Saturday, January 29, 2022
Cyber Reality: Quest for the Digital Castle...
They have been waking us up again to the reality of the Operational Risks we now face, to our ubiquitous digital-based economic infrastructure.
The message is clear to those insiders, who have been trying to defend our "Digital Castles" against tremendous odds of these seemingly invisible threats. Is it really, game over?
The short answer is yes. The current mindset should be, that every major business of valuable interest in the eyes of the enemy has already been compromised or soon to be. It is already too late. The stealth digital code is currently waiting in the shadows of your organizations hundreds or thousands of digital assets.
Whether it is the aging Dell Tower Desk Tops still running on Windows XP somewhere or the latest Android PDA/Apple IOS devices tethered to the corporate network does not matter. Your adversary has control of when and where to begin the attack on you and your organization.
So if this is the reality of the global state-of-play, in both the business world and also to government, what should the risk management strategy consist of going forward? How could we ever get to a point of advantage over those who seek to do us harm?
So internally, the prudent corporate business strategy should be for your General Counsel and the CIO of your organization to be already preparing themselves for the day that they will step before the press conference microphone to disclose the material breach of the companies intellectual capital or theft of assets.
They should already know, that it is just a matter time and not a denial that it will ever happen on their watch. If you are a Board Director and you still have not had "The Talk" with management about this stark reality, then you too are complicit in the scheme to present your stockholders and stakeholders with a false sense of confidence that you are safe and secure.
The new normal for forward thinking organizations is already being implemented for adverse events. The Crisis Management Team has already exercised the "Data Breach" scenario numerous times.
Your General Counsel and Chief Information Officer have rehearsed and practiced their testimony before opposing and adversarial questioning of your organizations information security processes.
The company subject matter experts are more than prepared to submit evidence of their best practices, industry standards compliance and previous tests of due diligence. The stage is set for the court room battles ahead:
The quest for the "Digital Castle" has been going on for years. Are you awake now or still living in a dream of denial on your state of achieving a Defensible Standard of Care…
Saturday, May 28, 2011
OPSEC: TQM in the Defense Industrial Base...
By Jim Finkle and Andrea Shalal-Esa
BOSTON/WASHINGTON, May 27 (Reuters) - Unknown hackers have broken into the security networks of Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and several other U.S. military contractors, a source with direct knowledge of the attacks told Reuters.
They breached security systems designed to keep out intruders by creating duplicates to "SecurID" electronic keys from EMC Corp's (EMC.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) RSA security division, said the person who was not authorized to publicly discuss the matter.
It was not immediately clear what kind of data, if any, was stolen by the hackers. But Lockheed's and other military contractor networks house sensitive data on future weapons systems as well as military technology currently used in battles in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Like natural ecosystems, the cyber ecosystem comprises a variety of diverse participants – private firms, non‐profits, governments, individuals, processes, and cyber devices (computers, software, and communications technologies) – that interact for multiple purposes. Today in cyberspace, intelligent adversaries exploit vulnerabilities and create incidents that propagate at machine speeds to steal identities, resources, and advantage. The rising volume and virulence of these attacks have the potential to degrade our economic capacity and threaten basic services that underpin our modern way of life.
The approach to managing operational risk differs from that applied to other types of risk, because it is not used to generate profit. In contrast, credit risk is exploited by lending institutions to create profit,market risk is exploited by traders and fund managers, and insurance risk is exploited by insurers. They all however manage operational risk to keep losses within their risk appetite - the amount of risk they are prepared to accept in pursuit of their objectives. What this means in practical terms is that organisations accept that their people, processes and systems are imperfect, and that losses will arise from errors and ineffective operations. The size of the loss they are prepared to accept, because the cost of correcting the errors or improving the systems is disproportionate to the benefit they will receive, determines their appetite for operational risk. Events such as the September 11 terrorist attacks, rogue trading losses at Société Générale,Barings, AIB and National Australia Bank serve to highlight the fact that the scope of risk management extends beyond merely market and credit risk.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Critical Infrastructure Resilience: Put On a "Black Hat"...
