Vault 7, the worst data theft in CIA history, could have been avoided, report finds.
Read the whole story
Read the whole story
"The stolen data includes everything from the CIA collaboration and communication platform known as Confluence and from a source code repository known as Stash."
Just curious whether that's the same Confluence platform that is available from Atlassian? If so, my company uses it too.. it's not just a CIA platform, but a commercially available product.
edited to include link to product page
"The stolen data includes everything from the CIA collaboration and communication platform known as Confluence and from a source code repository known as Stash."
Just curious whether that's the same Confluence platform that is available from Atlassian? If so, my company uses it too.. it's not just a CIA platform, but a commercially available product.
edited to include link to product page
"Most of our sensitive cyber weapons were not compartmentalized, users shared systems administrator-level passwords, there were no effective removable media controls, and historical data was available to users indefinitely,"
Okay that’s an impressive level of woefully lax....users shared systems administrator-level passwords...
Okay that’s an impressive level of woefully lax....users shared systems administrator-level passwords...
While factually true, look at the facts we know. This wasn't someone penetrating security systems and actively working through protocols. This was the digital equivalent (and perhaps actual case) of walking out the door with the data, thanks to lax and nearly nonexistent protection measures.Information Security is difficult, expensive, and inconvenient. Being the CIA doesn't change that.
In some ways, being the CIA probably makes it harder. Just like even top authors still need proofreaders, even the best IT team needs independent assessments and audits, and I doubt that the CIA is able to allow a truly independent/outside team to examine their systems.
Not to mention the challenge in any organization to persuade people to follow proper procedure every single time with no shortcuts no matter what. It's essentially impossible, but one error in the right (wrong?) place can seriously compromise the security of an entire system.
I'm never surprised when an entity is compromised - I assume that anyone targeted by a motivated and resourced opponent will be. The current state of the art is to compartmentalize to limit the damage, have monitoring systems to detect indicators of compromise, and a well trained team to respond.
While factually true, look at the facts we know. This wasn't someone penetrating security systems and actively working through protocols. This was the digital equivalent (and perhaps actual case) of walking out the door with the data, thanks to lax and nearly nonexistent protection measures.Information Security is difficult, expensive, and inconvenient. Being the CIA doesn't change that.
In some ways, being the CIA probably makes it harder. Just like even top authors still need proofreaders, even the best IT team needs independent assessments and audits, and I doubt that the CIA is able to allow a truly independent/outside team to examine their systems.
Not to mention the challenge in any organization to persuade people to follow proper procedure every single time with no shortcuts no matter what. It's essentially impossible, but one error in the right (wrong?) place can seriously compromise the security of an entire system.
I'm never surprised when an entity is compromised - I assume that anyone targeted by a motivated and resourced opponent will be. The current state of the art is to compartmentalize to limit the damage, have monitoring systems to detect indicators of compromise, and a well trained team to respond.
It looks to me like a textbook case of "it can't happen here." And then it happened there.
Security *is* hard. But this... this wasn't even security.
There's overbearing, and then there's this:While factually true, look at the facts we know. This wasn't someone penetrating security systems and actively working through protocols. This was the digital equivalent (and perhaps actual case) of walking out the door with the data, thanks to lax and nearly nonexistent protection measures.Information Security is difficult, expensive, and inconvenient. Being the CIA doesn't change that.
In some ways, being the CIA probably makes it harder. Just like even top authors still need proofreaders, even the best IT team needs independent assessments and audits, and I doubt that the CIA is able to allow a truly independent/outside team to examine their systems.
Not to mention the challenge in any organization to persuade people to follow proper procedure every single time with no shortcuts no matter what. It's essentially impossible, but one error in the right (wrong?) place can seriously compromise the security of an entire system.
I'm never surprised when an entity is compromised - I assume that anyone targeted by a motivated and resourced opponent will be. The current state of the art is to compartmentalize to limit the damage, have monitoring systems to detect indicators of compromise, and a well trained team to respond.
It looks to me like a textbook case of "it can't happen here." And then it happened there.
Security *is* hard. But this... this wasn't even security.
This looks like an insider threat and probably a least privilege failure. If the CIA has gone all agile-matrix management-cross functional team happy like the rest of the world, they probably have quite a few technical staff with very broad access.
I’m not making excuses for them, just pointing out that security is hard in modern environments. Go back to VMS with a well defined MAC (mandatory access control) scheme and this would have been impossible. Good luck getting anyone to live with those limitations.
