|
![]() |
Note: This is an historic document. We are no longer maintaining the content, but it may have value for research purposes. Pages linked to from the document may no longer be available. Cyber Security - Growing Risk from Growing VulnerabilityTestimony of Richard D. Pethia, Director, CERT® CentersSoftware Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213
Before the
House Select Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Science, and Research and Development
Hearing on
Overview of the Cyber Problem - A Nation Dependent and Dealing with Risk June 25, 2003 Contents:
IntroductionMr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee: My name is Rich Pethia. I am the director of the CERT® Centers, part of the Software Engineering Institute, a federally funded research and development center operated by Carnegie Mellon University. We have 14 years of experience with computer and network security. The CERT Coordination Center (CERT/CC) was established in 1988, after an Internet "worm" became the first Internet security incident to make headline news, acting as a wake-up call for network security. In response, the CERT/CC was established at the SEI. The center was activated in just two weeks, and we have worked hard to maintain our ability to react quickly. The CERT/CC staff has handled well over 200,000 incidents and cataloged more than 8,000 computer vulnerabilities.Thank you for the opportunity to testify on cyber security problem. Today I will discuss the vulnerability of information technology on the Internet and steps I believe we must take to better protect our critical systems from future attacks. The current state of Internet security is cause for concern. Vulnerabilities associated with the Internet put users at risk. Security measures that were appropriate for mainframe computers and small, well-defined networks inside an organization are not effective for the Internet, a complex, dynamic world of interconnected networks with no clear boundaries and no central control. Security issues are often not well understood and are rarely given high priority by many software developers, vendors, network managers, or consumers. Government, commercial, and educational organizations depend on computers to such an extent that day-to-day operations are significantly hindered when the computers are "down." Currently many of the day-to-day operations depend upon connections to the Internet, and new connections are continuously being made to the Internet. Use of the Internet enhances the ability of organizations to conduct their activities in a cost-effective and efficient way. However, along with increased capability and dependence comes increased vulnerability. It is easy to exploit the many security holes in the Internet and in the software commonly used in conjunction with it; and it is easy to disguise or hide the true origin and identity of the people doing the exploiting. Moreover, the Internet is easily accessible to anyone with a computer and a network connection. Individuals and organizations worldwide can reach any point on the network without regard to national or geographic boundaries. Computers have become such an integral part of American business and government that computer-related risks cannot be separated from general business, health, and privacy risks. Valuable government and business assets are now at risk over the Internet. For example, customer and personnel information may be exposed to intruders. Financial data, intellectual property, and strategic plans may be at risk. The widespread use of databases leaves the privacy of individuals at risk. Increased use of computers in safety-critical applications, including the storage and processing of medical records data, increases the chance that accidents or attacks on computer systems can cost people their lives. Techniques that have worked in the past for securing isolated systems are not effective in the world of unbounded networks, mobile computing, distributed applications, and dynamic computing that we live in today. Today there is rapid movement toward increased use of interconnected networks for a broad range of activities, including commerce, education, entertainment, operation of government, and supporting the delivery of health and other human services. Although this trend promises many benefits, it also poses many risks. In short, interconnections are rapidly increasing and opportunities to exploit vulnerabilities in the interconnected systems are increasing as well. Key Factors in the Current State of Internet SecurityThe current state of Internet security is the result of many factors. A change in any one of these can change the level of Internet security and survivability.
Categories of vulnerabilitiesProtecting any complex system (hardware, software, people, and physical plant) and insuring its successful operation in the face of attacks, accidents and failures is a difficult task. Vulnerabilities (weaknesses that can be exploited to compromise the operation of the system) can creep into the system in a variety of areas. Deciding which vulnerabilities really matter and effectively dealing with them, are key steps in an organization's risk management process.For discussion, it is useful to separate sources of vulnerability into two major categories: weaknesses in the information technology (IT) products as supplied by the vendor(s); and weakness in the ways organizations manage and use the technology.
