<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title><![CDATA[[SecurityRatty] tag: october]]></title>
    <link>http://securityratty.com/tag/october</link>
    <description></description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
    <generator>iRatty Engine</generator>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Building Secure Web Applications Training in Minneapolis]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/425c10b73ebf6262c2b07d2a4b9edeaa</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/425c10b73ebf6262c2b07d2a4b9edeaa</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[I am very excited to announce that I am co-teaching a public software security class with Ken van Wyk , in Minneapolis, the class runs September 30 - October 2. Ken co-wrote a great book called Secure...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>I am very excited to announce that I am co-teaching a public software security class with <a href="http://krvw.com/about/about.html">Ken van Wyk</a>, in Minneapolis, the class runs September 30 - October 2. Ken co-wrote a great book called <a href="http://1raindrop.typepad.com/1_raindrop/2007/02/book_review_sec.html">Secure Coding</a>, and has trained folks in software security all across the globe. I am really looking forward to doing this class with Ken, I wanted to make sure we got Ken up here before the weather got too cold! The summary is below, if you would like more info please let me know. More details to follow.</div><br /><div>Building Secure Web Applications in Java/J2EE</div><br /><div>Course Description</div><div>This course teaches the students how to develop secure applications from the web front end through the middle tier and data and integration layers for today’s complex internetworked environment. &#160;Students will receive a deep and thorough understanding of the most prevalent and dangerous security defects in today’s applications, and what to do about them. &#160;Additionally, they will learn practical and actionable guidelines on how to remediate against these common defects in Java/J2EE and Web Services frameworks and how to test for them in their own applications.</div><br /><div>This class starts with a description of the security problems faced by today&#39;s software developer, as well as a detailed description of the Open Web Application Security Project’s (OWASP) “Top 10” security defects. &#160;These defects are studied in instructor-lead sessions as well as in hands-on lab exercises in which each student learns how to actually exploit the defects to “break into” a real web application. &#160;(The labs are performed in safe test environments.)</div><br /><div>Remediation techniques and strategies are then studied for each defect. Practical guidelines on how to integrate secure development practices into the software development process are then presented and discussed. Bring the concepts and hands on learning together, the class uses a case study to show how to design and architect security services for a real world application.</div><br /><div>Intended Audience</div><div>The ideal student for this tutorial is a hands-on web application developer or architect who is looking for a fundamental understanding of today&#39;s best practices in secure software development.</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:43:59 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security defects">security defects</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/defects">defects</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/applications">applications</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/secure">secure</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/dangerous security defects">dangerous security defects</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/secure web applications">secure web applications</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/develop secure applications">develop secure applications</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/secure software development">secure software development</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security">security</category>
      <source url="http://1raindrop.typepad.com/1_raindrop/2008/08/building-secure-web-applications-training-in-minneapolis.html">Building Secure Web Applications Training in Minneapolis</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Changes to PCI standard not expected to up the ante]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/a1bc3568bedfb182e187b136c4c005ea</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/a1bc3568bedfb182e187b136c4c005ea</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[The group that administers the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard -- or PCI, for short -- this week released a summary of the changes that are being made to the requirements in a revision...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[The group that administers the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standard -- or PCI, for short -- this week released a summary of the changes that are being made to the requirements in a revision scheduled to be published in October.]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/pci">pci</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/october">october</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/week">week</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/requirements">requirements</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/short">short</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/revision">revision</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/summary">summary</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/administers">administers</category>
      <source url="http://www.networkworld.com/news/2008/082008-changes-to-pci-standard-not.html?fsrc=rss-security">Changes to PCI standard not expected to up the ante</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[PCI Compliance: Reaction to the Summary of Changes]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/ddeefb896f6d234b28dddac20a55a9c5</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/ddeefb896f6d234b28dddac20a55a9c5</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[On August 18 the PCI Security Standards Council formally announced ( http://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pdfs/08-18-08 2.pdf ) forthcoming changes to the Payment Card Industry's Data Security Standard...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[On August 18 the PCI Security Standards Council formally announced (<a href="http://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pdfs/08-18-08_2.pdf" target=_blank>http://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pdfs/08-18-08_2.pdf</a>) forthcoming changes to the Payment Card Industry's Data Security Standard (PCI DSS) as it moves from version 1.1 to version 1.2 in October 2008.  The release represents the first major update since September 2006.
<P>
What's my take on the summary of changes? <B>Most merchants will be pleased to see that these are relatively minor changes...</b>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/payment card industry">payment card industry</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/data security standard">data security standard</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/release represents">release represents</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/version">version</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/pci dss">pci dss</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/summary">summary</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/october">october</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/pdf">pdf</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/minor">minor</category>
      <source url="http://www.rsa.com/blog/blog_entry.aspx?id=1330">PCI Compliance: Reaction to the Summary of Changes</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Wee-Fi: Meraki Modifies, Drops Standard; Tempe's Phoenix?; Remote Wake, Wi-Fi Need Not Apply]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/a930349b033e6f56c6098e0b152daddf</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/a930349b033e6f56c6098e0b152daddf</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Meraki reworks product line, drops new sales of community flavor: The cheap mesh router company has mutated slightly once again. The partly-Google-backed firm founded by MIT RoofNet &quot;graduates&quot; built...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img src="http://wifinetnews.com/images/weefi.jpg" align="right" border="0" hspace="5" /><a href="http://meraki.com/"><strong>Meraki reworks product line, drops new sales of community flavor:</strong></a> The cheap mesh router company has mutated slightly once again. The partly-Google-backed firm founded by MIT RoofNet "graduates" built the company on the notion that they could sell $50 routers that could mesh with each other, and use a robust central management system they developed. Over time, the $50 price didn't hold up for commercial networks of scale. Last October, the <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/007973.html"><strong>company mishandled a change</strong></a> in its business model when they abruptly announced a $100 increase in price for newly purchased nodes under their Meraki Pro level for any network that wanted to control whether or not ads appeared, have user accounts, and charge for service. (They eventually <a href="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/007979.html"><strong>recovered, apologized, and reworked</strong></a> some of the transition details.) <img src="http://wifinetnews.com//images/2008/meraki_indoor.jpg" alt="meraki_indoor.jpg" border="0" width="175" height="111" align="right" />The company continued to offer a $50 indoor and $100 outdoor Standard level nodes for networks that required ads and had other limits. As of a few days ago, Standard is dead, and the Meraki mini has been upgraded to the <a href="http://meraki.com/products_services/hardware/indoor/"><strong>Meraki Indoor</strong></a> ($150). The Indoor has signal strength LEDs on the side for better help in placing units, an internal antenna, and better resilience against power fluctuations. The company <a href="http://meraki.com/support/faq/"><strong>explains its move</strong></a> in eliminating Standard by noting that most customers moved to Pro. It's not precisely the end of idealism (nor did that happen last October), as Meraki is still one of the major commercial mesh vendors, and their products are still vastly easier and a fraction of the cost of higher-end competitors.<br clear="all"></p>

