Tag Archives: resilience

New – Stop & Resume Workloads on EC2 Spot Instances

Post Syndicated from Jeff Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/new-stop-resume-workloads-on-ec2-spot-instances/

EC2 Spot Instances give you access to spare EC2 compute capacity at up to 90% off of the On-Demand rates. Starting with the ability to request a specific number of instances of a particular size, we made Spot Instances even more useful and flexible with support for Spot Fleets and Auto Scaling Spot Fleets, allowing you to maintain any desired level of compute capacity.

EC2 users have long had the ability to stop running instances while leaving EBS volumes attached, opening the door to applications that automatically pick up where they left off when the instance starts running again.

Stop and Resume Spot Workloads
Today we are blending these two important features, allowing you to set up Spot bids and Spot Fleets that respond by stopping (rather than terminating) instances when capacity is no longer available at or below your bid price. EBS volumes attached to stopped instances remain intact, as does the EBS-backed root volume. When capacity becomes available, the instances are started and can keep on going without having to spend time provisioning applications, setting up EBS volumes, downloading data, joining network domains, and so forth.

Many AWS customers have enhanced their applications to create and make use of checkpoints, adding some resilience and gaining the ability to take advantage of EC2’s start/stop feature in the process. These customers will now be able to run these applications on Spot Instances, with savings that average 70-90%.

While the instances are stopped, you can modify the EBS Optimization, User data, Ramdisk ID, and Delete on Termination attributes. Stopped Spot Instances do not incur any charges for compute time; space for attached EBS volumes is charged at the usual rates.

Here’s how you create a Spot bid or Spot Fleet and specify the use of stop/start:

Things to Know
This feature is available now and you can start using it today in all AWS Regions where Spot Instances are available. It is designed to work well in conjunction with the new per-second billing for EC2 instances and EBS volumes, with the potential for another dimension of cost savings over and above that provided by Spot Instances.

EBS volumes always exist within a particular Availability Zone (AZ). As a result, Spot and Spot Fleet requests that specify a particular AZ will always restart in that AZ.

Take care when using this feature in conjunction with Spot Fleets that have the potential to span a wide variety of instance types. Because the composition of the fleet can change over time, you need to pay attention to your account’s limits for IP addresses and EBS volumes.

I’m looking forward to hearing about the new and creative uses that you’ll come up with for this feature. If you thought that your application was not a good fit for Spot Instances, or if the overhead needed to handle interruptions was too high, it is time to take another look!

Jeff;

 

Prime Day 2017 – Powered by AWS

Post Syndicated from Jeff Barr original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/prime-day-2017-powered-by-aws/

The third annual Prime Day set another round of records for global orders, topping Black Friday and Cyber Monday, making it the biggest day in Amazon retail history. Over the course of the 30 hour event, tens of millions of Prime members purchased things like Echo Dots, Fire tablets, programmable pressure cookers, espresso machines, rechargeable batteries, and much more! July 11th also set a record for the number of new Prime memberships, as people signed up in order to take advantage of hundreds of thousands of deals. Amazon customers shopped online and made heavy use of the Amazon App, with mobile orders more than doubling from last Prime Day.

Powered by AWS
Last year I told you about How AWS Powered Amazon’s Biggest Day Ever, and shared what the team had learned with regard to preparation, automation, monitoring, and thinking big. All of those lessons still apply and you can read that post to learn more. Preparation for this year’s Prime Day (which started just days after Prime Day 2016 wrapped up) started by collecting and sharing best practices and identifying areas for improvement, proceeding to implementation and stress testing as the big day approached. Two of the best practices involve auditing and GameDay:

Auditing – This is a formal way for us to track preparations, identify risks, and to track progress against our objectives. Each team must respond to a series of detailed technical and operational questions that are designed to help them determine their readiness. On the technical side, questions could revolve around time to recovery after a database failure, including the all-important check of the TTL (time to live) for the CNAME. Operational questions address schedules for on-call personnel, points of contact, and ownership of services & instances.

GameDay – This practice (which I believe originated with former Amazonian Jesse Robbins), is intended to validate all of the capacity planning & preparation and to verify that all of the necessary operational practices are in place and work as expected. It introduces simulated failures and helps to train the team to identify and quickly resolve issues, building muscle memory in the process. It also tests failover and recovery capabilities, and can expose latent defects that are lurking under the covers. GameDays help teams to understand scaling drivers (page views, orders, and so forth) and gives them an opportunity to test their scaling practices. To learn more, read Resilience Engineering: Learning to Embrace Failure or watch the video: GameDay: Creating Resiliency Through Destruction.

Prime Day 2017 Metrics
So, how did we do this year?