IT Product Vulnerabilities Some of these vulnerabilities are deep-seated and difficult to correct because they are the result of architecture and design decisions that were made early in the product's development cycle (e.g. operating system architectures that allow the unconstrained execution of application software and thereby allow the easy propagation of viruses). In these cases, the vulnerabilities can only be removed by changing the basic architecture of the product. These types of fundamental changes often have consequences that affect other aspects of the product's operation. In some cases these side effects will cause applications that inter-operate with the product to "break" (i.e. the new version of the product is no longer compatible with earlier versions and users may need to rewrite their applications). These types of vulnerability are typically long-lived and product users must find some other way to protect themselves from attacks that attempt to exploit the vulnerability (e.g. invest in anti-virus software in order to detect and remove viruses before they operate on the vulnerable system). Other vulnerabilities are easier to correct since they are the result of low-level design decisions or implementation errors (bugs in the programs). It is often that case that these types of vulnerability, once discovered, can quickly be corrected by the vendor and the corrections (oftentimes called "patches") made available to the customers. However, even though the corrections may be available quickly, it is not always the case that they can be deployed quickly. System operators need to insure that the corrections do not have unintended side-effects on their systems and typically test the corrections before deployment. Also, in the case of a widely used product, system operators must often update the software used in thousands of computers to deploy the correction. This in itself is a labor intensive and time consuming task. In either case, IT product vulnerabilities are often long-lived with many Internet connected systems vulnerable to a particular form of attack many months after vendors produce corrections to the vulnerability that was exploited by the attack. Weaknesses in Management and Operational Practice The second major category of vulnerability includes weaknesses in the management and operational practices of system operators. Factors that lead to weaknesses in operational practices include things like:
Weaknesses in any of these areas open the doors for attackers and give them opportunities to take advantage of the weaknesses to achieve their goals. Managing the risk associated with this category of vulnerability requires that organizations dedicate resources to the risk management task. Operations must be continuously assessed and corrective actions taken when needed. Recommended ActionsWorking our way out of the vulnerable position we are in requires a multi-pronged approach that helps us deal with the escalating near-term problem while at the same time building stronger foundations for the future. The work that must be done includes achieving these changes:
Higher quality products: In today's Internet environment, a security approach based on "user beware" is unacceptable. The systems are too complex and the attacks happen too fast for this approach to work. Fortunately, good software engineering practices can dramatically improve our ability to withstand attacks. The solutions required are a combination of the following:
To encourage product vendors to produce the needed higher quality products, we encourage the government to use its buying power to demand higher quality software. The government should consider upgrading its contracting processes to include "code integrity" clauses, clauses that hold vendors more accountable for defects in released products. Included here as well are upgraded acquisition processes that place more emphasis on the security characteristics of systems being acquired. In addition, to support these new processes, training programs for acquisition professionals should be developed that provide training not only in current government security regulations and policies, but also in the fundamentals of security concepts and architectures. This type of skill building is needed in order to ensure that the government is acquiring systems that meet the spirit, as well as the letter, of the regulations. Wider adoption of security practices: With our growing dependence on information networks and with the rapid changes in network technology and threats, it is critical that more organizations, large and small, adopt the use of effective information security risk assessments, management policies, and practices. While there is often discussion and debate over which particular body of practices might be in some way "best," it is clear that descriptions of effective practices and policy templates are widely available from both government and private sources such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the National Security Agency, and other agencies. What is often missing today is management commitment: senior management's visible endorsement of security improvement efforts and the provision of the resources needed to implement the required improvements. Expanded research in information assurance: It is critical to maintain a long-term view and invest in research toward systems and operational techniques that yield networks capable of surviving attacks while protecting sensitive data. In doing so, it is essential to seek fundamental technological solutions and to seek proactive, preventive approaches, not just reactive, curative approaches. Thus, the research agenda should seek new approaches to system security. These approaches should include design and implementation strategies, recovery tactics, strategies to resist attacks, survivability trade-off analysis, and the development of security architectures. Among the activities should be the creation of
In this research program, special emphasis should be placed on the overlap between the cyber world and the physical world, and the analysis techniques developed should help policy and decision makers understand the physical impact and disruption of cyber attacks alone or of cyber attacks launched to amplify the impact of concurrent physical attacks. More technical specialists: Government identification and support of cyber-security centers of excellence and the provision of scholarships that support students working on degrees in these universities are steps in the right direction. The current levels of support, however, are far short of what is required to produce the technical specialists we need to secure our systems and networks. These programs should be expanded over the next five years to build the university infrastructure we will need for the long-term development of trained security professionals. More awareness and training for Internet users: The combination of easy access and user-friendly interfaces have drawn users of all ages and from all walks of life to the Internet. As a result, many Internet users have little understanding of Internet technology or the security practices they should adopt. To encourage "safe computing," there are steps we believe the government could take:
ConclusionInterconnections across and among cyber and physical systems are increasing. Our dependence on these interconnected systems is also rapidly increasing, and even short-term disruptions can have major consequences. Cyber attacks are cheap, easy to launch, difficult to trace, and hard to prosecute. Cyber attackers are using the connectivity to exploit widespread vulnerabilities in systems to conduct criminal activities, compromise information, and launch denial-of-service attacks that seriously disrupt legitimate operations.
Reported attacks against Internet systems are almost doubling each year and attack technology will evolve to support attacks that are even more virulent and damaging. Our current solutions are not keeping pace with the increased strength and speed of attacks, and our information infrastructures are at risk. Solutions are not simple, but must be pursued aggressively to allow us to keep our information infrastructures operating at acceptable levels of risk. However, we can make significant progress by making changes in software design and development practices, increasing the number of trained system managers and administrators, improving the knowledge level of users, and increasing research into secure and survivable systems. Additional government support for research, development, and education in computer and network security would have a positive effect on the overall security of the Internet.
CERT and CERT Coordination Center are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Copyright 2003 Carnegie Mellon University. Disclaimers and copyright information. Last updated July 16, 2003. |