<p><a href="http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/123037"><strong>New life for dead Tempe network?</strong></a> Another firm has expressed interest in buying the pennies on the dollar assets that remain of the former Kite Networks installation in Tempe from the firm that financed the venture as long as they can negotiate a new, more favorable deal with the city for mounting and removal rights. CTC, Inc., which the East Valley Tribune reports runs networks in the Kansas City, Mo., area, thinks there's an opportunity. The article notes that reception problems were due in part to the prevalence of stucco in Tempe, common in the southwest. Stucco walls layer plaster or other materials on a wire mesh for strength that turns a house into a bit of an accidental <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage"><strong>Faraday cage</strong></a>, partially shielding the home from electromagnetic radiation. (Could I go so far to say that Tempe's network could be a phoenix? Ouch.)</p>

<p><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/2008-08-14-intel-wake-up-pcs_N.htm"><strong>Wake up, you darn computer:</strong></a> Intel's new Remote Wake motherboards won't work with Wi-Fi, it's important to note. The feature, announced today, will let an incoming VoIP call (the articles all say "phone call over the Internet") to wake a computer, as long as the call comes from a particular source. Of course, the standard SIP protocol for VoIP doesn't have the kind of security and integrity that would allow this; Intel has to overcome the problem with network address translation that renders most computer unreachable from outside the local network without a separate service like GoToMyPC or LogMeIn; and it will only work for computers connected via Ethernet to a local network, because Wi-Fi is off when a computer sleeps, while Ethernet can remain lightly active. I don't have the protocol details yet, but there's long been a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake-on-LAN"><strong>Wake on LAN protocol</strong></a> that required support in a router, operating system, and Ethernet card; Intel may be leveraging this.</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 06:32:51 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/meraki">meraki</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/network">network</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/network address translation">network address translation</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/dead tempe network">dead tempe network</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/dead">dead</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/tempe">tempe</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/standard">standard</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/meraki indoor">meraki indoor</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/meraki mini">meraki mini</category>
      <source url="http://wifinetnews.com/archives/008420.html">Wee-Fi: Meraki Modifies, Drops Standard; Tempe's Phoenix?; Remote Wake, Wi-Fi Need Not Apply</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Hacking Mifare Transport Cards]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/3a7dba1bb2685c0c225ca69eddd304c7</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/3a7dba1bb2685c0c225ca69eddd304c7</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[London's Oyster card has been cracked , and the final details will become public in October. NXP Semiconductors, the Philips spin-off that makes the system, lost a court battle to prevent the...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>London's Oyster card has been <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jun/26/hitechcrime.oystercards">cracked</a>, and the final details will become public in October. NXP Semiconductors, the Philips spin-off that makes the system, lost a court battle to prevent the researchers from publishing. People might be able to use this information to ride for free, but the sky won't be falling. And the publication of this serious vulnerability actually makes us all safer in the long run.</p>

<p>Here's the story. Every Oyster card has a radio-frequency identification chip that communicates with readers mounted on the ticket barrier. That chip, the "Mifare Classic" chip, is used in hundreds of other transport systems as well — Boston, Los Angeles, Brisbane, Oslo, Amsterdam, Taipei, Shanghai, Rio de Janeiro — and as an access pass in thousands of companies, schools, hospitals, and government buildings around Britain and the rest of the world.</p>

<p>The security of Mifare Classic is terrible. This is not an exaggeration; it's kindergarten cryptography. Anyone with any security experience would be embarrassed to put his name to the design. NXP attempted to deal with this embarrassment by keeping the design secret.</p>

<p>The group that <a href="http://www.ru.nl/ds/research/rfid/">broke</a> Mifare Classic is from Radboud University Nijmegen in the Netherlands. They <a href="http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article4184481.ece">demonstrated the attack</a> by riding the Underground for free, and by <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW3RGbQTLhE">breaking into</a> a building. Their two papers (one is already <a href="http://www.cs.ru.nl/~flaviog/publications/Attack.MIFARE.pdf">online</a>) will be published at <a href="http://www.scc.rhul.ac.uk/CARDIS/">two</a> <a href="http://www.isac.uma.es/esorics08/">conferences</a> this autumn.</p>

<p>The second paper is the one that NXP <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-9985886-7.html?hhTest=1">sued</a> <a href="http://www.secureidnews.com/news/2008/07/10/nxp-sues-to-prevent-hackers-from-releasing-mifare-flaws/">over</a>. They called disclosure of the attack "irresponsible," warned that it will cause "immense damages," and claimed that it "will jeopardize the security of assets protected with systems incorporating the Mifare IC." The <a href="http://zoeken.rechtspraak.nl/resultpage.aspx?snelzoeken=true&amp;searchtype=ljn&amp;ljn=BD7578&amp;u_ljn=BD7578">Dutch court</a> would have none of it:  "Damage to NXP is not the result of the publication of the article but of the production and sale of a chip that appears to have shortcomings."</p>

<p>Exactly right. More generally, the notion that secrecy supports security is <a href="http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0205.html#1">inherently flawed</a>. Whenever you see an organization claiming that design secrecy is necessary for security — in ID cards, in voting machines, in airport security — it invariably means that its security is lousy and it has no choice but to hide it. Any competent cryptographer would have designed Mifare's security with an open and public design.</p>

<p>Secrecy is fragile. Mifare's security was based on the belief that no one would discover how it worked; that's why NXP had to muzzle the Dutch researchers. But that's just wrong. Reverse-engineering isn't hard. <a href="http://computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&amp;taxonomyName=spam__malware_and_vulnerabilities&amp;articleId=9078038&amp;taxonomyId=85">Other</a> <a href="http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~evans/pubs/usenix08/">researchers</a> <a href="http://eprint.iacr.org/2008/166">had</a> <a href="http://staff.science.uva.nl/~delaat/sne-2006-2007/p41/Report.pdf">already</a> <a href="http://www.translink.nl/media/bijlagen/nieuws/TNO_ICT_-_Security_Analysis_OV-Chipkaart_-_public_report.pdf">exposed</a> Mifare's lousy security. A Chinese company even <a href="http://www.fmsh.com/english/product_chipcard.php?product=FM11RF32">sells</a> a <a href="http://www.fmsh.com/english/products/FM11RF32_FS_ENG.pdf">compatible chip</a>. Is there any doubt that the bad guys already know about this, or will soon enough?</p>

