In an effort to shore up the security of the US' critical infrastructures, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security recently proposed that all publicly-traded companies disclose in their filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission precisely what they are . . . . In an effort to shore up the security of the US' critical infrastructures, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security recently proposed that all publicly-traded companies disclose in their filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission precisely what they are doing to protect the security, confidentiality, integrity and availability of their electronic information and databases. Harkening back to the end of the last millennium, Tom Ridge suggested in a speech before the Business Software Alliance that cyber security problems were similar to the problems presented to publicly traded companies before Y2K. Ridge suggested that "we need to talk about some kind of public disclosure. What are you doing about your security, physical and cyber security? Tell your shareholders, tell your employees, tell the communities within which you operate". It's a worthy idea to ponder, but two underlying questions remain unanswered: are investors really going to make investment decisions based upon such disclosures, and wouldn't any meaningful disclosures provide hackers and criminals with a roadmap to vulnerabilities? The link for this article located at TheRegister.co.uk is no longer available. . Efforts to enhance the security of critical infrastructure in the U.S. spark debates on how transparency affects investors and cybercriminals alike. Critical Infrastructure Security,Cybersecurity Risk,Public Disclosure. . Anthony Pell
Indeed, many vendors, network administrators and security companies adopt a policy of less-is-more when it comes to the question of how much information to release to the public about a particular software bug, exploit or attack. . . .. Indeed, many vendors, network administrators and security companies adopt a policy of less-is-more when it comes to the question of how much information to release to the public about a particular software bug, exploit or attack. The reasoning goes something like this: If they release too many details, not only will they give hackers more ammunition for their attacks, but also -- and more importantly for the vendor whose software or standard was breached -- they'll open themselves up to public scrutiny and criticism. Microsoft Corp., for example, is notoriously tight-lipped about security flaws in its products, but usually takes a beating in the press nonetheless any time a bug is found. The link for this article located at ZDNet / eWeek is no longer available. . Many companies and cybersecurity experts adopt a minimalist strategy when revealing system vulnerabilities to mitigate public criticism.. Software Security Disclosure, Vendor Policies, Public Disclosure. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
Well-meaning hackers are creating an army of "script kiddies" by making security holes public, says a speaker at the Black Hat Security Conference. . Well-meaning hackers are creating an army of "script kiddies" by making security holes public, says a speaker at the Black Hat Security Conference. The link for this article located at eXcite News is no longer available. . Well-meaning hackers are creating an army of 'script kiddies' by making security holes public, says . well-meaning, hackers, creating, 'script, kiddies', making, security, holes, public. . LinuxSecurity.com Team
Get the latest Linux and open source security news straight to your inbox.