Delfigo Security - Strong Authentication

What is dynamic authorization management?

"authorization management defines the approaches to centrally manage authorizations in underlying systems. In best case it ends up with the management of specific entitlements (that would really be "Entitlement Management"), in most cases it is only the capability to map users (using roles and so on) to system-level roles or groups or profiles"

However, recognizing the need to close the "big gap in provisioning", Martin Kuppinger of Kuppinger Cole adds the term "dynamic" to describe -

" authorization engines which are used as part of an externalization strategy (externalizing authentication, authorization, auditing and so on from applications) which provide the results of a dynamic authorization decision, according to defined rules, on the fly. "

Gunnar Peterson of the Arctec Group on the difficulty of valuating assets in the digital world:

"Risk management requires that you know your assets .....Unfortunately, in the digital world these turn out to be devilishly hard to identify and value."

"In a world that quite literally presents us with too much information, we need screens to sift out what is worth paying attention to. You can run your vulnerability assessment tool of choice on your system, and come back with hundreds or thousands of vulnerabilities, but which ones should you pay attention to and act on?"

A simple maxim - know your assets. However difficult, it is the starting point for aligning your information security budget with your business. 

Jordan Weissmann writes in Legal Times how lending user identification to enable others to share your accounts can prove very costly. Online subscription services are using revenue recovery solutions to  monitor user accounts for fraudulent use and license violations. In the case described, one online service provider is using copyright law to seek "enhanced damages," instead of seeking judgement on subscription fees only. The defendents (those who used the service, as well as those who shared the account) are being accused of illegally distributing content. This raises the cost from a mere $5000 to cover fees, to $150,000 per  database that was accessed.

It is a basic premise in security, prevent rather than react. This was reinforced again recently with the difficulties encountered by Twitter (Infoweek: Twitter Hack Made Possible By Weak Password ). Twitter is a popular, award winning service, that has been around since 2006. It has raised over $22 million but failed to address very basic security vulnerabilities. 

 "According to a report filed by Kim Zetter of Wired News, an 18-year-old hacker calling himself GMZ gained access to the account of a Twitter employee on Monday using a dictionary attack program that he created. Because the Twitter employee's account had access to administrative tools, GMZ was able to access any Twitter member's account by resetting the password."

Several rookie mistakes here. First, having your administrator use the same web application that users use to manage their accounts. The administrator systems should have been a separate server and application. Second, it is sloppy password management to allow a common word as your password. Finally, and most importantly, allowing unlimited login attempts. This is the core issue that allowed the hacker as many chances as they needed to attack the login system. Who doesn’t use a lockout feature to limit the number of login attempts in 2009? 

A serious new sleeper virus that exploits Microsoft Windows is working its way through corporate networks. According to Mikko Hypponen, chief research officer at anti-virus firm F-Secure, "the best way to prevent the virus is to "get the patch and install it company-wide. The second way is password security. Use long, difficult passwords -- particularly for administrators who cannot afford to be locked out of the machines they will have to fix."

These of course are not the only options. Given the fact that most organizations have difficulty managing password policies and enforcing "strong" passwords, a more practical option would be to deploy an authentication platform using multiple factors such as keyboard biometrics, geospatial metrics, system parameters, and reflective thinking. Some key factors in considering this type of solution are:

1. Platform Independence (Easy plugability into exisiting application environments)
2. Database Flexibility (No heavy lifting if you need to change database vendors)
3. Easy Integration and Configuration
4. Open Standards (industry standards w/ built-in WS-Security authentication and encryption mechanisms)
5. End-To-End Security
6. Audit and Transaction Logging
7. Great Administrative Tools (easily manage system and users )

Network World features Delfigo solution in "Start-up measures users' trustworthiness for authentication into sites." Key quote:

"Boiled down, Delfigo does context- or risk-based authorization scoring. In other words, the product, DSGateway, calculates, in real time, a risk value - called the "confidence factor" - which reflects the trustworthiness of your authentication in much the same way your credit score reflects your credit worthiness.

Here's how it works, as Klein explained it to me:

a. User signs on with user ID and password.

b. User keyboard biometrics and geospatial data determine "are you who you say you are?"

c. System analyzes current information against user historical profile and assigns a confidence factor (CF).

d. If CF is weak, access is restricted and the user may elect to increase confidence using in-band and out-of-band methods.

e. If confidence factor is sufficient, user is granted access.

The service can continue to monitor the user's activity during the session and if it deviates too far (settable by the administrator) from the user's historical profile a flag can be raised and the user is asked to further authenticate using both in-band and out-of-band methods. Examples of in-band methods could be passwords, tokens, secret questions, keyboard dynamics, while examples of out-of-band methods could be SMS messages.

We've all experienced, I'm sure, services which ask us to periodically re-authenticate, but if the username and password are compromised it really doesn't matter how often the attacker needs to enter them, does it? How much better to use different methods, such as the in-band and out-of-band methods, all the while building up a better level of confidence that the user is who they say they are."

Remember the layoffs of 2001?Those fortunate to keep their jobs were met with a significant increase in their workload.  Not to make lite of the current economy and continued reductions in force, but according to David Griffeth in IAM Insights, here we go again. "The challenge for identity and access management professionals will be securing data from former employees who know the system from the inside out." Not only will IAM professionals have to pick up the slack resulting from reductions in staff, they will need to be aware that over 50% of security breaches come from insiders (or former insiders in  this case).

Chapin Information Services recently tested password management features in web browsers. The conclusion seems that none were very good, as the results table is littered with "failed" tests.

First factor security, in the form of passwords, continues to be a threat worldwide (i.e. phishing, man in the middle, simple used passwords and a host of other vulnerabilities). CSI's results show that there is little reason to rely on the locked down browser to provide a competent level of security. This is further evidence of a market need for 2nd factor and beyond. The issue is can you provide an extra layer of security without being intrusive, and deliver it at low cost? 

Thinking out loud, what if a user could rely upon their keyboard biometric to validate them like PGP once did for the distribution of their public key? It would be great to be able to save a bio-key and upload it to a site. Provide a  means to enable each user to prove ownership of their bio-key and have a 48 hr delay with safeguards in place to ensure the bio-key is legitimate. That way when the user revisits Amazon or Ebay for example, they could type in their password and be validated.