Critical Infrastructure solutions in the global economy require a robust combination of bandwith and data centers. The Virtual Corporation and the Blur of change in the connected enterprise requires that the servers that are the "life blood" of the business be available, fast and assured. Business agreements that improve the capabilities of vital critical infrastructure organizations is a vital facet of prudent Operational Risk Management. Why?Built to accommodate five 50,000-square-foot independent data centers and one 72,000-square-foot office building, Terremark's NAP of the Capital Region exceeds Federal standards for a carrier grade data communications and hosting facility. Customers in the Terremark NAP of the Capital Region now have access to AboveNet's high bandwidth connectivity solutions for all business data communications needs. AboveNet currently serves Terremark customers at the NAP of the Capital Region, and also connects to Terremark data centers in Miami, FL, Dallas, TX, and Santa Clara, CA.
AboveNet has the expertise and high bandwidth connectivity solutions to meet your specific business needs. Customers use high bandwidth solutions to enable their mission critical applications
- Major Broadcasters use AboveNet’s high bandwidth connectivity solutions to facilitate broadcasting of their live shows and to store historical video content to remote datacenters
- Pre and Post Film Production Houses are using fiber optic connectivity solutions to provide on lot virtualized post production capabilities for all new films
- Online Gaming and Social Networking customers use AboveNet services to support content delivery for their end users
- Online Communication, Content and Product providers use fiber networks to provide content for their on-line products such as MSN, Hot Mail, etc
- Major Financial Institutions use WDM fiber optic connectivity to achieve their Financial Transaction Processing and Business Continuity needs
- Hedge Funds use Ethernet networks to connect to the likes of NASDAQ and AMEX and move trading data between their offices
- Oil and Energy customers use WDM networks to support their Geo Thermal Mapping Disaster Recovery needs
- Internet Sales customers use high bandwidth network solutions to boast the efficiency of their sales and service
These servers are often underutilized, tying up capital in unneeded software licenses, half-empty drives and idle processing capacity. Long deployment times limit your ability to respond rapidly in an on-demand world. And dedicated servers are expensive to replace, leaving you tied to older models while new advances pass you by.
A true utility computing solution should solve both the economic and capacity-on-demand shortcomings of traditional infrastructure, allowing you to pay only for the resources you need while enabling the rapid deployment of new capacity. And it should do all of this without any performance compromise, in a secure, highly available enterprise-class environment.
The Operational Risks of owning, operating and maintaining your own computing infrastructure are growing. The risks of new threats to embedded systems is also increasing in the transportation industry. The safety and security of the traveling public is being compromised by computers that control braking on a Metro train and the proper position for the wing flaps on a departing commercial airliner:
Authorities investigating the 2008 crash of Spanair flight 5022 have discovered a central computer system used to monitor technical problems in the aircraft was infected with malware.
An internal report issued by the airline revealed the infected computer failed to detect three technical problems with the aircraft, which if detected, may have prevented the plane from taking off, according to reports in the Spanish newspaper, El Pais.
Flight 5022 crashed just after takeoff from Madrid-Barajas International Airport two years ago today, killing 154 and leaving only 18 survivors.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board reported in a preliminary investigation that the plane had taken off with its flaps and slats retracted — and that no audible alarm had been heard to warn of this because the systems delivering power to the take-off warning system failed. Two earlier events had not been reported by the automated system.
The malware on the Spanair computer has been identified as a type of Trojan horse.
Are you investing as much in the safety and security of your computing infrastructure as you are in the preventative maintenance of your vehicles, rail cars or aircraft? When was the last time you took them offline and audited these systems for the possibility of infections or just incorrect or outdated updates to the software?
The facts are that you don't have the proper manpower or resources to keep up with the "Blur of the Connected Economy" in the transportation or information technology sectors. Your Operational Risks are increasing by the day, minute and second as a result of your ignorance to the Single-Points-of-Failure in the design, implementation or configuration of your systems.
