Download the Report
Advanced Threat Protection
Download the Datasheet
Let's Go Threat Hunting: Gain Visibility and Insight into Potential Threats and Risks
Download the Whitepaper
Bracing for the Tidal Wave of Data Privacy Compliance in America
View Recent Catches
Catch More Threats
December 09, 2011
Changes in end-user behavior and the resulting “consumerization” of IT have contributed to the changing and expanding definition of Application Performance Management (“APM”). APM can no longer focus just on the application or the optimization of infrastructure against abstract limits; APM must now view performance from the end-user’s access point back across all infrastructure involved in the delivery of the service.
November 21, 2011
The commercialization of Cloud-based IT services, along with market and economic challenges are changing the way business services are conceived, created, delivered and consumed. This change is reflected in the growing interest in alternative delivery models and solutions.
November 17, 2011
October 25, 2011
On September 22, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved and passed Sen. Richard Blumenthal’s (D, Conn.) bill, the “Personal Data Protection and Breach Accountability Act of 2011,” sending it to the Senate floor. The bill will penalize companies for online data breaches and was introduced on the heels of several high profile security breaches and hacks that affected millions of consumers. These included the Sony breach which compromised the data of 77 million customers, and the DigiNotar breach which resulted in 300,000 Google GMail account holders having their mail hacked and read. The measure addresses companies that hold the personal information of more than 10,000 customers and requires them to put privacy and security programs in place to protect the information, and to respond quickly in the event of a security failure.
The bill proposes that companies be fined $5,000 per day per violation, with a maximum of $20 million per infringement. Additionally, companies who fail to comply with the data protection law (if it is passed) may be required to pay for credit monitoring services and subject to civil litigation by the affected consumers. The bill also aims to increase criminal penalties for identity theft, as well as crimes including the installing of a data collection program on someone’s computer and concealing any security breached in which personal data is compromised.
Key provisions in the bill include a process to help companies establish appropriate minimum security standards, notifications requirements, information sharing after a breach and company accountability.
While the intent of the bill is admirable, the problem is not a lack of laws to deter breaches, but the insufficient enforcement of these laws. Many of the requirements espoused in this new legislation already exist in many different forms.
SANS is the largest source for information security training and security certification, and their position is that we don’t need an extension to the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002 (FISMA) or other compliance regulations, which have essentially encouraged a checkbox mentality: “I checked it off, so we are good.” This is the wrong approach to security but companies get rewarded for checking off criteria lists. Compliance regulations do not drive improvement. Organizations need to focus on the actual costs that can occur by not being compliant:
The gap does not exist in the laws, but rather, in the enforcement of those laws. Until there is enforcement any legislation or requirements are hollow threats.
October 24, 2011
October 13, 2011
Those in IT operations responsible for service delivery or infrastructure operations know what it’s like: collect and store a growing amount of the data that is necessary to do our jobs, but at a rate that drives up cost. However, the problem with infinite detail is not much different than trying to organize and analyze noise; there’s plenty of it, but finding the signal underneath is the difficult, but critical point.
September 21, 2011
It’s a dirty secret, many IT projects fail; maybe even as many as 30% of all IT projects.
Amazing, given the time, money and mojo spent on them, and the seriously smart people working in IT.
As a vendor, it is painful to see this. We see it from time to time (often helplessly from the sidelines), we think about it a lot, we’d like to see eliminated along with malaria, cancer and other “nasties.”
They fail for a lot of reasons, many of them unrelated to software.
At EventTracker we’ve helped save a number of nearly-failed implementations, and we have noticed some consistency of why they fail.
From the home office in Columbia MD, here are the top 10 reasons IT projects fail:
This is the “if you don’t do it right, don’t do it at all” belief system. With this viewpoint, the project lead person believes that the solution must perfectly fit existing or new business processes. The result is a massive, overly complicated implementation that is extremely expensive. By the time it’s all done, the business environment has changed and an enormous investment is wasted.
Lesson: Value does not mean perfection. Make sure the solution delivers value early and often, and let perfection happen as it may.
