devopsy.kinsta.cloud

Tag: Software Supply Chain

  • Red Hat Moves to Secure Software Supply Chains

    Red Hat Moves to Secure Software Supply Chains

    Red Hat today announced a portfolio of cloud services designed to better secure software supply chains. The expanded portfolio includes Red Hat Trusted Application Pipeline to secure continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) workflows and Red Hat Trusted Content offerings to better secure software components.

    Announced at the Red Hat Summit, the Red Hat Trusted Software Supply Chain combines a suite of curated open source tools into a cloud service managed by Red Hat. The Red Hat Trusted Application Pipeline service is based on sigstore, an emerging de facto standard for cryptographically signing code to ensure immutability that Red Hat helped drive, while Red Hat Trusted Content provides access to a set of software components that Red Hat has vetted.

    Red Hat Trusted Software Supply Chain also provides access to existing tools such as Quay, a registry for containers, and the Advanced Cluster Security (ACS) platform for securing Kubernetes clusters.

    Red Hat Trusted Software Supply Chain is scheduled to be made available in preview in the next few weeks, and will also track the provenance of components. In addition, the service will monitor emerging threats to software components and alert users of new and emerging risks. The service will also surface recommendations for remediating vulnerabilities it identifies based on best practices defined by Red Hat.

    Finally, Red Hat Trusted Application Pipeline also promises to make it simpler to automate the deployment of secure code with a few clicks within the context of an integrated continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipeline. DevOps team can also import Git repositories and configure container-native continuous build, test and deployment pipelines, inspect source code and transitive dependencies, autogenerate software bill of materials (SBOMs) within builds and verify and promote container images. An enterprise contract policy engine can consistently enforce compliance with the Supply Chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA) framework.

    Finding ways to implement DevSecOps workflows is a major challenge for any organization. Red Hat is making a case for a managed cloud service based on a collection of security software and services that a DevOps team would otherwise have to implement themselves.

    Tasked with securing increasingly complex software development environments, it’s not clear whether DevOps teams will opt to rely on a cloud service, but given the general lack of security expertise among software development teams, the fastest way to secure a software supply chain for most organizations is to rely on a service.

    Regardless of approach, of course, DevSecOps will soon become a standard element of application development workflows. Once that occurs, it’s not clear whether DevOps will simply become DevSecOps or whether security will be assumed to be an integrated element of any set of DevOps best practices.

    Sarwar Raza, vice president and general manager for cloud services at Red Hat, said regardless of approach, it’s clear that implicit trust is no longer good enough. Organizations of all sizes will need to be able to demonstrate that they have maintained a chain of custody for the software components used to build an application, he noted.

    One way or another, the overall security of downstream applications should eventually improve as the processes used to construct software are increasingly locked down.

  • DevOps Security: Your Complete Checklist

    DevOps Security: Your Complete Checklist

    In a fast-paced environment like DevOps, your security strategy needs to be even more agile. While moving fast is great for delivering application features and functionality, speed shouldn’t come at the cost of security.

    DevOps security incorporates security strategies directly into your DevOps pipeline, creating a culture of pre-secured software deployments that work seamlessly for the end user. However, this requires a complete shift in your operational policies and security mindset. You need to start viewing security as an integral part of your DevOps lifecycle instead of a separate department.

    Here’s a checklist of DevOps security strategies for your development teams to deliver secure and reliable applications faster:

    Your Complete DevOps Security Checklist

    1. Analyze your development process for security hazards.
    The first step in implementing a DevOps security strategy is finding and fixing loopholes in your existing development process.

    For instance, continuous delivery and development are key in a DevOps environment. However, if each change doesn’t go through a code review, it has the potential to break your application.

    Deploying changes without passing them through a security checkpoint is like driving at high speed on a road with many curves. Each curve (change) is a potential hazard, and the danger increases when the driver does not know a car is coming from the other side (bug).

    Therefore, you must turn the spotlight on your development process and find those curves.

    2. Create a common goal between development and security teams.
    Traditional roles of developers and security teams might look like they are at crossroads — Developers write code, and security teams find fault with their code. However, in a collaborative environment such as DevOps, security and development must work hand-in-hand to deliver a secure and seamless experience to end users.

    Your organization should have a common goal of integrating security directly into the development process. Therefore, encourage open and regular communication between development and security teams. Further, establish joint milestones and review them to ensure there are no silos between both teams.

    Once these teams get used to this collaborative approach, your deployments will become faster because fewer things will break.

    3. Integrate security procedures in the development phase.
    Automation is the lifeblood of DevOps security. Integrating scanning tools into development workflows is critical to your entire process.

    For example, automated tools can scan the code, network and infrastructure to identify security vulnerabilities and provide recommendations for remediation. With this, development teams can fix a few security concerns themselves before passing them on to the security team for a final check.

    4. Add observability to your pipeline.
    One of the biggest challenges of the distributed nature of DevOps operations is visibility. How do you efficiently monitor a large number of operation nodes spread across several different locations?

    Observability helps you do this by using logs, metrics and traces—i.e., the outputs of your application to determine internal application health. With observability tools, you can see much deeper into the operations of your systems and identify the exact details of any security concerns. You can also easily identify potential bugs and fix them before they cause problems.