Sharing admin passwords... That takes me back to what I said: this wasn't security at all."Most of our sensitive cyber weapons were not compartmented, users shared systems administrator-level passwords, there were no effective removable media controls, and historical data was available to users indefinitely," the report continued. "Furthermore, CCI focused on building cyber weapons and neglected to also prepare mitigation packages if those tools were exposed. These shortcomings were emblematic of a culture that evolved over years that too often prioritized creativity and collaboration at the expense of security."
Okay that’s an impressive level of woefully lax....users shared systems administrator-level passwords...
"The stolen data includes everything from the CIA collaboration and communication platform known as Confluence and from a source code repository known as Stash."
Just curious whether that's the same Confluence platform that is available from Atlassian? If so, my company uses it too.. it's not just a CIA platform, but a commercially available product.
edited to include link to product page
"Most of our sensitive cyber weapons were not compartmentalized, users shared systems administrator-level passwords, there were no effective removable media controls, and historical data was available to users indefinitely,"
Even the part time English teaching assistant job I got in University is not that lax with USB drive and data shares. Hell, even for a part timer like me, they provide an email address that they control and terminate the moment I leave the job. What even is this?
It's another sign, in bright, screaming yellow letters 1000 feet high, illuminated with biilion watt lamps and blaring klaxons of the accelerating decline of America, not completely, but mostly the fault of the boomers (it's all happening on their watch so....).
If you can't trust the CIA, the NSA, or the FBI, who can can you trust?CIA: Untrustworthy AND inept it would seem.
We have that too. It is tied to our Active Directory accounts. Mostly used for documentation, technotes, SOPs, and such."The stolen data includes everything from the CIA collaboration and communication platform known as Confluence and from a source code repository known as Stash."
Just curious whether that's the same Confluence platform that is available from Atlassian? If so, my company uses it too.. it's not just a CIA platform, but a commercially available product.
edited to include link to product page
I have seen shit like that in every network I have looked at. Got DBA on a production database once when they had scott/tiger enabled. Logged in, queried ALL_USERS to get a username list and tried them all with the username as the password. Got full DBA. Demoed it right in front of the production DBA, and not a care in the world.Okay that’s an impressive level of woefully lax....users shared systems administrator-level passwords...
Hey, at least they didn't go "full lazy" and hardcode the same backdoor admin account and password for everyone to use. That would be staggeringly lax. Wait.. do we know they didn't do that?
If there's a silver lining in the report, it's this: the task force assessed with moderate confidence that WikiLeaks never obtained final versions of hacking tools and source code that were housed in the so-called Gold folder.
"The Gold folder was better protected," the report said. "WikiLeaks so far has released data in Stash despite the availability of newer, easier to exploit versions of tools in Gold."
1) Do they have the Gold folder?
2) Is the Gold folder inferior to the things located outside it?
We use both confluence and stash at my organisation (although we're migrating off Stash atm) also."The stolen data includes everything from the CIA collaboration and communication platform known as Confluence and from a source code repository known as Stash."
Just curious whether that's the same Confluence platform that is available from Atlassian? If so, my company uses it too.. it's not just a CIA platform, but a commercially available product.
edited to include link to product page
How does one exfiltrate 34 TB of data from the CIA? It's not like the suspect worker walked out with an armful of hard drives. Or maybe they did?
Considering the security, they probably just uploaded everything to their Dropbox over a few days.How does one exfiltrate 34 TB of data from the CIA? It's not like the suspect worker walked out with an armful of hard drives. Or maybe they did?
Oh come on, don't underestimate your audience. We know what 34 terabytes means. But what does _a 2.2 billion-page document_ mean? Compressed? Uncompress? Raw text, Word document, PDF? What font size and line spacing?34 terabytes of data, a staggering amount that's roughly the equivalent of a 2.2 billion-page document.
If you didn't lock your computer there was a 99% chance I was going to send a random email from YOUR computer to a manager asking if they've ever been in a book club, know how to hacky sack or something else random and innocuous.
I did an internship where it was croissants instead of cake, and on slack instead of emails, same idea though.If you didn't lock your computer there was a 99% chance I was going to send a random email from YOUR computer to a manager asking if they've ever been in a book club, know how to hacky sack or something else random and innocuous.
On a previous job, the tradition was to send a message to the entire department promising to bring cake the next day.