The AWS teams checked their dashboards and log files, and were happy to share their metrics with me. Here are a few of the most interesting ones:

Block Storage – Use of Amazon Elastic Block Store (EBS) grew by 40% year-over-year, with aggregate data transfer jumping to 52 petabytes (a 50% increase) for the day and total I/O requests rising to 835 million (a 30% increase). The team told me that they loved the elasticity of EBS, and that they were able to ramp down on capacity after Prime Day concluded instead of being stuck with it.

NoSQL Database – Amazon DynamoDB requests from Alexa, the Amazon.com sites, and the Amazon fulfillment centers totaled 3.34 trillion, peaking at 12.9 million per second. According to the team, the extreme scale, consistent performance, and high availability of DynamoDB let them meet needs of Prime Day without breaking a sweat.

Stack Creation – Nearly 31,000 AWS CloudFormation stacks were created for Prime Day in order to bring additional AWS resources on line.

API Usage – AWS CloudTrail processed over 50 billion events and tracked more than 419 billion calls to various AWS APIs, all in support of Prime Day.

Configuration TrackingAWS Config generated over 14 million Configuration items for AWS resources.

You Can Do It
Running an event that is as large, complex, and mission-critical as Prime Day takes a lot of planning. If you have an event of this type in mind, please take a look at our new Infrastructure Event Readiness white paper. Inside, you will learn how to design and provision your applications to smoothly handle planned scaling events such as product launches or seasonal traffic spikes, with sections on automation, resiliency, cost optimization, event management, and more.

Jeff;

 

How to Increase the Redundancy and Performance of Your AWS Directory Service for Microsoft AD Directory by Adding Domain Controllers

Post Syndicated from Peter Pereira original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/how-to-increase-the-redundancy-and-performance-of-your-aws-directory-service-for-microsoft-ad-directory-by-adding-domain-controllers/

You can now increase the redundancy and performance of your AWS Directory Service for Microsoft Active Directory (Enterprise Edition), also known as AWS Microsoft AD, directory by deploying additional domain controllers. Adding domain controllers increases redundancy, resulting in even greater resilience and higher availability. This new capability enables you to have at least two domain controllers operating, even if an Availability Zone were to be temporarily unavailable. The additional domain controllers also improve the performance of your applications by enabling directory clients to load-balance their requests across a larger number of domain controllers. For example, AWS Microsoft AD enables you to use larger fleets of Amazon EC2 instances to run .NET applications that perform frequent user attribute lookups.

AWS Microsoft AD is a highly available, managed Active Directory built on actual Microsoft Windows Server 2012 R2 in the AWS Cloud. When you create your AWS Microsoft AD directory, AWS deploys two domain controllers that are exclusively yours in separate Availability Zones for high availability. Now, you can deploy additional domain controllers easily via the Directory Service console or API, by specifying the total number of domain controllers that you want.

AWS Microsoft AD distributes the additional domain controllers across the Availability Zones and subnets within the Amazon VPC where your directory is running. AWS deploys the domain controllers, configures them to replicate directory changes, monitors for and repairs any issues, performs daily snapshots, and updates the domain controllers with patches. This reduces the effort and complexity of creating and managing your own domain controllers in the AWS Cloud.

In this blog post, I create an AWS Microsoft AD directory with two domain controllers in each Availability Zone. This ensures that I always have at least two domain controllers operating, even if an entire Availability Zone were to be temporarily unavailable. To accomplish this, first I create an AWS Microsoft AD directory with one domain controller per Availability Zone, and then I deploy one additional domain controller per Availability Zone.

Solution architecture

The following diagram shows how AWS Microsoft AD deploys all the domain controllers in this solution after you complete Steps 1 and 2. In Step 1, AWS Microsoft AD deploys the two required domain controllers across multiple Availability Zones and subnets in an Amazon VPC. In Step 2, AWS Microsoft AD deploys one additional domain controller per Availability Zone and subnet.

Solution diagram

Step 1: Create an AWS Microsoft AD directory

First, I create an AWS Microsoft AD directory in an Amazon VPC. I can add domain controllers only after AWS Microsoft AD configures my first two required domain controllers. In my example, my domain name is example.com.

When I create my directory, I must choose the VPC in which to deploy my directory (as shown in the following screenshot). Optionally, I can choose the subnets in which to deploy my domain controllers, and AWS Microsoft AD ensures I select subnets from different Availability Zones. In this case, I have no subnet preference, so I choose No Preference from the Subnets drop-down list. In this configuration, AWS Microsoft AD selects subnets from two different Availability Zones to deploy the directory.

Screenshot of choosing the VPC in which to create the directory

I then choose Next Step to review my configuration, and then choose Create Microsoft AD. It takes approximately 40 minutes for my domain controllers to be created. I can check the status from the AWS Directory Service console, and when the status is Active, I can add my two additional domain controllers to the directory.

Step 2: Deploy two more domain controllers in the directory

Now that I have created an AWS Microsoft AD directory and it is active, I can deploy two additional domain controllers in the directory. AWS Microsoft AD enables me to add domain controllers through the Directory Service console or API. In this post, I use the console.