<p>Publication of this attack might be expensive for NXP and its customers, but it's good for security overall. Companies will only design security as good as their customers know to ask for. NXP's security was so bad because customers didn't know how to evaluate security: either they don't know what questions to ask, or didn't know enough to distrust the marketing answers they were given. This court ruling encourages companies to build security properly rather than relying on shoddy design and secrecy, and discourages them from promising security based on their ability to threaten researchers.</p>

<p>It's unclear how this break will affect <a href="http://www.tfl.gov.uk/">Transport for London</a>. Cloning takes only a few seconds, and the thief only has to brush up against someone carrying a legitimate Oyster card. But it requires an RFID reader and a small piece of software which, while feasible for a techie, are too complicated for the average fare dodger. The police are likely to quickly arrest anyone who tries to sell cloned cards on any scale. TfL <a href="http://news.cnet.co.uk/software/0,39029694,49297810,00.htm">promises</a> <a href="http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/tfl-responds-to-oyster-hack-runling-428238">to</a> turn off any cloned cards within 24 hours, but that will hurt the innocent victim who had his card cloned more than the thief.</p>

<p>The vulnerability is far more serious to the companies that use Mifare Classic as an access pass. It would be very interesting to know how NXP presented the system's security to them.</p>

<p>And while these attacks only pertain to the Mifare Classic chip, it makes me suspicious of the entire product line. NXP sells a more secure chip and has another on the way, but given the number of basic cryptography mistakes NXP made with Mifare Classic, one has to wonder whether the "more secure" versions will be sufficiently so.</p>