In almost every IT shop, “seamless integration with everything” is the mantra. Vendors tout it, management believes it, and users demand it. In other words to be all things to all people, IT project cannot exist in isolation. Integration has become a key component of many IT projects and it can’t exist alone anymore.
Lesson: Examine your needs for integration before you start the project. Find out if there are pre-built tools to accomplish this. Plan accordingly if they aren’t.
This is the classic “committee” problem. The CIO or IT Manager decides the company needs an IT solution, so they assign the task of getting it done to a group. No one is accountable, no one is in charge. So they deliberate and discuss forever. Nothing gets done, and when it does, no one makes sure it gets driven into the organization. Failure is imminent.
Lesson: Make sure someone is accountable in the organization for success. If you are using a contractor, give that contractor enough power to make it happen.
This is a tough problem to foresee because employees don’t usually broadcast their departure or disinterest before bailing. The bottom line is that if the project lead leaves, the project will suffer. It might kill the project if no one else is up to speed. It’s a risk that should be taken seriously.
Lesson: Make sure that more than just one person is involved, and keep a new interim project manager shadowing and up-to-date.
IT projects are often as much about people and processes as it is about technology. If the project doesn’t have consistent management support, the project will fail. After all, if no one knows how or why to use the solution, no one will
Lesson: Make sure you and your team have allocated time to define, test, and use your new solution as it is rolled out.
One day someone realized, “hey we need a good solution to address the compliance regulations and these security gaps.” The next day someone started looking at packages, and a month later you buy one. Then you realized that there were a lot of things this solution affects, including core systems, router, applications and operations processes. But you’re way too far down the road on a package and have spent too much money to switch to something else. So you keep investing until you realize you are dumping money down a hole. It’s a bad place to be.
Lesson: Make sure you think it all through before you buy. Get support. Get input. Then take the plunge. You’ll be glad you did.
In this all-too-common example, half way through a complex project, someone says “we actually want to rework our processes to fit X.” The project guys look at what they have done, realize it won’t work, and completely redesign the system. It takes 3 months. The project goes over budget. The key stakeholder says “hey this project is expensive, and we’ve seen nothing of value.” The budget vanishes. The project ends.
Lesson: Make sure you know what you want before you start building it. If you don’t know, build the pieces you do, then build the rest later. Don’t build what you don’t understand.
This relates to #4 above. Sometimes requirements are defined, but they don’t match good processes, because these processes don’t exist. Or no one follows them. Or they are outdated. Or not well understood. The point is that the solution is computer software: it does exactly what you tell it the same way every time, and it’s expensive to change it. Sloppy processes are impossible to create in software making the solution more of a hindrance than a help.
Lesson: Only implement and automate processes that are well understood and followed. If they are not well understood, implement them in a minimal way and do not automate until they are well understood and followed.
Any solution with no users is a very lonely piece of software. It’s also a very expensive use of 500Mb on your server. Most IT projects fail because they just aren’t used by anyone. They are a giant database of old information and spotty data. That’s a failure.
Lesson: Focus on end user adoption. Buy training. Talk about the value that it brings your customers, your employees, and your shareholders. Make usage a part of your employee review process. Incentivize usage. Make it make sense to use it.
This is by far the most prevalent problem in implementing IT solutions: Businesses don’t take time to define what they want out of their implementation, so it doesn’t do what they want. This goes further than just defining requirements. It’s about defining what value the new software will deliver for the business. By focusing on the nuts and bolts, the business doesn’t figure out what they want from the system as a whole.
Lesson: Instead of starting with “hey I need something to accomplish X,” the organization should be asking “how can this software help us bring value to our security posture, to our internal costs, to our compliance requirements.”
This list is not exhaustive – there are many more ways to kill your implementation. However if your organization is aware of the pitfalls listed above, you have a very high chance of success.
September 20, 2011
I have two rules of thumb when it comes to audit logging: first, if it has a log, enable it. Second, if you can collect the log and archive it with your log management/SIEM solution, do it – even if you don’t set up any alert rules or reports.