To deploy two more domain controllers in the directory:

  1. I open the AWS Management Console, choose Directory Service, and then choose the Microsoft AD Directory ID. In my example, my recently created directory is example.com, as shown in the following screenshot.Screenshot of choosing the Directory ID
  2. I choose the Domain controllers tab next. Here I can see the two domain controllers that AWS Microsoft AD created for me in Step 1. It also shows the Availability Zones and subnets in which AWS Microsoft AD deployed the domain controllers.Screenshot showing the domain controllers, Availability Zones, and subnets
  3. I then choose Modify on the Domain controllers tab. I specify the total number of domain controllers I want by choosing the subtract and add buttons. In my example, I want four domain controllers in total for my directory.Screenshot showing how to specify the total number of domain controllers
  4. I choose Apply. AWS Microsoft AD deploys the two additional domain controllers and distributes them evenly across the Availability Zones and subnets in my Amazon VPC. Within a few seconds, I can see the Availability Zones and subnets in which AWS Microsoft AD deployed my two additional domain controllers with a status of Creating (see the following screenshot). While AWS Microsoft AD deploys the additional domain controllers, my directory continues to operate by using the active domain controllers—with no disruption of service.
    Screenshot of two additional domain controllers with a status of "Creating"
  5. When AWS Microsoft AD completes the deployment steps, all domain controllers are in Active status and available for use by my applications. As a result, I have improved the redundancy and performance of my directory.

Note: After deploying additional domain controllers, I can reduce the number of domain controllers by repeating the modification steps with a lower number of total domain controllers. Unless a directory is deleted, AWS Microsoft AD does not allow fewer than two domain controllers per directory in order to deliver fault tolerance and high availability.

Summary

In this blog post, I demonstrated how to deploy additional domain controllers in your AWS Microsoft AD directory. By adding domain controllers, you increase the redundancy and performance of your directory, which makes it easier for you to migrate and run mission-critical Active Directory–integrated workloads in the AWS Cloud without having to deploy and maintain your own AD infrastructure.

To learn more about AWS Directory Service, see the AWS Directory Service home page. If you have questions, post them on the Directory Service forum.

– Peter

T411, France’s Most-Visited Torrent Site, Has Been Shut Down

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/t411-frances-most-visited-torrent-site-has-disappeared-170627/

As the number one torrent site among French speakers and one of the most popular sites in France, T411’s rise to stardom is the product of more than a decade of twists and turns.

After a prolonged battle against 31 Canadian media organizations including the CRIA, the administrator of a torrent site known as QuebecTorrent closed its doors in 2008 after the handing down of a permanent injunction.

“I just wanna say thanks to all the people who supported the cause and me all along,” admin Sebastian Doditz told TorrentFreak at the time.

Initially, it was believed that the 109,000 members of the site would be left homeless but shortly after another torrent site appeared. Called Torrent411 with the slogan The Torrent Yellow Pages (411 is Canada’s version), it launched with around 109,000 members – the number that QuebecTorrent closed with.

No surprise then that all QuebecTorrent user accounts had been transferred to T411, including ratios and even some content categories that were previously excluded due to copyright holder disputes.

“Welcome to one and all!” a notice on the site read. “It is with great pleasure that we launch the Torrent411.com site today. All the team of Torrent411.com wishes you the most cordial of welcomes! Here you will find all the torrents imaginable which will be for you for thousands of hours to come! Filled with surprises that await you!”

Even following its resurrection, pressure on the site continued to build. In 2011, it was forced to move to T411.me, to avoid problems with its .com domain, but against the odds, it continued to grow.

As shown in the image to the right (courtesy OpenTrackers), in 2013 the site had more than 5.3 million members, 336,000 torrents, and 4.7m seeders. That made it a significant site indeed.

In early 2015, the site decided to move again, from .me to .io, following action to have the site blocked in France.

But later in the year, there was yet more trouble when the site found itself reported to the United States Trade Representative, identified as a “rogue site” by the RIAA.

With a number of copyright holders on its back, it’s clear that T411’s troubles weren’t going away anytime soon, but now there’s a crisis from which the site is unlikely to recover.

On Sunday, T411 simply stopped responding on its latest T411.al domain. No warning and no useful messages have been forthcoming from its operators. For a site of this scale and resilience, that’s not something one expects.

Message greeting site visitors

Even though the site itself has been down, there have been some very basic signs of life. For example, the site’s Wiki remained operational which indicates the T411.al domain is at least partially intact, at least for now. But for those hoping for good news, none will be forthcoming.

Moments ago, French journalist Tristan Brossat‏ confirmed that T411 has been shut down in a joint operation between French and Swedish police.

