What's new arround internet
| Src | Date (GMT) | Titre | Description | Tags | Stories | Notes |
 |
2022-05-18 15:41:53 | Hacking the Microsoft Sculpt keyboard (lien direct) |  In its infinite wisdom, Microsoft designed data encryption into the Sculpt wireless keyboard set to protect against wireless eavesdropping and other attacks. The keyboard allegedly* uses AES for symmetric encryption with a secret key burnt into the chips in the keyboard's very low power radio transmitter and the matching USB dongle receiver during manufacture: they are permanently paired together. The matching Sculpt mouse and Sculpt numeric keypad use the same dongle and both are presumably keyed and paired in the same way as the keyboard.This design is more secure but less convenient than, say, Bluetooth pairing. The risk of hackers intercepting and successfully decoding my keypresses wirelessly is effectively zero. Nice! Unfortunately, the keyboard, keypad and mouse are all utterly dependent on the corresponding USB dongle, creating an availability issue. Being RF-based, RF jamming would be another availability threat. Furthermore, I'm still vulnerable to upstream and downstream hacking - upstream meaning someone coercing or fooling me into particular activities such as typing-in specific character sequences (perhaps cribs for cryptanalysis), and downstream including phishers, keyloggers and other malware with access to the decrypted key codes etc.So yesterday, after many, many happy hours of use, my Sculpt's unreliable Ctrl key and worn-out wrist rest finally got to me. I found another good-as-new Sculpt keyboard in the junkpile, but it was missing its critical USB dongle. The solution was to open up both keyboards and swap the coded transmitter from the old to the new keyboard - a simple 20 minute hardware hack.In case I ever need to do it again, or for anyone else in the same situation, here are the detailed instructions:Assemble the tools required: a small cross-head screwdriver; a stainless steel dental pick or small flat-head screwdriver; a plastic spudger or larger flat-head screwdriver (optional); a strong magnet (optional). Start with the old keyboard. Peel off the 5 rubber feet under the keyboard, revealing 5 small screws. Set the feet aside to reapply later.Remove all 5 screws. Note: the 3 screws under the wrist rest are slightly longer than the others, so keep them separate.Carefully ease the wrist rest away from the base. It is a 'snap-fit' piece. I found I could lever it off using my thumbs at the left or right sides, then gradually work around the edge releasing it. You may prefer to use the spudger. It will flex a fair bit but it is surprisingly strong.Under the wrist rest are anot |
Malware Tool | ||
|
2022-04-05 17:31:41 | Infosec control attributes paper completed (lien direct) |  Yesterday, I completed and published the white paper on information security control attributes. Today I drafted a set of comments on ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27's proposed Preliminary Work Item for ISO/IEC 27028, using content from the white paper to build a 'donor document' with fairly minor changes in accordance with ISO's rquired structure and format. It includes the following summary: "This document extends the concept of 'control attributes' introduced in ISO/IEC 27002:2022, discussing a wider variety of factors potentially worth bearing in mind when considering, selecting, designing, using and reviewing information security controls. Control attributes are a powerful and flexible tool for information security management purposes, a novel way to design, manage and improve an organisation's approach to mitigating unacceptable information risks, supplementing more traditional or conventional methods. The document includes pragmatic suggestions on how to make use of control attributes in the business context, with a worked example illustrating the approach." Once the comments are submitted, we must wait patiently to see how much of it (if any!) makes it through to the Working Draft, blended with inputs and comments from other committee members. Although it seems to take 'forever' to develop new standards, I'm hoping that the donor document will set the project off to a flying start.Meanwhile, I'm actively looking for opportunities for clients to start using control attributes as an integral part of their ISO27k information risk and security management activities - designing better, more relevant and meaningful security metrics for instance. If that or any other ideas in the paper catch your imagination, please comment below or email me (Gary@isect.com). I see a lot of potential business value in control attributes: how about you? |
Tool | ||
|