<p>This essay <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/07/hacking.security">originally appeared</a> in the <i>Guardian</i>.</p><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=lyT29K"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=lyT29K" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?a=3HhhnK"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/schneier/fulltext?i=3HhhnK" border="0"></img></a>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:07:02 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/mifare">mifare</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/design">design</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/design secrecy">design secrecy</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/mifare classic chip">mifare classic chip</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/secrecy">secrecy</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security">security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/secrecy supports security">secrecy supports security</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security properly">security properly</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/chip">chip</category>
      <source url="http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/08/hacking_mifare.html">Hacking Mifare Transport Cards</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Microsoft to predict exploitability of its own bugs]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/9510337f5e9e691b0e68319edc6dbb5c</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/9510337f5e9e691b0e68319edc6dbb5c</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[In a move toward improving its metrics mojo, Microsoft has announced that as of October, it will rate all new vulnerabilities according to the likelihood that they can actually be exploited. It will...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[In a move toward improving its metrics mojo, Microsoft has announced that as of October, it will rate all new vulnerabilities according to the likelihood that they can actually be exploited. It will also will share information with some vendors before everyone else gets patches.
<p><a href="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~a/Computerworld/Security/News?a=Cf4vFF"><img src="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~a/Computerworld/Security/News?i=Cf4vFF" border="0"></img></a></p><img src="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~r/Computerworld/Security/News/~4/356337100" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2008 09:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/share information">share information</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/metrics mojo">metrics mojo</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/microsoft">microsoft</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/vulnerabilities">vulnerabilities</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/october">october</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/move">move</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/vendors">vendors</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/patches">patches</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/likelihood">likelihood</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.computerworld.com/~r/Computerworld/Security/News/~3/356337100/article.do">Microsoft to predict exploitability of its own bugs</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Monthly Blog Round-Up - July 2008]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/ad180724e0eff95212e4a6b6f36f73c1</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/ad180724e0eff95212e4a6b6f36f73c1</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[I saw this idea of a monthly blog round-up and I liked it. In general, blogs are a bit &quot;stateless&quot; and a lot of good content gets lost since many people, sadly, only pay attention to what they see...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I saw this idea of a monthly blog round-up and I liked it. In general, blogs are a bit &quot;stateless&quot; and a lot of good content gets lost since many people, sadly, only pay attention to what they see <em>today</em>. This is an attempt to remind people of useful content!</p>  <p>So, here is my next <strong>monthly <a href="chuvakin.blogspot.com/">&quot;Security Warrior&quot; blog</a> </strong>round-up of top 5 popular posts and topics.</p>  <ol>   <li>As you can easily, easily guess, the&#160; #1 spot this month is taken by my irreverent comments on a Terry Childs saga. Namely, &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/07/on-doomsaying-terry-childs-case.html">On Doomsaying (Terry Childs case)</a>&quot;, &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/07/on-doomsaying-terry-childs-case.html">So ... Am I? Maybe I Am!</a>&quot; and &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/07/admins-good-guys-or-am-not-idiot.html">Admins , Good Guys or &quot;I am NOT an Idiot!&quot;</a>&quot;</li>    <li>Obviously, my earlier post/rant called &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/06/you-are-security-idiot-if.html">You Are &quot;A Security Idiot&quot; If ...</a>&quot; takes the #2 spot. Yes, we all like to point out other people's problems, especially when they are epically huge :-)</li>    <li>Next up is my post &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/06/11-signs-that-your-siem-is-dog-or-you.html">11 Signs That Your SIEM Is A Dog or &quot;Raffy, You Killed SIM!&quot;</a>&quot;. It is both humorous and sadly true (and <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/cgi-bin/mailto/x.cgi?pagetosend=/export/home/httpd/htdocs/reviews/2008/063008-test-siem.html&amp;pagename=/reviews/2008/063008-test-siem.html&amp;pageurl=http://www.networkworld.com/reviews/2008/063008-test-siem.html&amp;site=security">backed up by other sources</a>) </li>    <li>Also popular is my post &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/07/log-management-day-1.html">Log Management - Day 1</a>,&quot; which talks about the very first thing you do when embarking on a journey to <a href="http://www.loglogic.com">log management</a>.