(Lack of) Patch Management Highlighted in US Congress

March 9, 2018 / G C Network / Comments Off

Twitter Feed

NCOIC Discusses e-Discovery and Cloud Computing

By G C Network | March 22, 2010

Last week during its weekly meeting, the NCOIC Cloud Computing Working Group (CCWG) examined some of the legal aspects surrounding electronically stored information. With government use of cloud computing expected…

Take the survey, get a book!

By G C Network | March 20, 2010

“Cloud Musings”, in cooperation with Aditya Yadav & Associates, is conducting a new cloud computing survey. This short, eight (8) question poll, is designed to gauge general corporate plans around…

Army Knowledge Leaders Study Cloud Computing

By G C Network | March 12, 2010

This week it was my pleasure to explore cloud computing with Army Knowledge Leaders (AKL) ! AKL is an intensive 2 year experience of training and work rotations designed to develop leadership,…

Northrop Grumman & Lockheed Martin Selected for CANES

By G C Network | March 9, 2010

Last week the US Navy awarded initial CANES contracts to Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin. Navy officials place the contract values at $775M for Northrop and $937M for Lockheed.…

NCOIC Analyses Cloud Computing With SCOPE

By G C Network | February 24, 2010

Last week, the Network Centric Operations Consortium (NCOIC) Cloud Computing Working Group (CCWG) started it’s work on cloud interoperability in earnest. The first step in their process is the completion…

TASER Awarded: The NGA ASP/ISP Transition Contract

By G C Network | February 17, 2010

The National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) has awarded the Total Application Services for Enterprise Requirements (TASER) contract to: Accenture National Security Services, LLC BAE Systems Information Technology, Inc. The Boeing Company-Autometric,…

EuroCloud Expands Quickly

By G C Network | February 16, 2010

Last October I introduced EuroCloud as a pan-European business network with the goal of promoting European use of cloud computing. In the intervening three months, the organization has grown to…

Joining NJVC: A Professional Plateau

By G C Network | February 8, 2010

This week I begin a new and exciting phase of my professional career by joining the NJVC Enterprise Management Team! For those unfamiliar, NJVC is one of the largest information…

DoD Deputy CIO on Secure Information Sharing

By G C Network | February 3, 2010

Today on Federal Executive Forum, Dave Wennergren, Deputy CIO, Office of the Secretary of Defense, shared his views on secure information sharing. Mr. David M. Wennergren serves as the Deputy…

Training Conference: Cloud Computing for DoD & Government

By G C Network | February 1, 2010

Please join me at the Cloud Computing for DoD & Government training conference, February 22-24, 2010 at the Hilton Old Town in Alexandria, VA. This unique conference agenda blends interactive…

« Previous
1
…
38
39
40
41
42
…
73
Next »

According to the former Equifax CEO’s testimony to Congress, one of the primary causes of this now infamous data breach was the company’s failure to patch a critical vulnerability in the open source Apache Struts Web application framework. Equifax also waited a week to scan its network for apps that remained vulnerable.[1]Would you like to appear at the next Congressional hearing on patch management?

Patch management is the process of identifying, acquiring, installing, and verifying patches for products and systems. Patches not only correct security and functionality problems in software and firmware, but they also introduce new, and sometimes mandatory, capabilities into the organization’s IT environment. It is so useful, the CERT® Coordination Center (CERT®/CC) claims that 95 percent of all network intrusions are avoidable by using proper patch management to keep systems up-to-date.

This nightmare true story and compelling endorsement from CERT®/CC, however, masks the ugly operational patch management implementation complexities. Key enterprise challenges include:

Timing, prioritization, and testing of patches often present conflicting requirements. Competitive prioritization of IT resources, business imperative, andbudget limitations often leave patching tasks on the back burner
Technical mechanisms and requirements for applying patches may also conflict and may include:
- Software that updates itself with little or no enterprise input
- Use of a centralized management tool
- Third-party patch management applications
- Negative or unknown interactions with network access control, health check functions, and other similar technologies
- User initiated manual software updates
- User-initiatedpatches or version upgrades
Typical enterprise heterogeneous environment that includes
- Unmanaged or user managed hosts
- Non-standard IT components that require vendor patching or cannot be patched
- Enterprise owned assets that typically operate on non-enterprise networks
- Smartphones, tablets, and other mobile devices
- Patching of rehydrating virtual machines
- Firmware updates

Piling up on these purely operational tasks are the change management steps associated with:

Maintaining current knowledge of available patches;
Deciding what patches are appropriate for particular systems;
Ensuring proper installation of patches;
Testing systems after installation; and
Documenting all procedures and any specific configurations.

This challenge can also be significantly exacerbated in an IT environment that blends legacy, outsourced and cloud service provider resources. Environment heterogeneity and the sheer volume of patches released is why any patching strategy that primarily relies solely on manual implementation is untenable.

According to the SANS Institute, meeting the patch management challenge requires the creation of a patch management methodology and the automation of that methodology.[2]The methodology itself should include:

A detailed inventory of all hardware, operating systems, and applications that exist in the network and the creation of the process to keep the inventory up-to-date.
A process to identify vulnerabilities in hardware, operating systems, andapplications.
Risk assessment and buy-in from management and business owners.
A detailed procedure for testing patches before deployment.
A detailed process for deploying patches and service packs, as well as a process for verification of deployment.

As for the automation component, it should deliver an automated, comprehensive server lifecycle approach that can provision and configure software, update patches and implement configurations that can improve security and compliance across physical, virtual and cloud servers.

It should also encompass a policy-based approach with support for all major operating systems on physical servers and leading virtualization and cloud platforms. An ability to automate continuous compliance checks and remediate any security or regulatory shortcoming is also paramount. If appropriately implemented, IT Staff should be able to manage patching via a web interface. Having this feature increases server to admin ratio, enhances operational productivity, accelerates audit timelines and reduces incident response latency.

A leading solution in this space is BladeLogicServer Automation by BMC. It was specifically designed to address the dual enterprise requirements of (1) ensuring compliance with rules and regulations and (2) software patching to reduce security vulnerabilities. In the market for over 10 years, it is a comprehensive server lifecycle automation solution that helps organizations provision and configure software, update patches and configurations to improve security and compliance across physical, virtual and cloud servers. Advanced capabilities include script automation, compliance tracking and the ability to stage and test patches before committing them. The latter feature is used to copy patch bundles to the targeted servers before maintenance windows open.The full-function suite integrates with change management systems to facilitate change record creation. Vulnerability management and remediation are automated by importing vulnerability management scan data from vendors like Qualys, Tenable and Rapid 7, and mapping the vulnerabilities back to underlying patches in BladeLogic.

Secure IT operations start with the identification and prioritization of critical vulnerabilities paired with the capability to deliver multi-tier remediation. These reinforcing goals are why an advance patch automation solution is a “must have” for today’s modern enterprise.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/10/a-series-of-delays-and-major-errors-led-to-massive-equifax-breach/

[2] https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/sysadmin/meeting-challenges-automated-patch-management-1468

This post is brought to you by BMC and IDG. The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views and opinions of BMC.