Wednesday, October 31, 2012

Sandy Takes its Toll ... But also on our Confidence?

As you can tell from my last few posts I have had a renewed interest in the critical infrastructure area and in particular how proper planning is a significant element of being prepared. Super-storm Sandy brought home some of those ideas. For many of us on the east coast we had not faced such a major storm. Here in the DC area we were lucky that we had but a glancing blow. Our friends further up the coast were much less lucky.

Certainly we can never be fully prepared for something as rare as Sandy but there are lessons we can pull from the last couple of days and I am sure there will be many more we can pull from the next few weeks. I did read an interesting article from the NY Times this morning that is related to thoughts on planning and a few items in particular stuck in my head.

I have talked about critical infrastructure as a "system of systems", tightly interwoven in some cases and in others loosely connected. One sentence from the article relates to this;

"As more of life moves online, damage to critical Internet systems affect more of the economy, and disasters like Hurricane Sandy reveal vulnerabilities from the sometimes ad hoc organization of computer networks.

Much like the interconnected systems of gas, electrical, transportation, finance, telecommunications and others, the Internet arose from the interconnection of very different systems which were built for very different reasons. As Internet services grew so did the companies that provide services and this in turn led to elements of geographic disbursement of capabilities and further interconnectedness through telecom systems and power systems. This growth naturally means greater opportunity for interruption based on the fact that the target space is greater. Of course, in theory it also means greater opportunity for high availability and reliability but that only works when the specific service is built with that in mind. The moral here is that one needs to ensure that the services that you pick at least meet the reliability needs of the service that you offer.

Another item that jumped out at me was raised in relation to the power situation. 

"Power is the primary worry, since an abrupt network shutdown can destroy data, but problems can also stem from something as simple as not keeping a crisis plan updated.

So when should a crisis plan be updated? Certainly it is something that should be looked at annually to ensure that the plan itself is inline with business needs but awareness of the environment you are operating in should also cause one to consider if the situational environment will have an impact on business. Is a hurricane ,or some other naturally occurring but foreseeable event, bearing down on facilities that you rely on, whether they are your own or those of service providers? Has the geopolitical climate changed whereby the threat of cyber- or physical terrorism against a facility becoming a more significant risk? These are just some examples of situations that should have you pulling out your crisis plan to ensure that the plan does not need to be updated or altered.

Finally there was one element in this article that demonstrates the need for planning. 

"Another downtown building ... had one generator in the basement, which was damaged by water. There is another generator, but it is on a higher floor. ... “We’ve got a truck full of diesel pulled up to the building, and now we’re trying to figure out how to get fuel up to the 19th floor.”"

It was great that they had planned for two generator but a 19th floor backup without a plan for getting the fuel to where it needs to be? When thinking about your plan do not overlook the little things. It is great to have redundancy but if the redundancy is reliant on other systems then make sure you are aware of that and have plans to address any potential gaps.

All of these ideas are ones raised due to a very rare and dramatic event but the underlying principles are the same whether it is physical infrastructure or cyber infrastructure: 

  • Understand the business needs for operations in regular and emergency circumstances
  • Understand the assets that you are reliant on and classify them into ones you have control of and those that are outsourced
  • Create a Crisis Plan and test it to ensure it meets the business needs and is executable
  • Review the plan on a regular basis and when significant events occur ensure to consider the impact on the plan
Know what you have, know what you need, monitor to ensure steady state and be prepared for events that disrupt the steady state.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Will Flame Scorch US Utilities?

Over the past couple of months I have spent a good deal of my time speaking to utilities, companies that work with utilities and attending conferences surrounding the utility industry. This has all been done in conjunction with the work that I have been doing in cyber-security over the last 20+ years. It has been an interesting couple of months as it has been a re-introduction into the whole idea of Critical Infrastructure Protection (CIP), which was one of the areas I was focused on a decade ago, but also has allowed me to link together some of the interesting aspects of what has been happening in the last two years, in regards to cyber-attacks, with CIP.

There has been lots of conjecture as to attacks against the US utility infrastructure, and in fact ample evidence that there have been breaches at varying levels and with varying effects. I am not going to go down the path of highlighting these as you can do the web searches that will help you find them. Yes some of them are real, and based on some recent conversations, some of the ones that were "Not cyber-attacks" were very likely exactly that. The bottom line is that the utility infrastructure is vulnerable and we need to do a beter job of detecting and reacting to these vulnerabilities.

Now all that being said there is another side to this puzzle. Everyone has heard about Stuxnet and Flame. You can read past posts to get a refresher. I have even discussed what I feel is the most worrisome element of these, which is re-use. We have already seen some of that within the payloads of these systems themselves. We are seeing more of that in other payloads being used for similar purposes including a "mini-" Flame that has been identified in the Middle East. The worrisome element here is not that the guys who created these are re-using elements but the fact that others are also re-using elements. Elements of Stuxnet have been found in recent financial targeted malware. Elements of Flame were seen in the attack against Aramco, the most valuable company in the world that also suffered the broadest attack to date.

The Aramco attack should be the red flag for many, or at least I hope. What Aramco showed is a couple of things:

  • The insider threat is real. The recent Verizon 2012 DBIR highlights the threat to IP from the insider threat along with the rise of hacktivism which seems to be another element of the attack
  • Malware does not die, nor do its delivery mechanisms. Both of these elements continue to live for a long time - they just evolve.
  • If your business is supporting cyber warfare then make sure you, and your allies, are aware of the re-use capabilities of code so you and your allies are not bitten back.
So how does all of this tie into US utilities? Well Aramco did show us another thing - that there are those that are unfriendly to the US and its allies and they have capabilities which can deliver harm. They may need help to do it but leveraging the code re-use elements and the hacktivism that exists everywhere today creates a risk for all utilities and other large sectors of the Critical Infrastructure that we need to pay attention to so we can mitigate those risks. The utility sector does create some additional concern as the past idea of utility security has been to build an "impenetrable" wall around the systems since the systems themselves were designed before the threats of 21st century cyber-capabilities were known. The issue they face today is that once someone gets through the door, into that secure environment, the damage can be swift and extensive, as evidenced in Aramco. Ensuring that organizations mitigate the risk by understanding their environment, the resources that they must manage and how their systems securely interact with others, inside and outside their domain, are critical to protecting the overall infrastructure.