Skip to main content

“We keep logs as far back, as long as we have had software to keep logs.”

If I’m reading this right, Symantec had a breech in 2006 but didn’t think that the breech was significant. After learning that older versions or their source code was stolen, they re-analyzed the 2006 event from 6 year old logs (!) and determined that the source was stolen during that incident.

The interesting bits:

Nobody that was involved at the 2006 breech is still at the company, but the logs still existed and were sufficiently detailed to reconstruct the event. That’s really impressive.

Presumably whomever stole the source could have been busy writing bots that were undetected by Symantec AV. I don’t know that to be the case, but it certainly is possible. Owning the source code for an AV product would certainly be a competitive advantage for a bot-maker.

Symantec’s advice to shut off pcAnywhere is interesting. I’s not the usual advice you get from companies with exploitable software. Oracle has never asked us to shut off their unbreakable databases.

It’s broken, shut it off.

Comments

  1. Imagine the apocalypse if Oracle ever asked us to shut off their database. I think there's an unspoken (and unexamined) consensus among Oracle, its customers and the vendors that ship Oracle that no bug is that bad.

    Meanwhile I didn't even know that anybody used PC Anywhere anymore.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cargo Cult System Administration

“imitate the superficial exterior of a process or system without having any understanding of the underlying substance” --Wikipedia During and after WWII, some native south pacific islanders erroneously associated the presence of war related technology with the delivery of highly desirable cargo. When the war ended and the cargo stopped showing up, they built crude facsimiles of runways, control towers, and airplanes in the belief that the presence of war technology caused the delivery of desirable cargo. From our point of view, it looks pretty amusing to see people build fake airplanes, runways and control towers  and wait for cargo to fall from the sky.The question is, how amusing are we?We have cargo cult science[1], cargo cult management[2], cargo cult programming[3], how about cargo cult system management?Here’s some common system administration failures that might be ‘cargo cult’:Failing to understand the difference between necessary and sufficient. A daily backup is necessary, b…

Ad-Hoc Verses Structured System Management

Structured system management is a concept that covers the fundamentals of building, securing, deploying, monitoring, logging, alerting, and documenting networks, servers and applications. Structured system management implies that you have those fundamentals in place, you execute them consistently, and you know all cases where you are inconsistent. The converse of structured system management is what I call ad hoc system management, where every system has it own plan, undocumented and inconsistent, and you don't know how inconsistent they are, because you've never looked.

In previous posts (here and here) I implied that structured system management was an integral part of improving system availability. Having inherited several platforms that had, at best, ad hoc system management, and having moved the platforms to something resembling structured system management, I've concluded that implementing basic structure around system management will be the best and fastest path to …

The Cloud – Provider Failure Modes

In The Cloud - Outsourcing Moved up the Stack[1] I compared the outsourcing that we do routinely (wide area networks) with the outsourcing of the higher layers of the application stack (processor, memory, storage). Conceptually they are similar:
In both cases you’ve entrusted your bits to someone else, you’ve shared physical and logical resources with others, you’ve disassociated physical devices (circuits or servers) from logical devices (virtual circuits, virtual severs), and in exchange for what is hopefully better, faster, cheaper service, you give up visibility, manageability and control to a provider. There are differences though. In the case of networking, your cloud provider is only entrusted with your bits for the time it takes for those bits to cross the providers network, and the loss of a few bits is not catastrophic. For providers of higher layer services, the bits are entrusted to the provider for the life of the bits, and the loss of a few bits is a major problem. The…