2021-10-14 17:20:00 | Topic-specific policy 3/11: asset management (lien direct) |  This piece is different to the others in this blog series. I'm seizing the opportunity to explain the thinking behind, and the steps involved in researching and drafting, an information security policy through a worked example. This is about the policy development process, more than the asset management policy per se. One reason is that, despite having written numerous policies on other topics in the same general area, we hadn't appreciated the value of an asset management policy, as such, even allowing for the ambiguous title of the example given in the current draft of ISO/IEC 27002:2022. The standard formally but (in my opinion) misleadingly defines asset as 'anything that has value to the organization', with an unhelpful note distinguishing primary from supporting assets. By literal substitution, 'anything that has value to the organization management' is the third example information security policy topic in section 5.1 ... but what does that actually mean?Hmmmm. Isn't it tautologous? Does anything not of value even require management? Is the final word in 'anything that has value to the organization management' a noun or verb i.e. does the policy concern the management of organizational assets, or is it about securing organizational assets that are valuable to its managers; or both, or something else entirely? Well, OK then, perhaps the standard is suggesting a policy on the information security aspects involved in managing information assets, by which I mean both the intangible information content and (as applicable) the physical storage media and processing/communications systems such as hard drives and computer networks?Seeking inspiration, Googling 'information security asset management policy' found me a policy by Sefton Council along those lines: with about 4 full pages of content, it covers security aspects of both the information content and IT systems, more specifically information ownership, valuation and acceptable use:1.2. Policy Statement The purpose of this policy is to achieve and maintain appropriate protection of organisational assets. It does this by ensuring that every information asset has an owner and that the nature and value of each asset is fully understood. It also ensures that the boundaries of acceptable use are clearly defined for anyone that has access to |
Tool Guideline | APT 17 | |
|
2020-09-04 14:26:51 | NBlog Sept 4 - standardising ISMS data interfaces (lien direct) |  We've been chatting on the ISO27k Forum lately about using various IT systems to support ISO27k ISMSs. This morning, in response to someone saying that a particular tool which had been recommended did not work for them, Simon Day made the point that "Each organisation trying to implement an ISMS will find it's own way based on their requirements."Having surveyed the market for ISMS products recently, I followed-up with my usual blurb about organisations having different information risks and business situations, hence their requirements in this area are bound to differ, and in fact vary dynamically (in part because organisations mature as they gain experience with their ISMS: their needs change). The need for flexibility is why the ISO27k standards are so vague (essentially: figure out your own requirements by identifying and evaluating your information risks using the defined governance structure - the ISMS itself), rather than explicitly demanding particular security controls (as happens with PCI-DSS). ISO27k is designed to apply to any organisation. That thought sparked a creative idea that I've been contemplating ever since: wouldn't it be wonderful if there was a standard for the data formats allowing us to migrate easily between IT systems supporting ISO27k ISMSs?I'm idly thinking about a standard file format with which to specify information risks (threats, vulnerabilities, impacts and probabilities), controls, policies, procedures, metrics, objectives etc. - maybe an XML schema with specified field names and (where applicable) enumerated lists of values.Aside from migrating between ISMS IT support systems and services, standard data formats would facilitate data sharing between application systems, services or sub-functions (e.g. for vulnerability management, incident management and information risk management), and between departments or even organisations (e.g. insurance companies, auditors and advisors and their clients and partners).Perhaps we should develop an outline specification and propose such a standard to ISO/IEC JTC1 SC 27. A New W |
Tool Vulnerability | ||
|
2020-02-22 15:11:12 | NBlog Feb 22 - the educator virus (lien direct) |  From time to time, people get all excited about micro-learning, the educational equivalent of eating a chocolate elephant - one bite or byte at a time."It's easy", the line goes. "Simply break down large indigestible topics into lots of smaller edible chunks, spreading them out enticingly for people to snack on whenever they feel peckish."I've tried that with our digital awareness content. For some strange reason, nobody was hungry enough to consume the random assortment of ones and zeroes, hundreds and thousands of bits all over the disk.Evidently it's not quite that easy. Education is never easy, if you want it to work well that is. Micro-, milli- and macro-learning, online learning, traditional classroom-based courses, webinars and seminars, conferences, educational events, rote and experiential learning, on-the-job training and demonstration classes, mentoring and so on are neither simple nor universal solutions. They each have their pros and cons. For one thing, they all just tools in the box. For an educator who happens to be a master craftsman, almost any tool will do, but he has preferences and a range of experience. Likewise for the students: some of us like reading and thinking things through in private, or debating the ins-and-outs at length with colleagues. Others need to be shown stuff, just briefly, or put through an intensive boot camp complete with sadistic 'instructors', hard