At the end of the day, this could represent an opportunity for Lockheed Martin and EMC/RSA to set positive examples for communications among security professionals. We, the good guys, are all in this together. Many of us frequently express a longing for better defensive information sharing and bemoan how little timely, actionable information sharing there is.
Wednesday, June 8, 2011
Good analysis of the LM case
Dave Kennedy wrote a very good post on the Verizon Business Security Blog about how the Lockheed Martin "breach" (was it really a breach?) is being handled. He points to the information being disclosed by Lockheed Martin and RSA and how that allows us to understand what had actually happened there.
The interesting aspect about this episode is that the only reasonable conclusion we can reach is that something really bad happened. If nothing happened LM would be quick to provide enough details to allow people to understand that it wasn't a big deal. On the other hand, an organization that only detects it's been breached after finding malware in its internal network wallowing in gigabytes of highly sensitive data will probably try to release only some vague statements such as "we detected a significant and tenacious attack on its information systems network".
Anyway, details about the attacker methods would allow a lot of other organizations to better protect themselves; not only that, if the detection was really in a early stage it would be quite beneficial (not to say to LM's image too) to others to know where to look for suspicious activity. As Dave says in his post:
These guys are some of the best honeypots the security community has out there; we should be doing something to leverage the information about attacks being gathered there. The first step is sharing that data.
UPDATE: Very good analysis from Dan Kaminsky on the subject here.