[Product update] Infrastructure Analysis Tool is now available with Business Accounts.Learn More

x

Cyber Security

571

Solutions

893

Contributors

The cyber security specialization covers the fundamental concepts underlying the construction of secure systems, from the hardware to the software to the human-computer interface, with the use of cryptography to secure interactions. cyber security focuses on protecting computers, networks, programs and data from unintended or unauthorized access, change, theft or destruction. This includes controlling physical access to the hardware, as well as protecting against the harm that may come via network access, data and code injection, and due to malpractice by operators, whether intentional, accidental, or due to them being tricked into deviating from secure procedures.

Share tech news, updates, or what's on your mind.

Sign up to Post

Dear Experts, I got this issue with Dell Sonicwall:

----------------------------------------------------------------
~~ SonicWALL Email Security Alert (9.0.5.2079) ~~
----------------------------------------------------------------

[Summary: A flood has been noticed in outbound traffic from
        user ID (mallikarjun.k@xxxxxx)]

Details: 
    Host Name: gw.xxxxxx.com
    Description: Number of messages sent from email ID
        (mallikarjun.k@xxxxxxx) in the scheduled
        interval  has exceeded the flood protection
        threshold.

Time Stamp: 
    Local Time: Mon Oct 22 13:00:01 2018
    GMT:        Mon Oct 22 06:00:01 2018

Additional Information: 
    Recommended Action: User's machine may have been affected.
        Please check for zombies.
    Alert Configuration Page: https://gw.xxxxxx.com:443/virus_config.html?bound=1&hopto=virus_config.html%3Fbound%3D1
    General Alert Settings: https://gw.xxxxxx.com:443/settings_monitoring.html?hopto=settings_monitoring.html

Open in new window


The mail server is Exchange 2016 on Win 2012R2, AV is Kaspersky.

We tried:
- Disable this email account
- Reinstall app, format all devices of users which installed email
- Create a rule in Transport settings in ECP to block email from this account

BUT we still receive this notification each 15 mins from the Sonicwall. Can you please suggest?
0
Exploring SharePoint 2016
LVL 12
Exploring SharePoint 2016

Explore SharePoint 2016, the web-based, collaborative platform that integrates with Microsoft Office to provide intranets, secure document management, and collaboration so you can develop your online and offline capabilities.

Let's say you reserved a domain at one of the reputable registrars.  You don't link it with the hosting account yet, just own it.  The registrar automatically creates nice landing page for it.  This means that they created a valid DNS zone file for your domain name, which includes an A record pointing at the web server hosting the landing page, bunch of CNAME records pointing at their www., pop., imap., etc. servers.  However, this is only a zone file for a landing page, so MX record may or may not be there and SPF record typically is not there.  Now, a company like Security Scorecard scans registrar's records and finds that this specific domain name belonging to your company.  The domain name doesn't have SPF record - negative points, has associated IMAP service - negative points, the landing page doesn't enforce HTTPS protocol - negative points.  All you did was reserved yourself a domain name, but that scored negatively against your company cyber security or, as they call it,  digital footprint reputation.

This leads me to the question directed to people familiar with Security Scorecard, or such like, services  - what is the best way to avoid owned parked domain having adverse effect on the Security Scorecard report?  Is the private registration the way to go?  Or, perhaps, setting invalid address for the DNS server authoritative to that domain, e.g 1.2.3.4?  That way the scanner will not get any response at all.  Or, maybe it is better to set the authoritative DNS …
0
I've set our web.config file on a WP site we've built to have secure cookies but all tests we've run online suggest cookies are still not secure. The httpOnly setting also hasn't taken effect.

The code snippet from the web.config is below and always the PHPSESSID cookie doesn't have these settings

<system.web>
    <httpCookies httpOnlyCookies="true" requireSSL="true"  />
</system.web>

Open in new window


What else do we need to look at to ensure this setting takes effect?

Thanks
Iain
0
Hello,

I need your advice please  to validate a solution for up to date  a file exchange between MarketPlace MIRAKL and SAP.
Mirakl does not give us the possibility to connect via sftp (user, mdp, port or other ).

However, If we use the CURL (client URL request library) technology to send requests and retrieve orders that are entered into our stores and repatriate them to SAP.
The connection is via https and in the script it will be used an API key that is unique and generate from our MIRAKL account. In this API key we have a user and a password, which makes the connection secure.

About security, the solution is secure (safe) or not and we advise me to implement this solution?