August 30, 2011
Columbia, MD, August 30, 2011 — Prism Microsystems, a leading provider of comprehensive security and compliance software for the US Department of Defense (DoD) and US Federal Government agencies, today announced the release of EventTracker DriveShield, an easy-to-deploy solution designed to provide visibility to files copied to USB devices or burned to CD/DVD-W drives.
August 24, 2011
No one needs to be convinced that monitoring Domain Controller security logs is important; member servers are equally as important: most people understand that member servers are where “our data” is located. But I often face an uphill battle helping people understand why workstation security logs are so critical. Frequently I hear IT administrators tell me they have policies that forbid the of storing confidential information locally. But the truth is, workstations and laptops always have sensitive information on them – there’s no way to prevent it. Besides applications like Outlook, Offline Files and SharePoint workspace that cache server information locally, there’s also the page file, which can contain content from any document or other information at any time.
August 17, 2011
Security and Compliance At Talbot’s Talbots is a leading multi-channel retailer and direct marketer of women’s apparel, shoes and accessories, based in Tampa, Florida. Talbots is well known for it’s stellar reputation in classic fashion. Everyone knows to look to Talbots when it is time to buy the perfect jacket or a timeless skirt. Talbots customers are women in the 35+ population that shop at their 568 stores in 47 states, catalogs and online at www.talbots.com. Approximate sales for Talbots in 2010 were $991 million.
July 20, 2011
An area of audit logging that is often confusing is the difference between two categories in the Windows security log: Account Logon events and Logon/Logoff events. These two categories are related but distinct, and the similarity in the naming convention contributes to the confusion.
June 24, 2011
Noticed the raft of headlines about break-ins at companies? If you did, that is the proverbial tip of the iceberg. Why? Think about the hammering that Sony took on the Playstation hack or how RSA will never live down the loss of golden keys and the subsequent attack at Lockheed. Victims overwhelmingly prefer to keep quiet. If there is disclosure, its because there is loss of consumer information which is subject to laws. If corporate information is stolen, it is often not required to be disclosed.
June 16, 2011
There’s been a lot of recent hype about security risks with the rise of virtualization, but much of it is vague and short on specifics. There is also an assumption that all the security available on a physical server simply disappears when it migrates to being a virtual machine. This is not true. A virtual server is the same server it was before it was P2V’d from a physical server. IS authentication, access control, audit, and network controls remain as active as before.
May 25, 2011
The next significant horizon in audit log management will be the automation of the review and response tasks associated with security events. Currently, log management SIEM solutions are expected to scour logs, identify high-impact changes or other suspicious activity, and simply send out an alert. It requires the intercession of a person to assess the information, make inquiries, research and review data, and ultimately resolve the matter.
April 25, 2011
Five Reasons for Log Apathy – and the Antidote
How many times have you heard people just don’t care about logs? That IT guys are selfish, stupid or lazy? That they would rather play with new toys than do serious work?
I argue that IT guys are amazing, smart and do care about the systems they curate, but native tools are such that log management is often like running into a brick wall — they encourage disengagement.
Here are five reasons for this perception and what can be done about them.
#1 Obscure descriptions: Ever see a raw log? A Cisco intrusion or a Windows failed object access attempt or a Solaris BSM record to mount a volume? Blech… it’s a description even the author would find hard to love. Not written to be easy to understand, rather its purpose is either debugging by the developer or meant to satisfy certification requirements. This is not apathy, it’s intentional exclusion.
To make this relevant, you need a relevant description which highlights the elements of value, enrichs the information (e.g., lookup an IP address or event id) and not just spew them in time sequence but present information in priority order of risk.
#2 Lack of access: What easier way to spur disengagement than by hiding the logs away in an obscure part of the file system, out of sight to any but the most determined; if they cannot see it, they won’t care about it.
The antidote is to centralize logging and throw up an easy to under display which presents relevant information – preferably risk ordered
#3 Unsexiness: All the security stories are about wikileaks and credit card theft. Log review is considered dull/boring, it’s a rare occurrence to make it to the plot line of Hawaii Five-O .
Compare it to working out at the gym, it can be boring and there are 10 reasons why other things are more “fun” but it’s good for you and pays handsomely in the long run.
