{"id":8679,"date":"2017-08-10T10:17:04","date_gmt":"2017-08-10T18:17:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/2017\/08\/10\/news-2452\/"},"modified":"2017-08-10T10:17:04","modified_gmt":"2017-08-10T18:17:04","slug":"news-2452","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/2017\/08\/10\/news-2452\/","title":{"rendered":"Beware of Security by Press Release"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>Credit to Author: BrianKrebs| Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 15:40:30 +0000<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>On Wednesday, the security industry once again witnessed an all-too-familiar cycle: I call it &#8220;security by press release.&#8221; It goes a bit like this: A security firm releases a report claiming to have unearthed\u00a0a major flaw in a competitor&#8217;s product; members of the trade press uncritically\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/gizmodo.com\/top-security-firm-may-be-leaking-terabytes-of-confident-1797667775\" target=\"_blank\">republish<\/a> the claims without adding much clarity or waiting for responses from the affected vendor; blindsided vendor responds in a blog post showing how the issue is considerably less dire than originally claimed.<\/p>\n<p>At issue are claims made by Denver-based security company <strong>DirectDefense<\/strong>, which published <a href=\"https:\/\/www.directdefense.com\/harvesting-cb-response-data-leaks-fun-profit\/\" target=\"_blank\">a report<\/a> this week warning that <strong>Cb Response <\/strong>&#8212;\u00a0a suite of security tools sold by competitor\u00a0<strong>Carbon Black<\/strong> (formerly <a href=\"https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/2013\/02\/security-firm-bit9-hacked-used-to-spread-malware\/\" target=\"_blank\">Bit9<\/a>) &#8212; was leaking potentially sensitive and proprietary data from customers who use its product.<\/p>\n<p><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-40262\" src=\"https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/snm-580x469.png\" alt=\"snm\" width=\"580\" height=\"469\" srcset=\"https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/snm-580x469.png 580w, https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/snm.png 754w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 580px) 100vw, 580px\" \/><\/p>\n<p>DirectDefense warned about a problem with Cb Response&#8217;s use of &#8220;a cloud-based multiscanner&#8221; to scan suspicious files for malware. DirectDefense didn&#8217;t name the scanner in question, but it&#8217;s Google&#8217;s <a href=\"https:\/\/www.virustotal.com\" target=\"_blank\">VirusTotal<\/a> &#8212; a free tool that lets anyone submit a suspicious file and have it scanned against dozens of commercial anti-malware tools. There&#8217;s also a paid version of VirusTotal that allows customers to examine any file uploaded to the service.<\/p>\n<p>Specifically, DirectDefense claimed that Cb Response&#8217;s sharing of suspicious files with VirusTotal could expose sensitive data because VirusTotal allows paying customers to download any files submitted by other users. This is\u00a0the full extent of the &#8220;vulnerability&#8221; that DirectDefense labeled &#8220;the world&#8217;s largest pay-for-play data exfiltration botnet.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Carbon Black responded with <a href=\"https:\/\/www.carbonblack.com\/2017\/08\/09\/directdefense-incorrectly-asserts-architectural-flaw-in-cb-response\/\" target=\"_blank\">its own blog post<\/a> noting that the feature DirectDefense warned about was not turned on by default, and that Carbon Black <a href=\"https:\/\/www.carbonblack.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/Blog_Image_2.png\" target=\"_blank\">informs customers of the privacy risks<\/a>\u00a0that may be associated with sharing files with VirusTotal.<\/p>\n<h4>ANALYSIS<\/h4>\n<p><strong>Adrian Sanabria<\/strong>, a security expert and founder of <strong>Savage Security<\/strong>, published <a href=\"https:\/\/blog.savagesec.com\/words-have-meanings-dc925219bb8e?source=user_profile---------0--------------\" target=\"_blank\">a blog post<\/a> that called &#8220;bullshit&#8221; on DirectDefense&#8217;s findings, noting that the company inexplicably singles out a competitor when many other\u00a0security firms similarly allow customers to submit files to VirusTotal.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Dozens<strong class=\"markup--strong markup--p-strong\">\u00a0<\/strong>of other security vendors either have an option to automatically submit binaries (yes, whole binaries, not just the hash) to VirusTotal or do it without the customers knowledge altogether,&#8221; Sanabria wrote. &#8220;In singling out Carbon Black, DirectDefense opens itself up to criticism and closer scrutiny.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Such as <a href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/Direct_Defense\/status\/894651409123033088\" target=\"_blank\">shilling for a partner firm<\/a>\u00a0(<strong>Cylance<\/strong>) that stands to gain from taking Cabon Black down a few notches in the public eye, Sanabria observed [link added].