He reports that “the brains” behind the site (reportedly two Ukrainians) have been arrested. Servers hosted at a Swedish company have been seized.

Anti-piracy activity against France-connected torrent sites has been high during recent months. Last November, torrent icon What.cd shutdown following action by French authorities.

Soon after, the cybercrime unit of the French military police targeted the country’s largest pirate site, Zone-Telechargement (1,2).

Update: A source familiar with developments informs TF that a one of those arrested in Sweden was a developer. In France, he reports that moderators have been arrested.

Update2: The arrests in Sweden took place in the Huddinge Municipality in Stockholm County, east central Sweden. The men are said to be around 30-years-old and are suspected of copyright infringement and money laundering offenses.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Sci-Hub Ordered to Pay $15 Million in Piracy Damages

Post Syndicated from Ernesto original https://torrentfreak.com/sci-hub-ordered-to-pay-15-million-in-piracy-damages-170623/

Two years ago, academic publisher Elsevier filed a complaint against Sci-Hub and several related “pirate” sites.

It accused the websites of making academic papers widely available to the public, without permission.

While Sci-Hub is nothing like the average pirate site, it is just as illegal according to Elsevier’s legal team, who obtained a preliminary injunction from a New York District Court last fall.

The injunction ordered Sci-Hub’s founder Alexandra Elbakyan to quit offering access to any Elsevier content. However, this didn’t happen.

Instead of taking Sci-Hub down, the lawsuit achieved the opposite. Sci-Hub grew bigger and bigger up to a point where its users were downloading hundreds of thousands of papers per day.

Although Elbakyan sent a letter to the court earlier, she opted not engage in the US lawsuit any further. The same is true for her fellow defendants, associated with Libgen. As a result, Elsevier asked the court for a default judgment and a permanent injunction which were issued this week.

Following a hearing on Wednesday, the Court awarded Elsevier $15,000,000 in damages, the maximum statutory amount for the 100 copyrighted works that were listed in the complaint. In addition, the injunction, through which Sci-Hub and LibGen lost several domain names, was made permanent.

Sci-Hub founder Alexandra Elbakyan says that even if she wanted to pay the millions of dollars in revenue, she doesn’t have the money to do so.

“The money project received and spent in about six years of its operation do not add up to 15 million,” Elbakyan tells torrentFreak.

“More interesting, Elsevier says: the Sci-Hub activity ’causes irreparable injury to Elsevier, its customers and the public’ and US court agreed. That feels like a perfect crime. If you want to cause an irreparable injury to American public, what do you have to do? Now we know the answer: establish a website where they can read research articles for free,” she adds.

Previously, Elbakyan already confirmed to us that, lawsuit or not, the site is not going anywhere.

“The Sci-Hub will continue as usual. In case of problems with the domain names, users can rely on TOR scihub22266oqcxt.onion,” Elbakyan added.

Sci-Hub is regularly referred to as the “Pirate Bay for science,” and based on the site’s resilience and its response to legal threats, it can certainly live up to this claim.

The Association of American Publishers (AAP) is happy with the outcome of the case.

“As the final judgment shows, the Court has not mistaken illegal activity for a public good,” AAP President and CEO Maria A. Pallante says.

“On the contrary, it has recognized the defendants’ operation for the flagrant and sweeping infringement that it really is and affirmed the critical role of copyright law in furthering scientific research and the public interest.”

Matt McKay, a spokesperson for the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM) in Oxford went even further, telling Nature that the site doesn’t offer any value to the scientific comunity.

“Sci-Hub does not add any value to the scholarly community. It neither fosters scientific advancement nor does it value researchers’ achievements. It is simply a place for someone to go to download stolen content and then leave.”

Hundreds of thousands of academics, who regularly use the site to download papers, might contest this though.

With no real prospect of recouping the damages and an ever-resilient Elbakyan, Elsevier’s legal battle could just be a win on paper. Sci-Hub and Libgen are not going anywhere, it seems, and the lawsuit has made them more popular than ever before.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

The Pirate Bay Isn’t Affected By Adverse Court Rulings – Everyone Else Is

Post Syndicated from Andy original https://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-isnt-affected-by-adverse-court-rulings-everyone-else-is-170618/

For more than a decade The Pirate Bay has been the world’s most controversial site. Delivering huge quantities of copyrighted content to the masses, the platform is revered and reviled across the copyright spectrum.

Its reputation is one of a defiant Internet swashbuckler, but due to changes in how the site has been run in more recent times, its current philosophy is more difficult to gauge. What has never been in doubt, however, is the site’s original intent to be as provocative as possible.

Through endless publicity stunts, some real, some just for the ‘lulz’, The Pirate Bay managed to attract a massive audience, all while incurring the wrath of every major copyright holder in the world.

Make no mistake, they all queued up to strike back, but every subsequent rightsholder action was met by a Pirate Bay middle finger, two fingers, or chin flick, depending on the mood of the day. This only served to further delight the masses, who happily spread the word while keeping their torrents flowing.

