Earlier this week, McAfee published information about a new cyber security threat it dubbed “Operation Shady RAT”. Operation Shady RAT, and others like it that have emerged over the past months, represent a new kind of cyber crime called Advanced Persistent Threats. These threats are a step-up in computer crime: they are massive, they target specific high-value data, and they lie dormant, undetected within computer systems, until remotely activated. These threats target specific high-value data, not just credit cards and customer account data but often records, in the form of email, legal contracts, design schematics, operational plans and images, pertaining to IP and trade secrets,
In the specific case of Shady RAT, spear fishing emails were sent to the target containing links to a web page that when clicked on automatically loaded a malicious remote access tool (RAT) program on the computer, thus gaining access to the network and the high-value information.
The new security threats.
In the “old” days, it was fairly straightforward to imagine boundaries around your business data. Today, it’s fair to say, with the rapid adoption of cloud and mobile computing, and the overall consumerization of IT, traditional boundaries have become fluid and, in most cases, non-existent. In today’s world, hackers have figured out how to target the data when it is most exposed, whether it’s on a corporate server, an iPhone, or in the cloud.
In this new IT world without boundaries the traditional ‘layered’ approach to enterprise data security becomes ineffective. Instead of assuming that data perimeter protection (protecting the networks and data ‘containers’) will keep data safe, we need to assume the bad guys are smart enough to not care about the containers and to instead attack the data. As the continued severity of data breaches show, bad guys are interested in the data itself, whenever it might be, and whenever they decide the time is right to strike.
What do we do in this new world? How do we protect data so that it is locked down and unusable by the bad guys while it is still accessible to those who need to use it for business purposes? While we can’t ignore the old approaches and steps for data protection, such as protecting IT infrastructure and putting in place effective monitoring approaches, we need a new step. Encryption, and not the traditional public key encryption, is the only way to keep sensitive data protected while at the same time keeping it usable.
Secure the data, not the perimeter.
Protecting private and sensitive data in a cloud/mobile world is difficult, expensive and increasingly mandatory to comply with federal and state regulations as well as to protect brand and business reputations. Thus, we need to think about data protection from a data-centric point of view where the data itself is protected. When you start thinking about how to protect your data in a world without boundaries, think about these four things:
We can win.
We can beat the bad guys. We have the technology to stop these new advanced persistent threats. Data-centric protection focuses on encrypting the digital assets, emails, documents, database records, in a way that they remain encrypted wherever they go. If they are stolen, those assets cannot be used, credit cards will not validate, emails will show up garbled and documents will not reveal their contents.
Format Preserving Encryption (FPE/FFX) which is the encryption technology underlying data-centric encryption is being standardized by NIST and is backed by several solution providers Voltage, Verifone and Ingenico. With Shady RAT, data-centric encryption would not have stopped the programs from taking the data, but they would prevent the attackers from using it. Data–centric encryption turns gold into straw, making the data useless.
Matt Pauker is Co-founder of Voltage Security.
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
- A field guide to cloud computing: current trends, future opportunities
- The Structure 50: The Top 50 Cloud Innovators
- Will Standardizing the Cloud Cause Clarity or Confusion?