</li>    <li>Finally, again this month, <a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/search/label/poll">my logging polls</a> took the #1 spot!&#160; <a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/05/poll-8-log-analysis-context.html">Poll #8</a> that covered context data for log analysis <a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/06/logging-poll-8-analysis-needed-log.html">is analyzed here</a>. Other popular polls include a controversial <u><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/04/windows-log-collection-poll-analysis.html">Windows Log Collection Poll</a></u> (which is <u><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/04/windows-log-collection-poll-analysis.html">a poll #7</a></u>)&#160; and <u><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/03/logging-poll-6-logs-do-you-look-at.html">poll #6</a></u> about logs that people actually look and <a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/02/logging-poll-5-logging-challenges.html">poll #5</a> about logging challenges. </li>    <li>Strangely, a lot of people wanted to &quot;<a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/07/which-blogs-do-i-read.html">Which Blogs Do I Read?</a>&quot; - so my brief post on that made it to the top.</li> </ol>  <p>See you in August, unless you are all on vacations, that is :-)</p>  <p><strong>Possibly related posts / past monthly popular blog round-ups:</strong></p>  <ul>   <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/07/monthly-blog-round-up-june-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - June 2008</a></li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/06/monthly-blog-round-up-may-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - May 2008</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/05/monthly-blog-round-up-april-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - April 2008</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/04/monthly-blog-round-up-march-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - March 2008</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/03/monthly-blog-round-up-february-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - February 2008</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/02/monthly-blog-round-up-january-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - January 2008</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2008/01/monthly-blog-round-up-december-2007.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - December 2007</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2007/11/monthly-blog-round-up-november-2007.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - November 2007</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2007/11/monthly-blog-round-up-october-2007.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - October 2007</a>&#160;&#160; </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2007/10/monthly-blog-round-up-september-2007.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - September 2007</a> </li>    <li><a href="http://chuvakin.blogspot.com/2007/08/monthly-blog-round-up-august-2007.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - August 2007</a></li> </ul>  <p>&#160;</p>  <p></p>  <div class="wlWriterSmartContent" id="scid:0767317B-992E-4b12-91E0-4F059A8CECA8:7192e29b-e335-4630-8b0b-dc37806d54ee" style="padding-right: 0px; display: inline; padding-left: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; margin: 0px; padding-top: 0px">Technorati Tags: <a href="http://technorati.com/tags/blog" rel="tag">blog</a>,<a href="http://technorati.com/tags/security" rel="tag">security</a>,<a href="http://technorati.com/tags/loggings" rel="tag">loggings</a>,<a href="http://technorati.com/tags/monthly" rel="tag">monthly</a></div>  <div class="blogger-post-footer">About me: http://www.chuvakin.org</div><div class="feedflare">
<a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog?a=dP6djK"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog?i=dP6djK" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog?a=ZJx4wK"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog?i=ZJx4wK" border="0"></img></a> <a href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog?a=Avu9xK"><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~f/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog?i=Avu9xK" border="0"></img></a>
</div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog/~4/353106236" height="1" width="1"/>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Aug 2008 12:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/monthly blog round-up">monthly blog round-up</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/blog">blog</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/blog round-up">blog round-up</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/monthly">monthly</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/posts">posts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/popular posts">popular posts</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/popular">popular</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/people">people</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/security">security</category>
      <source url="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AntonChuvakinPersonalBlog/~3/353106236/monthly-blog-round-up-july-2008.html">Monthly Blog Round-Up - July 2008</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Speaking of Security Podcast #114]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/ec60f9a9867a5ba85716c819cc65402e</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/ec60f9a9867a5ba85716c819cc65402e</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Click to Download/Listen (05:51