This vicious circle of being targeted by the entertainment industries, mocking them, and then reaping the traffic benefits, developed into the cheapest long-term marketing campaign the Internet had ever seen. But nothing is ever truly for free and there have been consequences.

After taunting Hollywood and the music industry with its refusals to capitulate, endless legal action that the site would have ordinarily been forced to participate in largely took place without The Pirate Bay being present. It doesn’t take a law degree to work out what happened in each and every one of those cases, whatever complex route they took through the legal system. No defense, no win.

For example, the web-blocking phenomenon across the UK, Europe, Asia and Australia was driven by the site’s absolute resilience and although there would clearly have been other scapegoats had The Pirate Bay disappeared, the site was the ideal bogeyman the copyright lobby required to move forward.

Filing blocking lawsuits while bringing hosts, advertisers, and ISPs on board for anti-piracy initiatives were also made easier with the ‘evil’ Pirate Bay still online. Immune from every anti-piracy technique under the sun, the existence of the platform in the face of all onslaughts only strengthened the cases of those arguing for even more drastic measures.

Over a decade, this has meant a significant tightening of the sharing and streaming climate. Without any big legislative changes but plenty of case law against The Pirate Bay, web-blocking is now a walk in the park, ad hoc domain seizures are a fairly regular occurrence, and few companies want to host sharing sites. Advertisers and brands are also hesitant over where they place their ads. It’s a very different world to the one of 10 years ago.

While it would be wrong to attribute every tightening of the noose to the actions of The Pirate Bay, there’s little doubt that the site and its chaotic image played a huge role in where copyright enforcement is today. The platform set out to provoke and succeeded in every way possible, gaining supporters in their millions. It could also be argued it kicked a hole in a hornets’ nest, releasing the hell inside.

But perhaps the site’s most amazing achievement is the way it has managed to stay online, despite all the turmoil.

This week yet another ruling, this time from the powerful European Court of Justice, found that by offering links in the manner it does, The Pirate Bay and other sites are liable for communicating copyright works to the public. Of course, this prompted the usual swathe of articles claiming that this could be the final nail in the site’s coffin.

Wrong.

In common with every ruling, legal defeat, and legislative restriction put in place due to the site’s activities, this week’s decision from the ECJ will have zero effect on the Pirate Bay’s availability. For right or wrong, the site was breaking the law long before this ruling and will continue to do so until it decides otherwise.

What we have instead is a further tightened legal landscape that will have a lasting effect on everything BUT the site, including weaker torrent sites, Internet users, and user-uploaded content sites such as YouTube.

With The Pirate Bay carrying on regardless, that is nothing short of remarkable.

Source: TF, for the latest info on copyright, file-sharing, torrent sites and ANONYMOUS VPN services.

Healthcare Industry Cybersecurity Report

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/06/healthcare_indu.html

New US government report: “Report on Improving Cybersecurity in the Health Care Industry.” It’s pretty scathing, but nothing in it will surprise regular readers of this blog.

It’s worth reading the executive summary, and then skimming the recommendations. Recommendations are in six areas.

The Task Force identified six high-level imperatives by which to organize its recommendations and action items. The imperatives are:

  1. Define and streamline leadership, governance, and expectations for health care industry cybersecurity.
  2. Increase the security and resilience of medical devices and health IT.

  3. Develop the health care workforce capacity necessary to prioritize and ensure cybersecurity awareness and technical capabilities.

  4. Increase health care industry readiness through improved cybersecurity awareness and education.

  5. Identify mechanisms to protect research and development efforts and intellectual property from attacks or exposure.

  6. Improve information sharing of industry threats, weaknesses, and mitigations.

News article.

Slashdot thread.

Some notes on Trump’s cybersecurity Executive Order

Post Syndicated from Robert Graham original http://blog.erratasec.com/2017/05/some-notes-on-trumps-cybersecurity.html

President Trump has finally signed an executive order on “cybersecurity”. The first draft during his first weeks in power were hilariously ignorant. The current draft, though, is pretty reasonable as such things go. I’m just reading the plain language of the draft as a cybersecurity expert, picking out the bits that interest me. In reality, there’s probably all sorts of politics in the background that I’m missing, so I may be wildly off-base.

Holding managers accountable

This is a great idea in theory. But government heads are rarely accountable for anything, so it’s hard to see if they’ll have the nerve to implement this in practice. When the next breech happens, we’ll see if anybody gets fired.
“antiquated and difficult to defend Information Technology”

The government uses laughably old computers sometimes. Forces in government wants to upgrade them. This won’t work. Instead of replacing old computers, the budget will simply be used to add new computers. The old computers will still stick around.
“Legacy” is a problem that money can’t solve. Programmers know how to build small things, but not big things. Everything starts out small, then becomes big gradually over time through constant small additions. What you have now is big legacy systems. Attempts to replace a big system with a built-from-scratch big system will fail, because engineers don’t know how to build big systems. This will suck down any amount of budget you have with failed multi-million dollar projects.
It’s not the antiquated systems that are usually the problem, but more modern systems. Antiquated systems can usually be protected by simply sticking a firewall or proxy in front of them.