So what is on the minds of those interested in your own self-defense? See Blackhat Briefings from last month and see what might impact you and your organization.
Monday, March 08, 2010
Quants: Fear and Loathing in Computer Code...
Jeremy Grant and Michael Mackenzie of FT are establishing an argument discussed on this blog soon after the economic meltdown began to take place:
Not long after lunchtime one day on the New York Stock Exchange three years ago, unusual things started to happen. Hundreds of thousands of “buy” and “sell” messages began flooding in, signalling for orders to be made and simultaneously cancelled.
The volume of messages sent in was so large that the traffic coming into the NYSE from thousands of other trading firms slowed, acting as a drag on the trading of 975 shares on the board.
The case was made public only last month when the disciplinary board of the NYSE fined Credit Suisse for failing adequately to supervise an “algorithm” developed and run by its proprietary trading arm – the desk that trades using the bank’s own money rather than clients’ funds.
Algorithms have become a common feature of trading, not only in shares but in derivatives such as options and futures. Essentially software programs, they decide when, how and where to trade certain financial instruments without the need for any human intervention. But in the Credit Suisse case the NYSE found that the incoming messages referred to orders that, although previously generated by the algorithm, were never actually sent “due to an unforeseen programming issue”.
It was a close call for the NYSE. Asked if the exchange could have been shut down as it was bombarded with false trades, an exchange official says: “If you had multiplied this many times you’d have had a problem on your hands.”
The Operational Risks associated with the software computer code and the development of the trading algorithms is at the center of the still untouched regulation of how financial products are designed. Once the SEC get's educated on a market practice that is creating substantial systemic risk then the wheels of monitoring and potential "Cramdown" begins to take place.
The difficulty is that responsibility for risk controls does not lie entirely with exchanges and trading platforms. Much of it rests instead with brokers, which increasingly provide access to such venues under an arrangement known as “sponsored access” whereby any trading firm that is not a member of an exchange can “piggyback” on a broker’s membership to gain direct access to an exchange. Until recently, before the SEC clamped down on the practice, traders were able to use a form of this process – “naked access” – to gain access to exchanges without brokers conducting pre-trade risk checks to ensure their algorithms were functioning properly.
In the latest books written by "Reporters" on the so called "Quant risk" going on within the ranks of trading firms across the globe, the focus is on the people themselves more than the systems. Comparing poker players to bridge players is only a small part of the issue at hand with regard to a quantitative traders point of view and mathematical orientation.
Imagine for a moment the complexity of the software systems that now control the trading mechanisms across the world. From Hong Kong to Wall Street, London to Tokyo, the software is written to accomplish tasks that the human is not capable of executing in the multi-split seconds that it takes for buyers to match sellers. One only has to spend a few weeks or a month inside the software coding life cycle management process within the walls of a JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs or Credit Suisse to better understand the Operational Risks that exist for the market as a whole.
The sheer complexity of the systems software code alone is enough to give an uneducated eTrader worry over whether the portfolio they are managing with their retirement nest egg is going to get destroyed by the likes of a super "Cyber Algorithm" designed to out smart and out think that last strategy from the previous nights episode of MSNBC's "Jim Kramer."
The next economic crisis will not be a war of who had toxic assets in their asset portfolio's. It will be a single line of computer code that initiated a sequence of risk mitigation strategies to hedge against another previously executed trade the month before. And because of the error that creates this cyber incident, the market detects a new "Fear Factor" on the horizon.
How about a little Deja Vu:
All of us have been watching the gyrations of Wall Street and the stock market in recent days. With the collapse of Bear Stearns and Lehman, the "rescue" of the failing Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac, and the bail-out of AIG, many people wonder, "Have investors completely lost their minds?" Well, the answer may be, "Sometimes". Here's how we might look at anxious investing during a time of market volatility, uncertainty, bad news, and fear.