New co-host Amanda Van Veen interviews Linda Lynch, RSA Conference Europe Manager, about this year's Conference in October. Learn about the early bird registration...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<a href="http://www.rsa.com/blog/blog_entry.aspx?id=1312">Click to Download/Listen</a> (05:51)<br>
<br />
New co-host Amanda Van Veen interviews Linda Lynch, RSA&reg; Conference Europe Manager, about this year's Conference in October. Learn about the early bird registration special as well as other helpful travel hints and session highlights. Register today: <a href="http://www.rsaconference.com/2008/Europe" target="_blank">www.rsaconference.com/2008/europe</a>.<br /><br />]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/helpful travel hints">helpful travel hints</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/co-host amanda van">co-host amanda van</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/interviews linda lynch">interviews linda lynch</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/bird registration special">bird registration special</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/session highlights">session highlights</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/october">october</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/register">register</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/click">click</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/rsaconference">rsaconference</category>
      <source url="http://www.rsa.com/blog/blog_entry.aspx?id=1312">Speaking of Security Podcast #114</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[A new version?]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/e612020837731d9520e370baabf4378a</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/e612020837731d9520e370baabf4378a</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Yes folks, the PCI DSS's first major update since version 1.1 was announced in September 2006 is on the horizon. Unveiled in May by the PCI Security Standards Council, the new version, called 1.2, is...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Yes folks, the PCI DSS's first major update since  version 1.1 was <a href="http://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pdfs/09-07-06.pdf" target=_blank>announced in September 2006</a> is on the horizon.  <a href="http://www.pcisecuritystandards.org/pdfs/05-14-08.pdf" target=_blank>Unveiled in May</a> by the PCI Security Standards Council, the new version, called 1.2, is due out in October. <B>Over the past few weeks, I've received a myriad of inquiries from merchants and figured this would be a good forum to share some of them...</b>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/version">version</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/pci dss">pci dss</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/due">due</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/horizon">horizon</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/october">october</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/forum">forum</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/share">share</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/merchants">merchants</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/inquiries">inquiries</category>
      <source url="http://www.rsa.com/blog/blog_entry.aspx?id=1309">A new version?</source>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title><![CDATA[Williamson County Schools learns of breach reported nine months ago]]></title>
      <link>http://securityratty.com/article/ab879007319944481d6c7e5668489293</link>
      <guid>http://securityratty.com/article/ab879007319944481d6c7e5668489293</guid>
      <description><![CDATA[Technorati Tag: Security Breach

