<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>An Information Security Place &#187; Chris Hoff</title>
	<atom:link href="http://infosecplace.com/blog/category/chris-hoff/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://infosecplace.com/blog</link>
	<description>Commentary on the State of Information Security</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Jun 2010 11:19:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>You can take take the &quot;A&quot; out of security, but you can&#8217;t take&#8230;wait&#8230; what?</title>
		<link>http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/02/you-can-take-take-the-a-out-of-security-but-you-cant-takewait-what/</link>
		<comments>http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/02/you-can-take-take-the-a-out-of-security-but-you-cant-takewait-what/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 02 Feb 2008 20:08:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Farnum</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[CIA Triad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Hoff]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dr. Anton Chuvakin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kurt Wismer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rant]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/02/you-can-take-take-the-a-out-of-security-but-you-cant-takewait-what/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Since I haven&#8217;t been doing a lot of serious posting for a while, it has been a while since I had an altercation with The Hoff on anything.&#160; But now it is in full swing, and I have to say that I have missed this a lot!
So here&#8217;s the deal for those of you just [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Since I haven&#8217;t been doing a lot of serious posting for a while, it has been a while since I had an altercation with The Hoff on anything.&nbsp; But now it is in full swing, and I have to say that I have missed this a lot!</p>
<p>So here&#8217;s the deal for those of you just joining the program.&nbsp; There was <a href="http://www.itpro.co.uk/news/161385/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern.html" target="_blank">an article</a> posted a couple of days ago that said business people were becoming more concerned with availability than security.&nbsp; I expressed my incredulity <a href="http://www.itpro.co.uk/news/161385/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern.html" target="_blank">here</a> with a very simple and direct question.&nbsp; I got a <a href="http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/01/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern/#comment-21584" target="_blank">quick verification of my point</a> by Mr. Wismer, and I felt I had done my duty in protecting the CIA Triad once again.&nbsp; I think the first time I posted about this was back in <a href="http://blogs.computerworld.com/node/5205" target="_blank">March of 2007</a>, when OpenBSD people were discounting a buffer overflow vulnerability in their code as NOT a security issue.&nbsp; This simply befuddled me because availability, in my old world, is an inseparable part of security (And Chris, it does mean what I think it means &#8211; &#8220;old&#8221; doesn&#8217;t mean we are old, maybe just conservative).&nbsp; I wrote this off to some people trying to get away with skewing statistics so they looked better on the security reports at the end of the year. </p>
<p>Of course, I could not have been more wrong in thinking that my day of heroic pursuits was done.&nbsp; First, I got the scalpel from Dr. Chuvakin (I know, I know&#8230; he&#8217;s not that kind of doctor &#8211; but it sounded cool.&nbsp; And seriously&#8230; PHYSICS??).&nbsp; Then I <a href="http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/01/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern/#comment-21590" target="_blank">got drop-kicked by The Hoff</a> on my blind side (which, incidentally, is the direction from which Chris always hits &#8211; not complaining at all, he just seriously has a really cool mind that makes him have wonderfully refreshing lines of thought).</p>
<p>So I saw all of this, weighed responding against how much work I had to do so I could have family night with the wife and kids, and I decided to work.&nbsp; So by the time I got around to hitting back, I really didn&#8217;t feel like arguing too much.&nbsp; But I did a little bit, and that quick quote can be found <a href="http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/01/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern/#comment-21591" target="_blank">here</a>. <a href="http://rationalsecurity.typepad.com/blog/2008/02/omg-availabilit.html" target="_blank">Chris responded</a> and called me a redneck. <img src='http://infosecplace.com/blog/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> &nbsp; Mr. Wismer <a href="http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/01/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern/#comment-21593" target="_blank">entered the fray again</a>. Chris <a href="http://rationalsecurity.typepad.com/blog/2008/02/omg-availabilit.html" target="_blank">posted about it</a> so it would have better visibility.&nbsp; Anton presumably has better things to do (I don&#8217;t blame him at all).&nbsp; And one more <a href="http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/01/availability-overtakes-security-as-it-concern/#comment-21602" target="_blank">comment by Chris</a>, and here we are&#8230; sheesh&#8230;</p>
<p>OK, now that you are all caught up and have read all of the comments and posts with serious interest, here&#8217;s my response&#8230; What were we talking about?&nbsp; Oh yeah, information security&#8230;</p>
<p>So I thought originally that Hoff missed my point on the first comment he made.&nbsp; He seemed to think that I thought the &#8220;C&#8221; and the &#8220;I&#8221; should come before the &#8220;A&#8221;, just like all us old dogs with allergies.&nbsp; Of course, that is not what I meant at all.&nbsp; I was actually arguing that people keep taking the &#8220;A&#8221; out of information security (search for CIA Triad on your favorite search engine).&nbsp; So now this article pops up, and I really got a little peeved.&nbsp; </p>
<p>Now, as to Anton&#8217;s point, this article was from more of a business centered IT magazine.&nbsp; So I get it from that angle.&nbsp; Chris even argues from that angle as well.&nbsp; But still, Chris&#8217; first take on my argument was not correct, and I felt that I needed to clarify that.&nbsp; I think in some weird way, we were actually agreeing.</p>
<p>But my overall point in all of this is that I think the definition of information security has been skewed as security has been more and more commoditized.&nbsp; And I don&#8217;t necessarily disagree with the skewing because I think the definition has actually become almost all-encompassing and has removed a lot of stovepipes that needed to go away.&nbsp; EVERYONE touches security now.&nbsp; From the switch guy to the server gal to the router dude to the firewall chick.&nbsp; Sure, the &#8220;security&#8221; group may tell those people what buttons to push, but the &#8220;on-the-front-lines&#8221; people still push the buttons.&nbsp; </p>
<p>In the same way, there really is no pure security solution out there now.&nbsp; Too many products serve duel purposes.&nbsp; Almost every product, whether it be an application or an appliance, has security built in.&nbsp; It may be nothing but a marketing gimmick so the word &#8220;secure&#8221; can be placed on the website, but no one disagrees that it is there.&nbsp; Take for instance the switch.&nbsp; Not too many years ago, switches did nothing but push packets.&nbsp; Now they are becoming an integral part of security through 802.1x and other NAC functions.&nbsp; Take the firewall and router.&nbsp; Those two products, at least for the SMB, are becoming a single product.</p>
<p>And because of that, many companies consult on IT practices as well as security practices because you really can&#8217;t separate the two anymore.&nbsp; IT frameworks build in security now (ITIL and COBIT).&nbsp; Chris says risk management encompasses security, and I see his point.&nbsp; But my take is that security is the whole, and ALL the other areas are pieces.&nbsp; Yes, people still code and expect the network to protect the code, but that is becoming less common.&nbsp; I see it everyday just as you do Chris.&nbsp; I see people getting pwned due to application vulnerability.&nbsp; Just ask <a href="http://www.whitehatsec.com/home/index.html" target="_blank">Jeremiah Grossman</a> and my friend David Nester from HP who is now posting on this blog.</p>
<p>Security has to be thought of almost before anything else.&nbsp; Have an idea that is going to revolutionize the IT world?&nbsp; My first question is, &#8220;How do you secure it?&#8221;&nbsp; And that means, &#8220;How do you make sure it is available while at the same time making sure everyone&#8217;s data doesn&#8217;t get leaked?&#8221;</p>
<p>Vet</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://infosecplace.com/blog/2008/02/02/you-can-take-take-the-a-out-of-security-but-you-cant-takewait-what/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
