culpability while blocking the only alibi the processors have.

“It’s all legal maneuvering by Visa,” says Gartner security analyst Avivah Litan in an interview with ComputerWorld.com. “This is PCI enforcement as usual: They’re making the rules up as they go.”

This was apparently seen as an opportunity by some Heartland competitors to move in on some of Heartland’s clients, with reports of merchants being warned by other processors that they may be violating PCI compliance by continuing to do business with Heartland, and prompting Heartland to respond with threats of lawsuits.

Then, during Tuesday’s Congressional hearings, representatives of the merchant community, long thought to bear the brunt of security protocol “cram-downs” by the issuing brands, threw their hat into the ring in what now amounts to an industry free-for-all.  From Forbes.com:

Michael Jones, the chief information officer at the retail company Michael’s, testified that the PCI rules were “expensive to implement, confusing to comply with and ultimately subjective both in their interpretation and their enforcement.”

Now bear in mind, all of these factions are supposed on the same team, and all are supposed to be working in unison to continue the evolution of ever more secure systems to thwart the increasingly resourceful criminal hackers.

Is it any wonder that the future of PCI DSS is in question?

And what could possibly be worse than an entire industry at each others throats in the midst of the biggest security problems they have faced to date?

Well, they could make enough of a brouhaha that they attract the attention of lawmakers, as they have succeeded in doing; lawmakers who have regularly demonstrated their intention of late to force industries of all stripes to cede to their “better judgment.”  Also from Forbes.com:

“I’m concerned that as long as the payment card industry is writing the standards, we’ll never see a more secure system,” (Rep. Bennie) Thompson said. “We in Congress must consider whether we can continue to rely on industry-created standards, particularly if they’re inadequate to address the ongoing threat.”

This means that the PCI Security Council, keepers of the PCI DSS flame, have their work cut out for them if they want to remain the chief regulating body for PCI security. Maybe they left these issues to simmer on the back burner for too long, and maybe someone will be looking for a scapegoat.

It’s all uphill now.

During a phone call in early March with Lib de Veyra, VP of emerging technologies at JCB International and recently named Chair of the PCI Security Council, I expressed my concern over the state of relations between the various elements that make up the payment card industry.

I likened the public displays of policy incongruity and the tendency for all interested parties to respond to news of security lapses by rushing to throw each other under the bus, to that of the image of a snake swallowing its own tail.

I expressed concern by offering my opinion that the biggest threat to PCI DSS does not come from the endless supply of criminal hackers the industry will certainly face in perpetuity, but instead comes from the fractured portrait of an industry in crisis, and its inability to effectively manage itself.

That was one long month ago, and opportunity to avert the creation of a new regulatory body to oversee PCI may have already come and gone, which is most unfortunate for everyone concerned.

PCI DSS is not broken, but the collective will to make it an effective standard for security just might be.

Anthony is a researcher, analyst and freelance writer who worked as a consultant to senior members of product development, secondary, and capital markets from the largest financial institutions in the country during the height of the credit bubble. Anthony’s work is featured by leading Internet publishers including Reuters, The Chicago Sun-Times, Business Week’s Business Exchange, Seeking Alpha, and ML-Implode.

The Author gives permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author and to Information-Security-Resources.com