Best regards,
0
I am getting the following error message in the event log each time it's restarted.
This is a Windows 2016 Hyper-V Host.  There's no virtual machines on it yet, this is a brand new install:

Log Name:      System
Source:        Microsoft-Windows-Kernel-Boot
Date:          9/7/2018 7:48:33 AM
Event ID:      124
Task Category: None
Level:         Error
Keywords:      (70368744177664)
User:          SYSTEM
Computer:      HostName.Domain.com
Description:
The Virtualization Based Security enablement policy check at phase 0 failed with status: The object was not found.
Event Xml:
<Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event">
  <System>
    <Provider Name="Microsoft-Windows-Kernel-Boot" Guid="{15CA44FF-4D7A-4BAA-BBA5-0998955E531E}" />
    <EventID>124</EventID>
    <Version>0</Version>
    <Level>2</Level>
    <Task>0</Task>
    <Opcode>0</Opcode>
    <Keywords>0x8000400000000000</Keywords>
    <TimeCreated SystemTime="2018-09-07T12:48:33.163793600Z" />
    <EventRecordID>6108</EventRecordID>
    <Correlation />
    <Execution ProcessID="4" ThreadID="8" />
    <Channel>System</Channel>
    <Computer>hostname.domain.com</Computer>
    <Security UserID="S-1-5-18" />
  </System>
  <EventData>
    <Data Name="Phase">0</Data>
    <Data Name="Status">3221226021</Data>
  </EventData>
</Event>
0
hello
i have a network the ahve a multi subnet and multi router and main gateway
on of client in a subnet are doing a arp spoofing of one of router in subnet on a switch getway ip
how i can catch him ?
in all subnets i have hawawi switches l3
thanks
0
Tough spam problem can't seem to isolate. Out of 20 users only one affected. Spam is not going through the spam filter incoming or outgoing. Has to be something on a local device infusing the spam into the users inbox. Nothing in sent either. Have removed the computer they work from in the office, disabled the NIC. Ran a malware scan on they're laptop and the ccleaner bug was found, see below for details regarding the CCleaner incident.

CCleaner v5.33 and CCleaner Cloud v1.07 Security Notification. Not sure if this is related.

Haven't run a scan on the users phone doing so now.

The bug is the same one identified here.
0
Hello everyone! I hope you are all doing well.  I've been looking at a few Single Sign on services provider. Centrify and Azure to name a few. Any other reliable and easy to setup Single Sign on services with excellent support? I have to add about 12 different cloud apps and wanted to make sure I can find one that perhaps will support us through the implementation process since some of the apps are not common.
0
I am considering running openVPN on a linode and setting UFW to only accept connections from that IP Address. Would this be good security? I realize it may be redudent with Fail2Ban but I'm hungover today doing sys admin stuff and thought about doing this.

I'm a Cyber Security student but I haven't gotten to any major classes yet so I really don't know if this is a good idea or not.
0
Hi,
I added a Content-Security-Policy that works in Firefox and Chrome but not Safari.  I am using Safari 10.1.2. In Safari I get the error:
“Refused to apply a stylesheet because its hash, its nonce, or 'unsafe-inline' does not appear in the style-src directive of the Content Security Policy.”
So, I tried adding ‘unsafe-inline' to style-src but I still get the error in Safari.  I have some hashes in style-src (that were provided by Chrome), and when I get rid of the hash, Safari gives no errors as long as I have ‘unsafe-inline’ written.  If I put the hash back in, I get the error again in Safari.  The other browsers work fine.  Does anyone know what I can do to get the Content-Security-Policy working in Safari?  Any help is greatly appreciated!
0
SD-WAN: Making It Work for You
SD-WAN: Making It Work for You

As bandwidth requirements and Internet costs grow, businesses naturally want to manage budgets by reducing reliance on their most expensive connection types. Learn more about how to make SD-WAN work for your business in our on-demand webinar!

My sonicwall is dropping my connection from a second subnet. I understand why, as it is identifying this 96... ip address as a WAN on the LAN. However I just simply want to allow all traffic from that IP to get through. How would I go about configuring the sonicwall?

I tried disabling IP Spoof Checking from the diag.html page, but it refuses to save and only says "there were no changes made".

01/15/2018 12:07:25.640      Alert      Intrusion Prevention      IP spoof dropped      96.67.165.X, 49873, X1      209.63.225.X, 80, X1      

Thanks!
0
Twice in the past month our static IP has been flagged by the CBL as hosting malware. The CBL provides the source and destination IP but we have not been able to capture ANY traffic from our network to the destination IP provided. Here is what the CBL gave us:

Detection Information Summary
Destination IP	146.148.124.166
Destination port	443
Source IP	[xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]
Source port	16997
C&C name/domain	kemonzura.gdn
Protocol	TCP
Time	Tue Dec 26 18:15:27 2017 UTC

Open in new window


The source IP is set on our WAN interface on our firewall (Sonicwall) and packet capture on the Sonicwall shows no outbound traffic to the destination IP. We port mirrored the switch port where the WAN port is connected on the switch and ran Wireshare against it and still no packets destined for the destination IP. We put a firewall rule in place to drop any packets destined for the destination IP and still we get listed.