#4 Unsung Heroes: Who is the Big Man on your Campus? Odds are, it’s the guys who make money for the enterprise (think sales guys or CEOs).
Rarely is it the folks who keep the railroad running or god forbid, reduce cost or prevent incidents.
However, they are the wind beneath the wings of the enterprise. The organization that recognizes and values the guys who show up for work everyday and do their job without fuss/drama is much more likely to succeed. Heroes are the ones who make a voluntary effort over a long period of time to accomplish serious goals, not chosen ones with marks on their forehead, destined from birth to save the day.
#5 Forced Compliance: As long as management looks at regulatory compliance as unwarranted interference, it will be resented and IT is forced into checkbox mentality that benefits nobody.
It’s the old question “What comes first? Compliance (chicken) or security (egg)?” We see compliance as a result of secure practices. By making it easy to crunch the data and present meaningful scores and alerts, there is less need to force this.
I’ll say it again, I know many IT guys and gals who are amazing, smart and care deeply about the systems they manage. To combat log apathy, make it easier to deal with them.
Tip of the hat to Dave Meslin whose recent talk at Tedx in Toronto spurred this blog entry
April 21, 2011
Intrusion detection and compliance are the focus of log management, SIEM and security logging. But security logs, when managed correctly are also the only control over rogue admins. Once root or admin authority has been given to, or acquired by, a user, there is little they cannot do: with admin authority, they can circumvent access or authorization controls by changing settings or using tools to leverage their root access to tamper with the internals of the operating system.
March 15, 2011
Despite tough times for the corporate world in the past year, spending on IT security was a bright spot in an otherwise gloomy picture.
However if you’ve tried to convince a CFO to sign off on tools and software, you know just how difficult this can be. In fact, the most common way to get approval is to tie this request to an unrelenting compliance mandate. Sadly, a security incident can also help focus and trigger the approval of budget.
Vendors have tried hard to showcase their value by appealing to the preventive nature of their products. ROI calculations are usually provided to demonstrate quick payback but these are often dismissed by the CFO as self serving. Recognizing the difficulty of measuring ROI, an alternate model called ROSI has been proposed but has met with limited success.
So what is an effective way to educate and persuade the gnomes? Try an approach from a parallel field, presentation of medical data. Your medical chart: it’s hard to access, impossible to read — and full of information that could make you healthier if you just knew how to use it, pretty much like security information inside the enterprise. But if you have seen lab results, even motivated persons find it hard to decipher and take action, much less the disinclined.
In a recent talk at TED, Thomas Goetz, the executive editor of Wired magazine addressed this issue and proposed some simple ideas to make this data meaningful and actionable. The use of color, graphics and most important personalization of the information to drive action. We know from experience that posting the speed limit is less effective at getting motorists to comply as compared to a radar gun which posts the speed limit and framed by “Your speed is __”. Its all about personalization.
To make security information meaningful to the CFO, a similar approach can be much more effective than bland “best practice” prescriptions or questionable ROI numbers. Gather data from your enterprise and present it with color and graphs tailored to the “patient”.
Personalize your presentation; get a more patient ear and much less resistance to your budget request.
–A. N. Ananth
March 07, 2011
Have you observed how “best practice” recommendations are widely known but not followed as much? While it seems more the case in IT Security, it is observed true in every other sphere as well. For example, dentists repeatedly recommend brush and floss after each meal as best practice, but how many follow this advice? And then there is the clearly posted speed limit on the road, more often than not, motorists are speeding.
Now the downside to non-compliance is well known to all and for the most part well accepted – no real argument. In the dentist example these include social hardships ranging from bad teeth and breath to health issues and the resulting expense. In the speeding example, there is potential physical harm and of course monetary fines. However it would appear that neither the fear of “bad outcomes” nor “monetary fine” spur widespread compliance. Indeed one observes that the persons who do indeed comply, appear to do so because they wish to; the fear or fine factors don’t play a major role for them.