Date Reported
7/11/08

Organization
Williamson County Schools

Contractor/Consultant/Branch
None

Victims
Students

3,052 ACT students and 2,117 students who took the...]]></description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[Technorati Tag: <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/security+breach" rel="tag">Security Breach</a><br><br>
<img src="http://breachblog.com/images/95781-88451/wcs.jpg" width="109" align="right" height="123"><font size="2"><b>Date Reported: </b><br>7/11/08<br><br><b>Organization: </b><br><a href="http://www.wcs.edu/">Williamson County Schools</a> <br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Contractor/Consultant/Branch:</span><br>None<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Victims:</span><br>Students*<br><br><font size="1">*"3,052 ACT students and 2,117 students who took the second grade test were affected", Source: <a href="http://www.wcs.edu/student_information_conf.htm%20">Student Information News Conference Text 7/11/08</a><br></font> <br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Number Affected:</span><br>5,169<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Types of Data:</span><br>Names, testing scores, and Social Security numbers<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Breach Description:</span><br>"FRANKLIN, Tenn.- It now appears a security breach at Williamson County schools was much worse than expected. School officials now say more than 5,000 students may have been affected when a school employee accidently posted their personal information online."<br><br>Reference URL:<br><a href="http://www.wcs.edu/student_information_conf.htm">Williamson County Student Information News Conference</a> <br><a href="http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=8662746">News Channel 5</a> <br><a href="http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?S=8657599">WREG Channel 3 News</a> <br><a href="http://www.wsmv.com/news/16843341/detail.html#-">WSMV Channel 4 News</a> <br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Report Credit:</span><br>Liberty Coalition<br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Response:</span><br>From the online sources cited above:<br><br>FRANKLIN, Tenn.- It now appears a security breach at Williamson County schools was much worse than expected. School officials now say more than 5,000 students may have been affected when a school employee accidently posted their personal information online.<br><br>Now the county could lose some federal funding because of the mistake.<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] Do you really think that this will happen?&nbsp; If we looked deeper into the way the public school systems handle confidential information, half of the school districts would lose funding.&nbsp; Williamson County is in good company across the country.</span><br style="font-style: italic;"><br>The school district had to notify the Department of Education because this was a federal violation.<br><br>Director of Schools, Rebecca Sharber is taking on the responsibility of fixing the problem.<br><br>"I'm the head of the school system. I'm accountable," said Sharber.<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] What a fantastic statement.&nbsp; Corporate CEOs, non-profit executive directors, etc. ARE ultimately responsible for the protection of information.&nbsp; Ms. Sharber just earned my respect.</span><br style="font-style: italic;"><br>"It certainly is distressing to me that information was ever out there," said Sharber.<br><br>According to school officials, former assessment specialist, Chris Nugent is responsible for the computer mix-up.<br><br>He resigned Friday.<br><br>"Mr. Nugent has resigned his position as Assessment Specialist, effective immediately."<br><br>It was August last year when Nugent mistakenly loaded the info on a personal web page, but he never alerted the district.<br><br>They only found out a couple of weeks ago.<br><br>"A principal who had been contacted by a parent brought this to our attention on June 26th."<br><br>"The information given to us indicated that our assessment specialist, Chris Nugent, was involved. This was the first we had heard of this situation."<br><br>"We began our investigation immediately asking Mr. Nugent to gather all data that could possibly be associated with this situation."<br><br>"We thought at that time he would be able to supply the names of students possibly involved in the most timely manner."<br><br>"When Mr. Nugent was unable to get that information for us, our attorney Jason Golden contacted the Liberty Coalition, the organization that had posted the Internet report presented to us by the principal."<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] The Liberty Coalition posted the information surrounding the breach in October, 2007, many months before the victims were ever made aware.</span><br style="font-style: italic;"><br>"Yesterday afternoon, the Liberty Coalition was able to provide the names of the students affected."<br><br>"Our investigation indicates that the student information was posted on a private website created by Mr. Nugent sometime during the month of August, 2007."<br><br>"On August 28, 2007, the Liberty Coalition notified Mr. Nugent that private student information was on his web site."<br><br>"On August 29, 2007, the web site was shut down."<br><br>"Mr. Nugent did not notify school authorities."<br><br>"Our investigation has established that Mr. Nugent had confidential student files on the same thumb-drive with his personal files."<br><br>"We believe that when Mr. Nugent uploaded his personal files to a web site he created, he inadvertently uploaded our student files."<br><br>Sharber said the first step will be to look at revising policies on student information.<br><br>They will also pay for fraud alerts for the students.<br><br>It could cost the district hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for those fraud alerts.<br><br>"I would say to other school districts they need to really, really check their policies and procedures on how student data is being used," said Sharber.