In short, we have not been able to capture a single packet egressing our network and destined for the destination IP provided by the CBL. Is it possible to spoof the source IP? If so, how do you re-mediate?

We are thoroughly puzzled by this.

Below are the full results of the CBL lookup:

Results of Lookup
[redacted] is listed

This IP address was detected and listed 56 times in the past 28 days, and 13 times in the past 24 hours. The most recent detection was at Tue Dec 26 18:15:00 2017 UTC +/- 5 minutes

This IP address is infected with, or is NATting for a
0
This is a great video (however the links no longer work):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Usydlsc2uWE
I need a real life example of IF someone clicks on a bad link via email or whatever avenue how the redirected website collects their credentials. Anyone have any good ones?

TIA!!
0
Hi Experts,

On our public-facing OWA server on IIS 7, we turned on IP Address and Domain Restriction. If from the log we detect any IP trying brute force to log into our Web Outlook interface, we will put the IP into "Deny Restriction Rule" in the hope that IP will be 'blocked', meaning not even able to get the login screen. Actually it seems to be a wishful thinking since we noticed one of the IP we already added in the 'Deny' list that particular ip still keeps showing up in the log and we can see it got the login form and then denied with sc-status 401-1.

My question is, it seems this feature does NOT "block" the IP from getting the login form, but instead simply "deny" their login request. Is it correct?
0
Hi there,

I am curious to know if there is a process to help map all DIACAP controls to RMF ? Or if there is already a mapping that was done for this already.

Please let me know your suggestions or experience. Any bit helps

-Michelle
0
So here's the situation.

We got hit with cryptolocker and we managed to restore our files from backup but the techs forgot to delete the encrypted files first and we aren't 100% sure that the restore worked.
Now I have to verify that every single folder on our filesystem has the same # or greater # of unencrypted files than encrypted ones before I can mass delete the encrypted files.
Sounds simple, aside from the fact that it's several Terabytes of data and thousands of folders.

I need help to design a script (or find a tool) that will recursively scan through all the folders in our filesystem and perform the following logic:

If # '.locked' files into folder > # of != '.locked' files in folder > paste folder path into log file.
0
I'm seeing something in a SIEM that I can't seem to wrap my head around. I have an internet facing ASA that is configured to deny spoofed IP addresses (I don't manage these devices). Shortly after feeding syslog events from this device into the SIEM, I started seeing "Traffic from Tor Exit Node" and "Deny IP Spoof" events in the SIEM. I bring up both items as I'm not sure if they're related.

Anyway, when I look at "Traffic from Tor Exit Node" events where the source IP is the known Tor exit node (most of them), there is no corresponding destination IP address or destination port. I've crafted a few stories in my head involving nmap scans through Tor but I can't convince myself of anything I've come up with. Anyone have a plausible explanation?

Thanks,
TR
0
I'm tasked with providing an email solution for a Defense Dept. (.MIL) organization that allows DoD students to submit messages and forms  containing personally identifiable information (PII) from their personal email accounts usually with no encryption.

The customer's requirements calls for the student information to be archived and tracked on a server that resides on the DoD organizational network.

The solution must support DoD 8500.1 guidelines and applicable FIPS/NIST standards  for CyberSecurity and processing PII information.

Please see the attached spreadsheet listing the requirements. The highlighted boxes are the toughest challenges.

I am open to any and all suggestions including Intranet, DMZ, VPN ...etc
Requirements.xlsx
0
I'm working on my master's dissertation in computer forensics and cyber security, and the topic is on bring-your-own-device (BYOD) acceptable use and security policy. There are many security implications that come along with BYOD. I am most interested in what organisations are doing today regarding BYOD?

If anyone has a few minutes and would like to participate in this anonymous BYOD survey, I would really appreciate the feedback.

The survey can be found here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/XPHCQSV 

Thank you!
0

Cyber Security

571

Solutions

893

Contributors

The cyber security specialization covers the fundamental concepts underlying the construction of secure systems, from the hardware to the software to the human-computer interface, with the use of cryptography to secure interactions. cyber security focuses on protecting computers, networks, programs and data from unintended or unauthorized access, change, theft or destruction. This includes controlling physical access to the hardware, as well as protecting against the harm that may come via network access, data and code injection, and due to malpractice by operators, whether intentional, accidental, or due to them being tricked into deviating from secure procedures.