In a recent experiment, people visiting the dentist were divided in two groups. Before the start, each patient was asked to indicate if they classified themselves as “generally listen to the doctors advice”. After the checkup, people from one group were given the advice to brush and floss regularly but then given a “fear” message on the consequences of non-compliance — bad teeth, social ostracism, high cost of dental procedures etc. People from the other group got the same checkup and advice but were given a “positive” message on the benefits of compliance– nice smile, social popularity, less cost etc. A follow up was conducted to determine which of the two approaches was more effective in getting patients to comply.
Those of us in IT Security battling for budget from unresponsive upper management have been conditioned to think that the “fear” message would be more effective … but … surprise, neither approach was more effective than the other in getting patients to comply with “best practice.” Instead, those who classified themselves as “generally listen to doctors advice” were the one who did comply. The rest were equally impervious to either the negative or positive consequences, while not disputing them.
You could also point to the great reduction in smoking incidence but this best practice has required more than 3 decades of education to achieve the trend and still can’t be stamped out.
Lesson for IT Security — education takes time and behavior modification, even more so.
March 06, 2011
It’s the line from a song in the 70’s, but quite apt when it comes to describing the Windows security log. There’s no getting around the fact that there are a lot of useless and inexplicable events in the Security log, and the sooner you get comfortable with that the sooner you’ll save your sanity and get on with work. In this article we’ll look at some common examples and noise events in the security and discuss strategies for dealing with them.
March 01, 2011
When we originally conceived the idea of SIEM and log management solution for IT managers many years ago, it was because of the problems they faced dealing with high volumes of cryptic audit logs from multiple sources. Searching, categorizing/analyzing, performing forensics and remediation for system security and operational challenges evidenced in disparate audit logs were time consuming, tedious, inconsistent and unrewarding tasks. We wanted to provide technology that would make problem detection, understanding and therefore remediation, faster and easier.
A recent article in Slate caught my eye; it was all about Infomercials…staple of late night TV and a pitch-a-thon that was conducted in Washington DC for new ideas. The question is just how would you know a “successful” idea if you heard it described?
By now, SIEM has “Crossed the Chasm” , indeed the Gartner MQ puts it well into mainstream adoption, but in the early days, there was some question as to whether this was a real problem or if, as is too often the case, if SIEM and log management was a solution in search of a problem.
Back to the question — how does one determine the viability of an invention before it is released into the market? Jacob Goldenberg, a professor of marketing at Hebrew University in Jerusalem and a visiting professor at Columbia University, has coded a kind of DNA for successful inventions. After studying a year’s worth of new product launches, Goldenberg developed a classification system to predict the potential success of a new product. He found the same patterns embedded in every watershed invention.
The first is subtraction—the removal of part of a previous invention.
For example, an ATM is a successful invention because it subtracts the bank teller.
Multiplication is the second pattern, and it describes an invention with a component copied to serve some alternate purpose. Example: the digital camera’s additional flash to prevent “red-eye.”
A TV remote exemplifies the third pattern: division. It’s a product that has been physically divided, or separated, from the original; the remote was “divided” off of the TV.
The fourth pattern, task unification, involves saddling a product with an additional job unrelated to its original function. The iPhone is the quintessential task unifier.
SIEM and log management solutions subtract (liberate) embedded logs and log management functionality from source systems.
SIEM and log management solutions (via aggregation) the problems that can be detected with correlation that would have gone unnoticed otherwise.
EventTracker also meets the last two criteria–arguably decent tools for managing logs ought to have been included by OS and platform vendors (Unix, Linux, Windows, Cisco all have very rudimentary tools for this, if anything); so one can say EventTracker provides something needed for operations (like the TV remote) but not included in the base product.
With the myriad features now available such as configuration assessment, change audit, netflow monitoring and system status, the task unification criteria is also satisfied; you can now address a lot of security and operational requirements that are not strictly “log” related – “task unification”.
When President Obama praised innovation as a critical element in the recovery in his State of the Union, he may not have had “As Seen on TV” in mind but does SIEM fit the bill?
What’s the message supposed to be? That SIEM and log management solutions are (now?) a good invention? SIEM has crossed the chasm!
February 23, 2011
In 2010, CBS rebooted the classic series Hawaii Five-O. It features a fictional state police unit run by Detective Steve McGarrett and named in honor of Hawaii’s status as the 50th state. The action centers on a special task force empowered by Hawaii’s governor to investigate serious crime.
