A Private Network for IoT Devices

Cloudflare has just announced an interesting and potential game changer for IoT-based threats:

“Orbit sits one layer before the device and provides a shield of security, so even if the device is running past its operating system’s expiration date, Cloudflare protects it from exploits. And while devices may be seldom patched, the Cloudflare security team is shipping code every day, adding new firewall rules to Cloudflare’s edge. Think of it like changing IoT to I*oT — devices can still access the Internet, but only after passing through Cloudflare where malicious requests can be filtered.

For the last year, Cloudflare has been working with a number of IoT vendors to develop Orbit. Already more than 120 million IoT devices are safer behind Cloudflare’s network. Lockitron is one of the IoT companies using Cloudflare. “Keeping our products and customers secure is our primary concern,” says Paul Gerhardt, co-founder of Lockitron. “Cloudflare provides an extra layer of security that allows us to keep our devices continually updated and ahead of any vulnerabilities.””

Source: https://blog.cloudflare.com/orbit/

Continue Reading

Misunderstanding APT Indicators of Compromise | Threatpost

A really interesting piece on IOCs (Indicators of Compromise) and how the term is often misunderstood and used in ways which are misleading for marketing from security vendors.

It also makes use of a great definition from MITRE on what the difference between ‘Observables‘ and ‘Indicators‘.

Observables are stateful properties and measurable events pertinent to the operation of computers and networks. Information about a file (name, hash, size, etc.), a registry key value, a service being started, or an HTTP request being sent are all simple examples of Observables. […] Indicators are a construct used to convey specific Observables combined with contextual information intended to represent artifacts and/or behaviors of interest within a cyber security context. They consist of one or more Observables potentially mapped to a related TTP context and adorned with other relevant metadata on things like confidence in the indicator’s assertion, handling restrictions, valid time windows, likely impact, sightings of the indicator, structure test mechanisms for detection, suggested course of action, the source of the indicator, etc.”

MITRE also defines several interrelated terms that address higher-level constructs and organizational objectives: Incidents; Tools, Tactics, and Procedures (TTPs); Campaign, Threat Actor, and Course Of Action (COA).

Source: Misunderstanding APT Indicators of Compromise | Threatpost | The first stop for security news

Continue Reading