“address immediate unmet budgetary needs necessary to manage risk”

Nobody cares about cybersecurity. Instead, it’s a thing people exploit in order to increase their budget. Instead of doing the best security with the budget they have, they insist they can’t secure the network without more money.

An alternate way to address gaps in cybersecurity is instead to do less. Reduce exposure to the web, provide fewer services, reduce functionality of desktop computers, and so on. Insisting that more money is the only way to address unmet needs is the strategy of the incompetent.

Use the NIST framework
Probably the biggest thing in the EO is that it forces everyone to use the NIST cybersecurity framework.
The NIST Framework simply documents all the things that organizations commonly do to secure themselves, such run intrusion-detection systems or impose rules for good passwords.
There are two problems with the NIST Framework. The first is that no organization does all the things listed. The second is that many organizations don’t do the things well.
Password rules are a good example. Organizations typically had bad rules, such as frequent changes and complexity standards. So the NIST Framework documented them. But cybersecurity experts have long opposed those complex rules, so have been fighting NIST on them.

Another good example is intrusion-detection. These days, I scan the entire Internet, setting off everyone’s intrusion-detection systems. I can see first hand that they are doing intrusion-detection wrong. But the NIST Framework recommends they do it, because many organizations do it, but the NIST Framework doesn’t demand they do it well.
When this EO forces everyone to follow the NIST Framework, then, it’s likely just going to increase the amount of money spent on cybersecurity without increasing effectiveness. That’s not necessarily a bad thing: while probably ineffective or counterproductive in the short run, there might be long-term benefit aligning everyone to thinking about the problem the same way.
Note that “following” the NIST Framework doesn’t mean “doing” everything. Instead, it means documented how you do everything, a reason why you aren’t doing anything, or (most often) your plan to eventually do the thing.
preference for shared IT services for email, cloud, and cybersecurity
Different departments are hostile toward each other, with each doing things their own way. Obviously, the thinking goes, that if more departments shared resources, they could cut costs with economies of scale. Also obviously, it’ll stop the many home-grown wrong solutions that individual departments come up with.
In other words, there should be a single government GMail-type service that does e-mail both securely and reliably.
But it won’t turn out this way. Government does not have “economies of scale” but “incompetence at scale”. It means a single GMail-like service that is expensive, unreliable, and in the end, probably insecure. It means we can look forward to government breaches that instead of affecting one department affecting all departments.

Yes, you can point to individual organizations that do things poorly, but what you are ignoring is the organizations that do it well. When you make them all share a solution, it’s going to be the average of all these things — meaning those who do something well are going to move to a worse solution.

I suppose this was inserted in there so that big government cybersecurity companies can now walk into agencies, point to where they are deficient on the NIST Framework, and say “sign here to do this with our shared cybersecurity service”.
“identify authorities and capabilities that agencies could employ to support the cybersecurity efforts of critical infrastructure entities”
What this means is “how can we help secure the power grid?”.
What it means in practice is that fiasco in the Vermont power grid. The DHS produced a report containing IoCs (“indicators of compromise”) of Russian hackers in the DNC hack. Among the things it identified was that the hackers used Yahoo! email. They pushed these IoCs out as signatures in their “Einstein” intrusion-detection system located at many power grid locations. The next person that logged into their Yahoo! email was then flagged as a Russian hacker, causing all sorts of hilarity to ensue, such as still uncorrected stories by the Washington Post how the Russians hacked our power-grid.
The upshot is that federal government help is also going to include much government hindrance. They really are this stupid sometimes and there is no way to fix this stupid. (Seriously, the DHS still insists it did the right thing pushing out the Yahoo IoCs).
Resilience Against Botnets and Other Automated, Distributed Threats

The government wants to address botnets because it’s just the sort of problem they love, mass outages across the entire Internet caused by a million machines.

But frankly, botnets don’t even make the top 10 list of problems they should be addressing. Number #1 is clearly “phishing” — you know, the attack that’s been getting into the DNC and Podesta e-mails, influencing the election. You know, the attack that Gizmodo recently showed the Trump administration is partially vulnerable to. You know, the attack that most people blame as what probably led to that huge OPM hack. Replace the entire Executive Order with “stop phishing”, and you’d go further fixing federal government security.

But solving phishing is tough. To begin with, it requires a rethink how the government does email, and how how desktop systems should be managed. So the government avoids complex problems it can’t understand to focus on the simple things it can — botnets.