The tech guru on the show is a Detective Chin Ho Kelly (played by Daniel Dae Kim) and is shown to be adept at various forensic techniques, including…wait for it…SIEM (of all things).
In Season 1, Episode 15 (Kai e’ e) the island’s leading tsunami expert is kidnapped on the same day that ocean reports indicate that a huge tsunami is headed to Hawaii. However, Five-0 soon suspects that the report is a hoax and is related to the kidnapping.
During the investigation, Chin Ho uncovers two failed logins with the kidnapped expert’s username and a numeric password each time. This is followed by a successful login. This seems odd because the correct password is all alphabetical and totally unrelated to the numbers. Turns out the kidnapped person was trying to send a message to the cops, knowing the failed logins would get scrutiny. The clue is incomplete though, because the failed logins do not capture the originating IP address and so can’t be readily geolocated.
Its great that SIEM is now firmly entrenched in the mainstream….bodes well for our industry and for IT security.
When the bad guys attack your assets, use EventTracker to “book ‘em Danno”.
– A.N. Ananth
February 12, 2011
Randy Franklin Smith compares methods for detecting malicious activity from logs including monitoring for high impact changes, setting up tripwires and anomalous changes in activity levels. Security standards and auditors make much of reviewing logs for malicious activity. I am frequently asked what event signatures are indicative of intrusions: “What are the top Event IDs for intrusion detection?” Ah, if it was only as easy as the movies make it, where the protagonist furiously defends the network while a computer voice stridently calls out “Intruder! Intruder!”
February 07, 2011
In the spirit of the Washington Posts’ regular column, “5 Myths”, here is “a challenge everything you think you know” about SIEM/Log Management.
Driven by compliance regulation and the unending stream of security issues, the IT community, over the past few years, has accepted SIEM and Log Management as must-have technology for the data center. The Analyst community lumps a number of vendors together as SIEM and marketing departments are always in overdrive to claim any or all possible benefits or budget. Consequently some “truths” are bandied about. This misinformation affects the decision-making process so let’s look at them.
1. Price is everything…all SIEM products are roughly equal in terms of features/functions.
An August 2010 article in SC Magazine points out that “At first blush, these (SIEM solutions) looked like 11 cats in a bag” quickly followed by “But a closer look shows interesting differences in focus.” Nice save but the first thought was the products were roughly equal, and for many that was a key take-away. As so many are influenced by the Gartner Magic Quadrant, the picture is taken to mean everything separated from the detailed commentary, even though that commentary states quite explicitly to look closely at features.
Even better, look at where vendor started? Very different places it turns out, but then added the features and functionality to meet market (or marketing) needs. For example, NetForensics preaches that SIEM is really correlation; Logrhythm believes that focusing on your logs is the key to security; Tenable thinks vulnerability status is the key; Q1Labs offers network flow monitoring as the critical element; eIQ origins are as a firewall log analyzer. So, while each solution may claim “the same features”, under the hood, they each started in a certain place, and packed additional feature/functionality around their core – they continue to focus on their core as being their differentiator; adding functionality as the market demands.
Also, some SIEM vendors are software-based, while others are appliance-based, which in itself differentiates the players in the market.
All the same? Hardly.
2. Appliances are a better solution.
Can you spell groupthink? It’s a way; neither better nor worse as a technical approach; perhaps easier for resellers to carry.
When does a software-based solution win?
– Sparing. To protect your valuable IT infrastructure, you will need to calculate a 1xN relationship of live appliances to back-ups. If your appliance breaks down and you don’t have a spare, you have to ship the appliance and wait for a replacement. With software, if your device breaks down, you can simply install the software on existing capacity in your infrastructure, and be back up and running in minutes versus potentially days.
– Scalability. With an appliance solution, your SIEM solution has a floor and a ceiling. You need at least one device to get started, and it has a maximum capacity before you have to add another appliance at a high price. With a software solution, you can scale incrementally… one IT infrastructure device at a time.