beds and nasty food. Some appear stubbornly resistant to all known edumacational techniques and do their level best to skip class, and we all have our cognitive issues occasionally.The fact that there is such a variety of techniques suggests that none of them is ideal for all learning situations. The advice to use, say, micro-learning could be taken to mean "use ONLY micro-learning" but that would be a mistake, in just the same way as "send them to college" or "gamify it"! It's well-meaning but naive silver bullet advice.Consider how we learn stuff in general. We take classes, go to night school, take driving or diving or cookery lessons, read-up on stuff, watch You Tube vids, read/listen to/watch/contemplate sage advisors, ask someone ... and generally muddle through by ourselves, learning as we go from our successes and failures. |
Tool | ||
|
2019-12-03 17:12:11 | NBlog Dec 3 - infosec driving principles (lien direct) | In an interview for CIO Dive, Maersk's recently-appointed CISO Andy Powell discussed aligning the organization with these five 'key operating principles': "The first is trust. The client has got to trust us with their data, to trust us to look at their business. So we've got to build trust through the cybersecurity solutions that we put in place. That is absolutely fundamental. So client trust, client buy-in has been fundamental to what we tried to drive as a key message. The second is resilience. Because you've got to have resilient systems because clients won't give you business if you're not resilient ... The third really is around the fact that security is everybody's responsibility. And we push that message really hard across the company … be clear about what you need to do and we train people accordingly. ...The fourth one really is accountability of security and I have pushed accountability for cyber risk to the business. ... And the final piece, and this has been one of the big call outs of my team to everybody, is that security is a benefit, not a burden. The reason I say that is people's perception is that security will slow things down, will get in the way ... the reality is that if you involve security early enough, you can build solutions that actually attract additional clients."Fair enough Andy. I wouldn't particularly quarrel with any of them, but as to whether they would feature in my personal top-five I'm not so sure. Here are five others they'd be competing against, with shipping-related illustrations just for fun:Governance involves structuring, positioning, setting things up and guiding the organization in the right overall direction - determining then plotting the optimal route to the ship's ultimate destination, loading up with the right tools, people and provisions. Corporate governance necessarily involves putting things in place for both protecting and exploiting information, a vital and valuable yet vulnerable business asset;Information is subject to risks that can and probably should be managed proactively, just as a ship's captain doesn't merely accept the inclement weather and various other hazards but, where appropriate, actively mitigates or avoids them, dynamically reacting and adjusting course as things change;Flexibility and responsiveness, along with resilience and ro |
Tool Guideline | NotPetya | |
|
2019-11-19 20:20:14 | NBlog Nov 18 - enough is enough (lien direct) |  Keeping ISO27k Information Security Management Systems tight, constrained within narrow scopes, avoiding unnecessary elaboration, seems an admirable objective. The advantages of ISMS simplicity include having less to design, implement, monitor, manage, maintain, review and audit. There's less to go wrong. The ISMS is more focused, a valuable business tool with a specific purpose rather than a costly overhead. All good. However, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is better to have fewer ISMS documents. In practice, simplifying ISMS documentation generally means combining docs or dispensing with any that are deemed irrelevant. That may not be the best approach for every organization, especially if it goes a step too far.Take information security policies for example. Separate, smaller policy docs are easier to generate and maintain, {re}authorize and {re}circulate individually than a thick monolithic “policy manual”. It's easier for authors, authorisers and recipients to focus on the specific issue/s at hand. That's important from the governance, awareness and compliance perspective. At a basic level, what are the chances of people actually bothering to read the change management/version control/document history info then check out all the individual changes (many of which are relatively insignificant) when yet another updated policy manual update drops into their inbox? In practice, it aint gonna happen, much to the chagrin of QA experts!On the other hand, individual policies are necessarily interlinked, forming a governance mesh: substantial changes in one part can have a ripple effect across the rest, which means someone has the unenviable task of updating and maintaining the entire suite, keeping everything reasonably consistent. Having all the policies in one big document makes maintenance easier for the author/maintainer, but harder for change managers, authorisers and the intended audiences/users. |
Tool |
1
We have: 7 articles.
We have: 7 articles.
To see everything:
Our RSS (filtrered)