How does the anxious investor think? Let's consider two possible investors--- one who is reasonably optimistic and the other who is pessimistic.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Red Flags Rule: Reputations at Stake...
The Federal Trade Commission has postponed a deadline for many of the nation's businesses -- including banks, public utilities and health-care providers -- to comply with a controversial identity-theft prevention program.
The program, called the "Red Flags Rule," was to take effect Aug. 1 but will now be delayed until Nov. 1. The program is aimed at preventing the loss of billions of dollars as the result of the theft of consumer and taxpayer personal information. Under the regulation, companies and institutions would be required to establish a way to identify potential threats at the businesses, find ways of detecting such threats and install measures to prevent them. Employees would also have to be educated about the programs.
A survey commissioned in 2006 by the FTC revealed that more than nine million Americans have their identities stolen each year at a total estimated loss of $15.6 billion.
The nation is under a barrage of attacks from adversaries that lie in the shadows such as "Conficker" and other botnets or malware and business still delays the compliance measures asked of them. One only has to look deeply into the latest 2009 report from CISCO to better understand the state of risk from "Transnational Economic Crime":
Report Highlights
Operational Risks are vast and the technology landscape is not getting more narrow, it is expanding. Cloud Computing is now the latest attempt to get cost savings and to make the IT puzzle less of an asset management nightmare. If you think that you understand it and where it's heading, think again. One only has to visit "Black Hat" and the briefings to get a better sense of what the true risks are going to be if not already. This one caught our eye and for good reason:
Nitesh Dhanjani
Psychotronica: Exposure, Control, and Deceit
This talk will expose how voluntary and public information from new communication paradigms such as social networking applications can enable you to remotely capture private information about targeted individuals.
Topics of discussion will include:
Hacking the Psyche: Remote behavior analysis that can be used to construct personality profiles to predict current and future psychological states of targeted individuals, including discussions on how emotional and subconscious states can be discovered even before the target is consciously aware.
Techniques on how individuals may be remotely influenced by messaging tactics, and how criminal groups and governments may use this capability, including a case study of Twitter and the recent terror attacks in Bombay.
Reconnaissance and pillage of private information, including critical data that the victim may not be aware of revealing, and that which may be impossible to protect by definition.
The goal of this presentation is to raise consciousness on how the new paradigms of social communication bring with it real risks as well as marketing and economic advantages.
Hackers have broken into Web servers owned by domain registrar and hosting provider Network Solutions, planting rogue code that resulted in the compromise of more than 573,000 debit and credit card accounts over the past three months, Security Fix has learned.
Herndon, Va. based Network Solutions discovered in early June that attackers had hacked into Web servers the company uses to provide e-commerce services - a package that includes everything from Web hosting to payment processing -- to at least 4,343 customers, mostly mom-and-pop online stores. The malicious code left behind by the attackers allowed them to intercept personal and financial information for customers who purchased from those stores, Network Solutions spokeswoman Susan Wade said.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
Offshoring Risk: Increased Fed Oversight...
Deloitte estimates that $356 billion, or 15 percent, of the financial service industry's current cost base is expected to move offshore within the next five years. Further, the range and number of offshored job functions within individual institutions is expected to increase, with the average number growing from two to four functions per institution. In particular, the traditional focus on IT alone, which accounts for 70 percent of current offshore activity, will change to a business-process emphasis. Competitive pressures are the primary motivator for financial institutions to move higher-risk functions offshore.
The banking industry has a list of Offshoring Risks that is in need of greater care and oversight.
Domestic outsourcing and offshoring share most risk characteristics. However, the more complicated chain of control incurred when offshoring financial services and related data may create new risks when compared to domestic outsourcing. Offshoring also introduces an element of country risk to the outsourcing process. In particular, geographic distance from the function and timing lags in reporting heighten the potential risk exposures. Significant offshoring risk areas include:
Country Risk: political, socio-economic, or other factors may amplify any of the traditional outsourcing risks, including those listed below.
Operations/Transaction Risk: weak controls may affect customer privacy.