<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] Again, did I mention that I respect Ms. Sharber?&nbsp; This statement is very good advice.</span><br><br>More than 5,000 students had their security information posted.<br><br>Most of those are high school students who took the ACT in the 2006-2007 school year, and second graders who took the TCAP the same year.<br><br>"We have learned that most students who took the second grade TCAP achievement test and most students who took the ACT test during the 2006-07 school year had social security numbers on a private website during August of 2007."<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] Is there some kind of legal requirement that states that a Social Security number must be tied to test scores, or was this just poor judgment?&nbsp; Are/were Social Security numbers used as student IDs at the district?</span><br style="font-style: italic;"><br>"Our review of the records shows that 3,052 ACT students and 2,117 students who took the second grade test were affected."<br><br>The information was on the internet for about a month.<br><br>"I want to thank the parents of Williamson County Schools for their patience and understanding and the positive suggestions they have shared as we have conducted our investigation and gone public with this information.", said Sharber<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] The Liberty Coalition went public with </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="https://www.ssnbreach.org/release.php?g=13">this breach</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> in October, 2007.&nbsp; I appreciate the motives of the Liberty Coalition, but I am not pleased with the way they report breaches.&nbsp; I'll elaborate below in the commentary section.</span><br style="font-style: italic;"><br>"I understand the anxiety that our parents are experiencing.", said Sharber<br><br>"On Monday, we will be calling all parents of students whose social security numbers were exposed to let them know their child was affected, and we will follow up that phone call with a letter."<br><br>"We are working to locate a security company, and at our expense, we will cover the cost of fraud protection for the students affected."<br><span style="font-style: italic;">[Evan] I hope that the school locates a good "security company".&nbsp; Of course </span><a style="font-style: italic;" href="http://www.frsecure.com">FRSecure</a><span style="font-style: italic;"> would be glad to help.&nbsp; I promise to keep the plugs to a minimum <img src="http://breachblog.com/emoticons/smile.png" border="0" />.</span><br style="font-style: italic;"><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Commentary:</span><br>OK.&nbsp; We all know that a breach affecting kids is especially bad.&nbsp; We all know that we are all human and all humans make mistakes.&nbsp; I presume that there are a number of risky information security behaviors at Williamson County Schools.&nbsp; This risky behavior just so happened to expose personal information online.&nbsp; What other risky behaviors will be addressed at the school district?<br><br>Now about the Liberty Coalition's role.&nbsp; I appreciate the motives of Aaron Titus and the Liberty Coalition.&nbsp; He maintains the SSNBreach.org web site where he publicizes information security breaches that his organization finds (or is informed about).&nbsp; My attention was first drawn to Aaron Titus in August 2007, when he reported the <a href="https://www.ssnbreach.org/release.php?g=1">Louisiana Board of Regents breach</a> affecting ~200,000 people.&nbsp; What drew my attention to his report was not the breach itself, but the way in which it he proceeded to report it.&nbsp; Lyger at Attrition.org covers it well <a href="http://attrition.org/security/rant/z/privacy.html">here</a>.<br><br>In this case, the Liberty Coalition publicly posted this breach in October, 2007 which is more than 9 months before the victims were ever made aware!&nbsp; According to the Liberty Coalition press release; "We updated this press release after becoming aware of Mr. Nugent's relationship with the school district. The Liberty Coalition also worked directly with district officials to help them notify the affected individuals."&nbsp; It would have been nice if the victims were notified prior to a public press release.&nbsp; I wonder why Mr. Nugent's relationship with the school district wasn't known earlier.&nbsp; I don't have the details that the Liberty Coalition does surrounding this breach, so I can only speculate.<br><br>The fact that some breaches are reported on SSNBreach.org prior to notification (in this case nine months), I chose to generally not report them here at The Breach Blog. <br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;">Past Breaches:</span><br>Unknown<br></font><br>
<script src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/%7Es/breachblog?i=http://breachblog.com/2008/07/12/wcs.aspx" type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"></script>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 20:12:01 +0000</pubDate>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/school">school</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/school students">school students</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/schools">schools</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/williamson county schools">williamson county schools</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/williamson county">williamson county</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/county">county</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/breach">breach</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/school authorities">school authorities</category>
      <category domain="http://securityratty.com/tag/school district">school district</category>
      <source url="http://breachblog.com/2008/07/12/wcs.aspx">Williamson County Schools learns of breach reported nine months ago</source>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