Dealing with “prolonged power outage associated with a significant cyber incident”

The government has had the hots for this since 2001, even though there’s really been no attack on the American grid. After the Russian attacks against the Ukraine power grid, the issue is heating up.

Nation-wide attacks aren’t really a threat, yet, in America. We have 10,000 different companies involved with different systems throughout the country. Trying to hack them all at once is unlikely. What’s funny is that it’s the government’s attempts to standardize everything that’s likely to be our downfall, such as sticking Einstein sensors everywhere.

What they should be doing is instead of trying to make the grid unhackable, they should be trying to lessen the reliance upon the grid. They should be encouraging things like Tesla PowerWalls, solar panels on roofs, backup generators, and so on. Indeed, rather than industrial system blackout, industry backup power generation should be considered as a source of grid backup. Factories and even ships were used to supplant the electric power grid in Japan after the 2011 tsunami, for example. The less we rely on the grid, the less a blackout will hurt us.

“cybersecurity risks facing the defense industrial base, including its supply chain”

So “supply chain” cybersecurity is increasingly becoming a thing. Almost anything electronic comes with millions of lines of code, silicon chips, and other things that affect the security of the system. In this context, they may be worried about intentional subversion of systems, such as that recent article worried about Kaspersky anti-virus in government systems. However, the bigger concern is the zillions of accidental vulnerabilities waiting to be discovered. It’s impractical for a vendor to secure a product, because it’s built from so many components the vendor doesn’t understand.

“strategic options for deterring adversaries and better protecting the American people from cyber threats”

Deterrence is a funny word.

Rumor has it that we forced China to backoff on hacking by impressing them with our own hacking ability, such as reaching into China and blowing stuff up. This works because the Chinese governments remains in power because things are going well in China. If there’s a hiccup in economic growth, there will be mass actions against the government.

But for our other cyber adversaries (Russian, Iran, North Korea), things already suck in their countries. It’s hard to see how we can make things worse by hacking them. They also have a strangle hold on the media, so hacking in and publicizing their leader’s weird sex fetishes and offshore accounts isn’t going to work either.

Also, deterrence relies upon “attribution”, which is hard. While news stories claim last year’s expulsion of Russian diplomats was due to election hacking, that wasn’t the stated reason. Instead, the claimed reason was Russia’s interference with diplomats in Europe, such as breaking into diplomat’s homes and pooping on their dining room table. We know it’s them when they are brazen (as was the case with Chinese hacking), but other hacks are harder to attribute.

Deterrence of nation states ignores the reality that much of the hacking against our government comes from non-state actors. It’s not clear how much of all this Russian hacking is actually directed by the government. Deterrence polices may be better directed at individuals, such as the recent arrest of a Russian hacker while they were traveling in Spain. We can’t get Russian or Chinese hackers in their own countries, so we have to wait until they leave.

Anyway, “deterrence” is one of those real-world concepts that hard to shoe-horn into a cyber (“cyber-deterrence”) equivalent. It encourages lots of bad thinking, such as export controls on “cyber-weapons” to deter foreign countries from using them.

“educate and train the American cybersecurity workforce of the future”

The problem isn’t that we lack CISSPs. Such blanket certifications devalue the technical expertise of the real experts. The solution is to empower the technical experts we already have.

In other words, mandate that whoever is the “cyberczar” is a technical expert, like how the Surgeon General must be a medical expert, or how an economic adviser must be an economic expert. For over 15 years, we’ve had a parade of non-technical people named “cyberczar” who haven’t been experts.

Once you tell people technical expertise is valued, then by nature more students will become technical experts.

BTW, the best technical experts are software engineers and sysadmins. The best cybersecurity for Windows is already built into Windows, whose sysadmins need to be empowered to use those solutions. Instead, they are often overridden by a clueless cybersecurity consultant who insists on making the organization buy a third-party product instead that does a poorer job. We need more technical expertise in our organizations, sure, but not necessarily more cybersecurity professionals.

Conclusion

This is really a government document, and government people will be able to explain it better than I. These are just how I see it as a technical-expert who is a government-outsider.

My guess is the most lasting consequential thing will be making everyone following the NIST Framework, and the rest will just be a lot of aspirational stuff that’ll be ignored.

New Whitepaper: Aligning to the NIST Cybersecurity Framework in the AWS Cloud

Post Syndicated from Chris Gile original https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/security/new-whitepaper-aligning-to-the-nist-cybersecurity-framework-in-the-aws-cloud/

NIST logo

Today, we released the Aligning to the NIST Cybersecurity Framework in the AWS Cloud whitepaper. Both public and commercial sector organizations can use this whitepaper to assess the AWS environment against the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF) and improve the security measures they implement and operate (also known as security in the cloud). The whitepaper also provides a third-party auditor letter attesting to the AWS Cloud offering’s conformance to NIST CSF risk management practices (also known as security of the cloud), allowing organizations to properly protect their data across AWS.

