Free Newsletter
Register for our Free Newsletters
Newsletter
Zones
Access Control
LeftNav
Alarms
LeftNav
Biometrics
LeftNav
Detection
LeftNav
Deutsche Zone (German Zone)
LeftNav
Education, Training and Professional Services
LeftNav
Government Programmes
LeftNav
Guarding, Equipment and Enforcement
LeftNav
Industrial Computing Security
LeftNav
IT Security
LeftNav
Physical Security
LeftNav
Surveillance
LeftNav
View All
Other Carouselweb publications
Carousel Web
Defense File
New Materials
Pro Health Zone
Pro Manufacturing Zone
Pro Security Zone
Web Lec
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
ProSecurityZone Sponsor
 
 
News

RSA Security Attack On Lockheed Martin Avoidable

SecurEnvoy : 01 June, 2011  (Technical Article)
Having known the vulnerabilities since March, Lockheed Martin should have closed the doors long ago on potential hackers according to two-factor authentication experts at SecurEnvoy
RSA Security Attack On Lockheed Martin Avoidable

Reports that Lockheed Martin is blaming an apparently successful hack of its IT systems on an earlier breach of RSA Security's system have been dismissed as "smoke and mirrors" by two-factor authentication specialist SecurEnvoy.


According to Steve Watts, SecurEnvoy's co-founder, whilst weekend newswires were citing Lockheed Martin, the US defence contractor, as laying the blame for its data breach at RSA Security's door, it should instead have been looking at its own IT security review procedures.


"The RSA Security breach occurred in mid-March, which has given its users more than two months to review their reliance on RSA Security's technology on their ITsec systems. Here at SecurEnvoy, we've always preached the need for multiple layers of security - including the use of two-factor authentication - so the question here is: what has Lockheed Martin’s IT department been doing for the last ten weeks?" he said.


"It's interesting to note that our colleagues over at NSS Labs said back in March that the RSA Security attack was a strategic move to grab the virtual keys to RSA's customers. More than anything, however, that entire affair should have triggered alarm bells ringing in any corporate IT security office, especially given RSA's deafening silence at the time," he added.


Let's put it quite simply: If the company that supplies the locks to your office is reported to have had its master keys stolen, what do you do? You change your office locks to those from another supplier, he went on to say.


And, says Watts, this is exactly what any competent IT security manager should have started doing, as soon as the RSA Security breach was reported. "This is contingency planning 101 material," he noted.


In fact, the SecurEnvoy co-founder notes, the RSA Security hack in mid-March should have triggered a review of an organisation's entire authentication security and its reliance on products from a single vendor.


Multi-layered security, says Watts, also means using technology from multiple vendors that uses a different approach to defending the corporate digital realm.


"If you start the planning and review process from the premise that your IT systems will eventually be breached, and then design your security defences on this basis, you end up with an intrinsically more secure system," he said.


"Modern IT security is all about building layers of defence on a modular basis, using today's security tools - including multi-factor authentication with integrated redundancy and fail-safe systems. If one element is compromised, you switch in other elements, as laid down in your IT security contingency plans," he added.


"For Lockheed Martin's IT security managers to blame an apparent successful incursion into their systems on a ten-week old widely-reported breach of one of their key ITsec suppliers is diverting publicity from its own security process failings."


SecurEnvoy don’t store customer keys on their premises as all keys are randomly generated within the customers own premises, which means the customer is in control of their own security and therefore you don’t need to trust any third party manufacturer.

Bookmark and Share
 
Home I Editor's Blog I News by Zone I News by Date I News by Category I Special Reports I Directory I Events I Advertise I Submit Your News I About Us I Guides
 
   © 2012 ProSecurityZone.com
Netgains Logo