Voice of the DBA

Tag: security

  • Rogue Software Changes

    Could a group of software developers make changes that fundamentally alter the way a software system should work without management being aware?

    That’s the question being asked of VW right now. Most people are skeptical, but I ran across a piece that wants to lend credence to the idea that a few software engineers acted with few people being aware. They did this, not because they wanted to defraud everyone, but they wanted a solve a problem that they couldn’t do in other ways. They also didn’t see the alteration of test results as much of an issue because they thought the tests were too stringent.

    I’m not sure I believe that’s what happened. Certainly there is some disagreement from various parties, but with my experience in software projects, management always wants to know how things are proceeding, with more and more questions whenever the applications don’t work as expected. When problems are solved, natural human curiosity leads more managers to ask for details, even when they don’t understand. In this case, I can’t imagine lots of VW management weren’t aware that software was being used to pass tests. Many people report to many others, and everyone would have wanted to know how VW solved this engineering problem.

    The stakes for organizations will continue to rise in a global economy, and software will play increasing roles in many companies. Will we see more and more pressure to manipulate our world with software, even in criminal ways? I suspect so, and I sympathize with those that might face the loss of employment for not complying with the requirements they’re given.

    Ultimately I think transparency of software is the best way to bring about better software that complies with regulations and rules. Transparency also ensures that copyrights aren’t violated (since violators code is available), and we can determine if security is being built into systems. Perhaps best of all, developers can all learn from each other, seeing exactly what works and doesn’t in each system.

    I doubt we’ll get there, but transparency would be a nice place to be.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 2.7MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and LibSyn.

  • The Lost Laptop Crisis

    I wrote about the dangers of travel awhile back, where I had concerns about information when crossing the borders of a country. However that’s a case that most of us encounter rarely. However many of us do move information around on a regular basis with our devices, carrying them wherever we go. Each time we change locations, there’s a chance we’ll forget a device, or that one might be stolen from us.

    There is a limited amount of information in our phones and tablets, but in many laptops, we can carry more information, and often do. No shortage of us keep database backups or imports/exports of data for development purposes. Our clients certainly have reports or data in Excel, but often that’s a limited amount of data compared to what some of us might keep on our machines. In thinking about this, I wanted to ask this question:

    What would you do if you lost your laptop?

    I’m talking about the main laptop that you use for work. What’s on it? What’s important? How would you react? Have you even thought about it?

    I have, and I’ve had laptops die, though never stolen. However I have taken some precautions. When I get a new laptop, the first thing I do is enable the whole disk encryption in Windows or OSX. I keep backups of the recovery codes at home and I make sure I’ve taken advantage of strong passwords and other encryption for information I carry. I don’t have passwords saved for any VPN or other secure connections to banks or work.

    It’s not a perfect solution, but it’s a start. Let me know today if you take other precautions.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 2.1MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and LibSyn.

  • Secret Software Security

    This might not be the best title, but I like the alliteration for a the problems we have when governments seek to prevent security researchers from releasing information about software vulnerabilities. This is nothing new, as vendors have tried to prevent this for years, arguing that criminals will exploit the information and target users before a patch can be built. The other side of the argument is that many software companies don’t bother building patches if the issues are kept secret.

    What might be different in this case is that we aren’t talking about database software, devices, or banking websites. Certainly those systems may need secure software, but here we have the US Department of Transportation arguing that security details about automobile software shouldn’t be released. There is some leeway in that potentially limiting details might satisfy the government, but apart from that, how do you feel?

    Many of us use vehicles every day. We might use private cars, but we might use public buses, trains, and airplanes, all of which are making more and more use of software over time. I don’t know, but I suspect, that much of this software is being developed with an eye towards ensuring it works as intended much more than with a view towards how malicious users might take advantage of vulnerabilities. Far too often it seems that we have new systems where control data is allowed to transit the same networks and computing structures as less secure data, with minimal security across the entire system.

    I certainly think that some researchers might not appreciate the dangers of random people experimenting with the issues they disclose, but I also truly believe that the pressures of getting software released overwhelm the concerns and dangers that exist overall. There are no shortage of people with time to spare, abundant computing resources, and substantial intelligence devoted to finding flaws in software. They work at “hacking” the system to change behaviors. While it’s a game to many, there are very real consequences to the world if strong security isn’t built into vehicle software.

    I don’t know that I expect much to change, but I suspect that we will see more and more issues over time, more lawsuits and more highly technical and forensic analysis performed when we a system is attacked. I can only hope that we actually disclose poor security practices so that vendors do learn that their embedded systems need better, and more secure, software engineering practices implemented.

    Steve Jones

    The Voice of the DBA Podcast

    Listen to the MP3 Audio ( 3.1MB) podcast or subscribe to the feed at iTunes and LibSyn.

  • Masking Data

    This editorial was originally published on Mar 7, 2008. It is being re-run as Steve is out of town.

    I saw an interesting thread awhile back where one of our very talented community members was asking about how to go about altering data in an application for a demo. It’s a valid scenario and one that I’m sure many people have run into at some point in their career. You want to show data that’s somewhat real so that it showcases the application and what it can do, but you don’t want to show real names, amounts, or any identifying information.

    A bit of a quandary and it seems that many people solve it in one of three ways. They just use test data, which is a very small set of data and doesn’t show as well. Or they may alter everyone’s name to something like “Steve Jones”, all phone numbers to 555-555-5555, etc., which looks funny.

    Or you just show the production data and wink and say “I don’t usually do this, but since you’re such a valued client…”

    So for the Friday poll: Do You Alter Production Data When It’s Copied?

    Meaning when the data gets moved to a non-production system (demo, test, development, etc.), do you alter the data and obfuscate it to remove any identifying information. Make it “safe” data that can’t be used to somehow compromise your production system.

    It’s a good practice, and one that I used to follow at a couple companies. I didn’t have any tools, but I did write scripts, load a few base tables of names, and then run those scripts as part of the restore job. They would randomly reassign new names to people, companies, addresses, etc. We would also redo phone numbers in sequential orders (555-555-0001, 555-555-0002, etc), and even randomly add products to sales or amounts to financial figures. It wasn’t perfect, and if you worked on the production system a lot you could guess which people were which, but it worked well for testing and client demos.

    I actually ran into a product recently (Camouflage) that does this and it’s a great idea. It’s something that quite a few companies should be implementing to ensure that their non-production systems are that much more secure.

    Steve Jones