In February 2014, NIST published the Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity in response to Presidential Executive Order 13636, “Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity,” which called for the development of a voluntary framework to help organizations improve the cybersecurity, risk management, and resilience of their systems. The Cybersecurity Enhancement Act of 2014 reinforced the legitimacy and authority of the NIST CSF by codifying it and its voluntary adoption into law, and federal agency Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) reporting metrics now align to the NIST CSF. Though it is intended for adoption by the critical infrastructure sector, the foundational set of security disciplines in the NIST CSF has been endorsed by government and industry as a recommended baseline for use by any organization, regardless of its sector or size.

We recognize the additional level of effort an organization has to expend for each new security assurance framework it implements. To reduce that burden, we provide a detailed breakout of AWS Cloud offerings and associated customer and AWS responsibilities to facilitate alignment with the NIST CSF. Organizations ranging from federal and state agencies to regulated entities to large enterprises can use this whitepaper as a guide for implementing AWS solutions to achieve the risk management outcomes in the NIST CSF.

Security, compliance, and customer data protection are our top priorities, and we will continue to provide the resources and services for you to meet your desired outcomes while integrating security best practices in the AWS environment. When you use AWS solutions, you can be confident that we protect your data with a level of assurance that meets, if not exceeds, your requirements and needs, and gives you the resources to secure your AWS environment. To request support for implementing the NIST CSF in your organization by using AWS services, contact your AWS account manager.

– Chris Gile, Senior Manager, Security Assurance

Buzzword Watch: Prosilience

Post Syndicated from Bruce Schneier original https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2017/03/buzzword_watch_.html

Summer Fowler at CMU has invented a new word: prosilience:

I propose that we build operationally PROSILIENT organizations. If operational resilience, as we like to say, is risk management “all grown up,” then prosilience is resilience with consciousness of environment, self-awareness, and the capacity to evolve. It is not about being able to operate through disruption, it is about anticipating disruption and adapting before it even occurs–a proactive version of resilience. Nascent prosilient capabilities include exercises (tabletop or technical) that simulate how organizations would respond to a scenario. The goal, however, is to automate, expand, and perform continuous exercises based on real-world indicators rather than on scenarios.

I have long been a big fan of resilience as a security concept, and the property we should be aiming for. I’m not sure prosilience buys me anything new, but this is my first encounter with this new buzzword. It would certainly make for a best-selling business-book title.

First Round of systemd.conf 2015 Sponsors

Post Syndicated from Lennart Poettering original http://0pointer.net/blog/first-round-of-systemdconf-2015-sponsors.html

First Round of systemd.conf 2015 Sponsors

We are happy to announce the first round of systemd.conf
2015
sponsors!

Our first Gold sponsor is CoreOS!

CoreOS develops software for modern infrastructure that delivers a consistent operating environment for distributed applications. CoreOS’s commercial offering, Tectonic, is an enterprise-ready platform that combines Kubernetes and the CoreOS stack to run Linux containers. In addition CoreOS is the creator and maintainer of open source projects such as CoreOS Linux, etcd, fleet, flannel and rkt. The strategies and architectures that influence CoreOS allow companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter to run their services at scale with high resilience. Learn more about CoreOS here https://coreos.com/, Tectonic here, https://tectonic.com/ or follow CoreOS on Twitter @coreoslinux.

A Silver sponsor is Codethink:

Codethink is a software services consultancy, focusing on engineering reliable systems for long-term deployment with open source technologies.

A Bronze sponsor is Pantheon:

Pantheon is a platform for professional website development, testing, and deployment. Supporting Drupal and WordPress, Pantheon runs over 100,000 websites for the world’s top brands, universities, and media organizations on top of over a million containers.

A Bronze sponsor is Pengutronix:

Pengutronix provides consulting, training and development services for Embedded Linux to customers from the industry. The Kernel Team ports Linux to customer hardware and has more than 3100 patches in the official mainline kernel. In addition to lowlevel ports, the Pengutronix Application Team is responsible for board support packages based on PTXdist or Yocto and deals with system integration (this is where systemd plays an important role). The Graphics Team works on accelerated multimedia tasks, based on the Linux kernel, GStreamer, Qt and web technologies.

We’d like to thank our sponsors for their support! Without sponsors our conference would not be possible!

We’ll shortly announce our second round of sponsors, please stay tuned!

If you’d like to join the ranks of systemd.conf 2015 sponsors, please have a look at our Becoming a Sponsor page!

Reminder! The systemd.conf 2015 Call for Presentations ends on monday, August 31st! Please make sure to submit your proposals on the CfP page until then!

Also, don’t forget to register for the conference! Only a limited number of
registrations are available due to space constraints!
Register here!.

For further details about systemd.conf consult the conference website.