<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;I personally don\u2019t believe DirectDefense is a shill for Cylance, but in singling out one of many vendors that do the same thing, they\u2019ve stepped into a classic PR gaffe that\u00a0<a class=\"markup--anchor markup--p-anchor\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/threatthreat\/status\/895306825763041284\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer\" data-href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/threatthreat\/status\/895306825763041284\" data-ss1502373666=\"1\">makes them look like one<\/a>,&#8221; he wrote.<span id=\"more-40257\"><\/span><\/p>\n<p>My take is that most people in corporate cybersecurity roles understand what VirusTotal is and the potential privacy risks involved in uploading files to the service &#8212; either on a one-off basis or automatically submitted through some security suite like CB Response (if not, those security folks probably need to investigate another career).<\/p>\n<p>That&#8217;s not to say that organizations don&#8217;t inadvertently overshare. I&#8217;ve seen instances where entire email threads and apparently sensitive documents have been submitted to VirusTotal along with embedded malware.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Lesley Carhart<\/strong>, a security incident response team leader and <a href=\"http:\/\/twitter.com\/hacks4pancakes\" target=\"_blank\">a prolific security commentator on Twitter<\/a>, said there are immense amounts of trust given VirusTotal. Carhart said if a malicious actor were able to identify individual files uploaded from a target organization to VirusTotal &#8212; even just as file hashes &#8212; they could gain lots of information about the organization, including what software suites they use, what operating systems, and which document types.<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;They provide an amazing free resource for the infosec community, as well as some great paid services,&#8221; Carhart said of VirusTotal. &#8220;However, we have unintentionally given them one of the largest repositories of files in the world.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>If DirectDefense&#8217;s report helped some security people better grasp the risks of oversharing with multiscanners like VirusTotal, that&#8217;s a plus.\u00a0But from where I sit, these types of overblown\u00a0research reports tend to live or die by uncritical and\/or unbalanced coverage in the news media &#8212; also known as &#8220;churnalism.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>My advice to tech reporters: Quit taking claims like these at face value and start asking some basic questions before publishing anything. For example, the early coverage of DirectDefense&#8217;s report in the media suggests that few reporters even asked about the identity of the multiscanner referenced throughout the report. Also, it&#8217;s clear that few (if any) reporters asked DirectDefense whether it had alerted Carbon Black before going public with their findings (it hadn&#8217;t).<\/p>\n<p>Pro tip: If a researcher or company with a vulnerability &#8220;scoop&#8221; doesn&#8217;t mention interaction with the affected vendor before going public with their research, this should be a giant red flag indicating that this individual or entity is merely\u00a0trying to use the media to generate short-term PR buzz, and that the &#8220;vulnerability&#8221; in question\u00a0is little more than\u00a0smoke and mirrors.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/2017\/08\/beware-of-security-by-press-release\/\" target=\"bwo\" >https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/feed\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/krebsonsecurity.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/08\/snm-580x469.png\"\/><\/p>\n<p><strong>Credit to Author: BrianKrebs| Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 15:40:30 +0000<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>On Wednesday, the security industry once again witnessed an all-too-familiar cycle: I call it &#8220;Security by press release.&#8221; It goes a bit like this: A security firm releases a report claiming to have unearthed a major flaw in a competitor&#8217;s product; members of the trade press uncritically republish the claims without adding much clarity or waiting for responses from the affected vendor; blindsided vendor responds in a blog post showing how the issue is considerably less dire than originally claimed.    At issue are claims made by Denver-based security company DirectDefense, which published a report this week warning that Cb Response &#8212; a suite of security tools sold by competitor Carbon Black (formerly Bit9) &#8212; was leaking potentially sensitive and proprietary data from customers who use its product.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","footnotes":""},"categories":[10643,10642],"tags":[13533,13534,13535,13536,13537,13538,10644],"class_list":["post-8679","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-independent","category-krebs","tag-adrian-sanabria","tag-carbon-black","tag-cb-response","tag-cylance","tag-directdefense","tag-leslie-carhart","tag-other"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8679","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8679"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8679\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8679"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8679"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.palada.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8679"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}