– Single Sign On. Integrate easily with Active Directory or LDAP; same username/password or smartcard authentication; very attractive
– Storage. What retention period is best for your logs? Weeks? Months? Years? With appliances, its dictated by the disk size provided; with software you decide or can use network based storage
So appliances must be easier to install? Plug in the box, provide an IP and you are done? Not really – more than 99% of the configuration is local to the user.
3. Your log volumes don’t matter…disk space is cheap.
Sure…but as Defense Secretary Rumsfeld used to say $10B and $10B there and pretty soon you’re talking real money.
Logs are voluminous, a successful implementation leads to much higher log volume and terabytes add up very quickly. Compression is essential but the ability to access network based storage is even more important. The ability to backup/restore archives easily and natively to nearline or offline storage is critical.
If you consider an appliance solution, it is inherently limited in the available disk.
4. The technology is like an antivirus… just install it and forget it, and if anything is wrong, it will tell you.
Ahh, the magic bullet! Like the ad says, “Set it and forget it!” If only this were true… wishing will not make it so. There is not one single SIEM vendor that can justify saying “open the box, activate your SIEM solution in minutes, and you will be fine!” To say so, or even worse, to believe it would just be irresponsible!
If you just open the box and install it, you will only have the protection offered by the default settings. With an antivirus solution, this is possible because you have all of the virus signatures to date, and it automatically looks to the virus database to see if there are any updates, and is constantly updated as signatures are added. Too bad they cannot recognize a “Zero Day” attack when it happens, but that for now, is impossible.
With a SIEM solution, you need something you don’t need with an antivirus… you need human interaction. You need to tell the SIEM what your organization’s business rules are, define the roles and capabilities of the users, and have an expert analyst team monitor it, and adapt it to ever-changing conditions. The IT infrastructure is constantly changing, and people are needed to adjust the SIEM to meet threats, business rules, and the addition or subtraction of IT components or users.
Some vendors imply that their SIEM solution is all that is needed, and you can just plug and play. You know what the result is? Unhappy SIEM users chasing down false positives or much worse false negatives. All SIEM solutions require educated analysts to understand the information being provided, and turn it into actions. These adjustments can be simplified, but again, it takes people. If you are thinking about implementing a SIEM and forgetting about it…then fuhgeddaboutit!
5. Log Management is only meaningful if you have a compliance requirement.
Seen the recent headlines? From Stuxnet to Wikileaks to Heartland? There is a lot more to log management than merely satisfying compliance regulations. This myth exists because people are not aware of the internal and external threats that exist in this century! SIEM/Log Management solutions provide some very important benefits to your organization beyond meeting a compliance requirement.
– Security. SIEM/Log Management solutions can detect and alert you to a “Zero-Day” virus before the damage is done…something other components in your IT infrastructure can’t do. They can also alert you to brute force attacks, malware, and trojans by determining what has changed in your environment…
– Improve Efficiency. Face it! There are two many devices transmitting too many logs, and the IT staff doesn’t have the time to comb through the logs and know if they are performing the most essential tasks in the proper order. Many times order is defined by who is screaming the loudest. A SIEM/Log Management solution help to know of a potential problem sooner, can automate the log analysis, prioritize the order in which issues are addressed, improving the overall efficiency of the IT team! It is also much more efficient to perform forensic analysis to determine the cause and effect of an incident.
– Improve Network Performance. Are the servers not working properly? Are the applications going slowly? The answer is in the logs, and with a SIEM/Log Management solution, you can quickly locate the problem and fix it.
– Reduce costs. Implementing a SIEM enables organizations to reduce the number of threats both internal and external, and reduce the operating cost per device. A SIEM can dramatically reduce the number of incidents that occur within your organization, which eliminates the cost it would take to figure out what actually happened. Should an event occur, the amount of time it takes to perform the forensic analysis and fix the problem can be greatly shortened, reducing the total loss per incident.
January 16, 2011
In most previous newsletters, we have discussed the use of logging for various regulatory mandates (such as PCI DSS, HIPAA and FISMA) as well as the use of logs for incident response and malicious software tracking. This log data can also be incredibly useful for detecting and investigating insider abuse and internal attacks.