Hey everybody, go check out my first post on Norse’s DarkMatters blog — yeah, you know, Norse with the awesome Live Cyber Attack Map!
Now that you’re mesmerized by the map, here’s the post and please share it! Sony Hack: Where Do We Die First?
You really need to hear this podcast where we draw lines in the sand staking out what is — and what is not — security research.
The #DtR Gang [Rafal Los (@Wh1t3Rabbit), James Jardine (@JardineSoftware), and Michael Santarcangelo (@Catalyst)] invited me to tag along for another episode of the Down the Security Rabbit Hole podcast.
Let us know what you think by tagging your comments with #DtR on Twitter!
I had the pleasure of joining the DtR Gang for another podcast on Down the Security Rabbit Hole and, as usual with this bunch, it was more fun than anything — but I learned a lot as well. Let me just tell you, these guys are the best around at what they do and they’re really great people on top of that!
This episode had the usual suspects of Rafal Los (@Wh1t3Rabbit), James Jardine (@JardineSoftware), and Michael Santarcangelo (@Catalyst), though James was riding passenger in a car and could only participate through IM. Also joining as a guest along with me was was Philip Beyer (@pjbeyer).
Thank you Raf, James, Michael and Phil — this was a lot of fun!
There is nothing new about cyber attacks coming from Russia, however, to actually be able to tie them to Russian government officials — albeit loosely — would be another step. Is this a hunch or do they have something more?
The huge cyberattack on JPMorgan Chase that touched more than 83 million households and businesses was one of the most serious computer intrusions into an American corporation. But it could have been much worse.
Questions over who the hackers are and the approach of their attack concern government and industry officials. Also troubling is that about nine other financial institutions — a number that has not been previously reported — were also infiltrated by the same group of overseas hackers, according to people briefed on the matter. The hackers are thought to be operating from Russia and appear to have at least loose connections with officials of the Russian government, the people briefed on the matter said.
Today I had a blast doing a podcast on the CFAA, Shellshock, and cyber security research with Rafal Los (@Wh1t3Rabbit), James Jardine (@JardineSoftware), and Michael Santarcangelo (@Catalyst) — in fact, we had so much fun that I suspect Raf had quite a time trying to edit it!
As I mentioned on the show, when I first saw Robert’s article, I viewed it with skepticism. However, after actually reading it (yeah, I know — makes sense, right?), I found the article to be very well written, sound on the principles and issues of the CFAA — in my view, Robert did a great job of framing some key issues in the debate that definitely needs to happen.
From the article, our discussion expanded to a general discussion of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, its confusion as to application to “security research,” and whether it is even possible for Congress to “fix” the CFAA.
I do not think Congress is able to “fix” the CFAA right now for many reasons. However, I believe we pointed out some additional issues that must be taken into consideration during the public debate in determining what we as a society really value and want on these issues. Until “we the people” can figure that out, I see no way for Congress to “fix” this law which means the Common Law method is what we are left with.
Anyway, this post is just skimming the surface — Raf turned this into a really nice podcast so check it out: Down the Security Rabbithole.
Thank you Raf, James and Michael — this was a lot of fun!
In a factually interesting case that offers a great read on attorney professionalism, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has confirmed that the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), 18 USC § 1030, does not require taking actions to prevent others from hacking into websites — even when the allegation is being made of internet service providers (ISP) that allegedly failed to take actions to prevent the hacking of their users websites.
In Lightspeed Media Corp. v. Smith, 761 F.3d 699 (7th Cir. 2014), the court addressed an appeal brought after the district court granted a motion to dismiss all claims, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act claim, which the court said was frivolous:
Lightspeed’s suit against the ISPs was premised on the notion that because the ISPs challenged appellants’ subpoena of the personally identifiable information of Smith’s 6,600 “co-conspirators,” they somehow became part of a purported plot to steal Lightspeed’s content. If there was any conceivable merit in that theory, then perhaps fees would have been inappropriate. But there was not.
Count I alleged that the ISPs violated the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030 and 1030(g), by failing to prevent hacking. The only alleged assistance to hackers, however, was the challenge to the subpoena. As expansive as the CFAA is, see Orin S. Kerr, Vagueness Challenges to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 94 MINN. L. REV. 1561, 1563-65 (2010), this is a frivolous charge.
The Plaintiff’s original allegations are set forth below:
(link to Lightspeed’s full First Amended Complaint)
For all of the criticism of the expansiveness and unpredictability of the CFAA, and much of it is well deserved, we can now be confident that it does not impose a duty to take steps to prevent the hacking of others — and thank God!
SEE BELOW FOR EVENT REGISTRATION!
This puts leaders in a difficult position. It is almost a statistical certainty that every company will suffer a data breach sooner rather than later. Does that mean that most C-Levels and Directors are on the verge of losing their positions because of a data breach? Does it mean that their careers and future are now out of their control?
No, it does not have to mean either of those things. There are steps leaders can take to help minimize the risk of these things happening, both to themselves and their companies.
Because statistics show that virtually all companies will eventually suffer some form of data breach, the standard by which their leadership is judged is not whether their company did or did not suffer a data breach. That is now a given.
Rather, the standard is whether, prior to a breach, the company had taken reasonable steps to protect its systems and data and whether it made appropriate plans to respond and mitigate the effects of such a breach.
Because the risk is foreseeable, the question is one of preparation. That is, did the leaders act reasonable in preparing their companies now that they are aware of the risks their companies face. If they did, they have much better odds. If they did not, they will be judged harshly.
How can leaders help prepare their companies for these challenges?
To prepare their companies, the C-Suite must show leadership on this issue by setting a tone for the company and establishing a culture of compliance when it comes to cyber security. This must come from the top down. There are three steps that leadership can take that will help create that culture:
The starting point for members of the C-Suite and Boardroom is to gain a better appreciation and understanding of the risks their companies face. There is a great opportunity for them to do this by attending an upcoming seminar sponsored by the North Texas Crime Commission.
The seminar, Strengthening the Weak Link: Cyber Security Essentials for the C-Suite, will be held at the George W. Bush Institute at Southern Methodist University on October 16, 2014.
The keynote speaker will be Tom Ridge, former Secretary of Homeland Security. There are several other notable speakers who will be sharing their knowledge of these risks, including members of the cyber units of the FBI, Secret Service, United States Department of Justice, and many others.