Compliance Risk: offshore vendors may not have adequate privacy regulations.
Strategic Risk: different country laws may not protect "trade secrets."
Credit Risk: a vendor may not be able to fulfill its contract due to financial losses.
It is currently standard FFIEC examination procedure for examiners to review outsourcing arrangements during examinations. Part of a standardized procedure should include:
- Identifying and reviewing contracts between financial institutions and data service providers that allow for subcontracting or subsequent outsourcing to occur;
- Determining whether subsequent outsourcing has in fact occurred as indicated in the contract or outside the terms of the contract;
- Determining if the financial institution is aware of the subsequent outsourcing and the location of the outsourcing; and
- Determining if the financial institution has procedures for monitoring all outsourcing arrangements to ensure adequate controls are in place or the service provider has proper procedures and controls to monitor their outsourcing arrangements.
We recommend that your CSO, CCO and General counsel revisit your last audit on high risk outsourced relationships such as customer data-base type work, including mortgage servicing and customer-assistance/help-desk services.
Thursday, May 10, 2007
IT Audit: Communicating with the CEO...
At its most basic level, an IT security audit is a systematic evaluation of a company's IT security infrastructure that measures how well security policies, procedures, and controls conform to a set of established criteria. Today's internal auditors know that the true value of an IT security audit to an organization goes beyond compliance. By successfully communicating their IT security audit recommendations, auditors can have a major influence on corporate strategy. Unfortunately, many auditors find there is little guidance to help them communicate audit results and recommendations to senior-level managers when preparing for the IT security audit. Consequently, conveying IT security recommendations can be one of the most challenging parts of an internal auditor's job. However, with a little preparation and knowledge, auditors can enhance the way they communicate IT security audit results as well as provide recommendations senior managers can relate to, understand, and implement.
What can the board of directors do to make sure that their CEO has moved to a place focused on mitigating operational risks to enhance opportunities and long term strategy?
Fundamentally, the first task is to make sure that the CEO has a management system in place for operational risk. What is needed is a process approach for establishing, implementing, operating, monitoring, maintaining and improving the effectiveness of an organisation’s operational risk enterprise architecture (OREA).
Let’s break OREA down this a little further to get a better view of some of the specific operational attributes:
People
Employee fraud, misdeed, unauthorised activity, loss/lack of personnel and employment law.
Process
Payment/settlement, delivery/selling, documentation/contract, valuation/pricing, internal/external reporting and compliance.
Systems
Technology investment, development, access, capacity, failures and security breach.
External
Legal liability, criminal activities, outsourcing, suppliers / insourcing, disasters / infrastructure, regulatory/political.
The attributes of operational risk are the same key areas that need to have metrics created for measurement and auditing. Performance management, Balanced Scorecard and other methodologies for managing, monitoring and continuous improvement need to be implemented so the boards of directors have a way to get timely alerts, updates and reporting.
The operational risk enterprise architecture (OREA) is a management framework that requires a process approach embedded with the legacy of our quality initiatives of the past several decades. The reason is because of the threat of change itself. The P-D-C-A model (plan – do – check – act) is appropriate for application to this process approach and threat of a constantly changing corporate environment:
Plan
Establish policy, objectives, targets, processes and procedures for managing operational risks to deliver results in accordance with the organisations business objectives.
Do
Implement and operate the policy, controls, processes and procedures.
Check
Assess and measure in applicable areas while reporting results to management for review.
Act
Take corrective and preventive actions based on results to continually improve the OREA framework.
Operational risk management is getting the attention of organizations outside of the major banks at a rapid pace. Board of directors in any industry will soon realize that the successful CEO of the future will be a master of building a culture with effective operational risk management systems at its core.
Furthermore, interpreting how enforcement of IT security controls and policies can strengthen connections with customers and suppliers, how authorization processes can preserve intellectual property, or how separation of duties can drive innovative new business processes demonstrates to senior managers that internal auditors are an invaluable company resource and asset.