    5. Make changes in small, incremental units.
    It is infinitely easier to test code in small units and deploy them as minor but incremental changes than handling large, unwieldy blocks of monolithic code. Deploying gradual changes means you can resolve vulnerabilities faster.

    6. Scan and secure your entire DevOps pipeline.
    A large part of the security hazards in your DevOps process comes from unsecured containers and operations nodes. According to a study from ThreatStack, 94% of organizations say containers represent a security risk.

    However, the risk is not limited to containers.

    Other services like APIs, third-party tools like Docker and imported code pose a potential security risk to your processes. This makes it necessary to scan all your operations nodes periodically for vulnerabilities. And once you’ve cleared them, remember to lock the door behind you by requiring strict credentials for access to your administrative dashboards.

    Ticking Items Off Your DevOps Security Checklist

    If you implement most of the security guidelines on this checklist, your organization will have a solid security foundation. However, DevOps security is not a one-time process.

    You will need to continuously integrate security protocols into each part of your DevOps life cycle. Furthermore, you will need to re-train your employees and invest in new technology that makes your security pipeline smoother, such as observability.

    However, since this entire process makes your applications more secure and compliant while shipping them to market faster, investing in DevOps security is well worth it!

  • AWS Converts Cedar Policy-as-Code Tool to Open Source Project

    AWS Converts Cedar Policy-as-Code Tool to Open Source Project

    At the Open Source Summit North America conference today, Amazon Web Services (AWS) announced it is making Cedar, a language for defining permissions as policies that includes automated reasoning to mathematically prove an IT environment is secure, available as an open source project.

    In addition, AWS launched SnapChange, an open source fuzz testing tool that cybersecurity researchers can employ to discover vulnerabilities by replaying physical memory snapshots in a KVM virtual machine. Fuzz testing uncovers software security issues by monitoring how the system behaves while processing random data.

    David Nalley, director of open source marketing for AWS, said both projects are part of an ongoing AWS effort to contribute intellectual property to the open source community that plays a pivotal role in the applications that organizations deploy on the AWS cloud.

    AWS has been employing Cedar to provide IT organizations with the ability to write authorization policies as code that can be deployed anywhere. It is most widely used within the managed AWS Verified Permissions service that manages those processes on behalf of organizations that deploy workloads on its cloud.

    Cedar differs from other policy-as-code approaches because it employs automated reasoning, a computer science discipline that is considered a subset of artificial intelligence (AI), to enable machines to prove theorems and checks. That latter capability is especially critical to enable organizations to mathematically prove that compliance mandates have been continuously met, noted Nalley.

    Otherwise, IT organizations become wholly dependent on an assessment of intermittent audits conducted by humans that are likely to arrive at varying subjective conclusions, he noted.

    The latest open source contributions from AWS come at a time when there is more scrutiny being applied to how open source software is developed and employed. The scrutiny increased in the wake of a series of vulnerability disclosures involving open source software, such as the Log4j monitoring software project.

    The maintainers of many open source software projects often don’t have the resources or capabilities required to immediately patch a vulnerability every time it is discovered. That’s become especially problematic, because more research into open source software vulnerabilities is being conducted; it’s only a matter of time before a vulnerability is detected in software that was largely created by developers that have limited cybersecurity expertise. Enterprises that consume open source software need to pay careful attention to what dependencies they are creating when that software gets incorporated into an application environment. A patch for a zero-day vulnerability that is discovered might not be readily available.

    Hopefully, consumers of open source software will become more involved in its development by contributing code or making available the financial resources that maintainers need to devote time and effort to creating a timely patch to a vulnerability. In the meantime, however, they should also be reviewing what open source software is included in applications running in production environments. Cybercriminals are increasingly looking to discover and exploit vulnerabilities in not just existing applications but not also in components they know are likely to be employed across a wide range of downstream applications.

    As such, finding ways to apply more cybersecurity expertise to application development by embracing DevSecOps practices has become an imperative rather than a recommendation.

  • ReversingLabs: Increased Focus on Software Supply Chain Security

    ReversingLabs: Increased Focus on Software Supply Chain Security

    A global survey of 300 global executives, technology and security professionals found software containing vulnerabilities (82%) followed by secrets leaked through source code (55%), malicious code (52%) and suspicious code (46%) posed a serious risk to the business.

    Conducted by Dimensional Research on behalf of ReversingLabs, a provider of a platform for securing software supply chains, the survey found 87% of respondents detected significant risks in their software supply chain in the last year. Nearly three-quarters (74%) said legacy application security tools, including static application security testing (SAST) (54%), dynamic application security testing (DAST) (42%) and software composition analysis (SCA) (40%), are ineffective against threats to modern software supply chains.

    A full 88% said software supply chain security is an enterprise-wide risk, but only 60% said their software supply chain defenses were up to the task. Nearly two-thirds (65%), however, acknowledged their organization’s software supply chain security program wasn’t as mature as it should be. As a result, 80% are currently focused on improving security for the software supply chain, with 96% noting a more comprehensive approach to software supply chain security that detects more than vulnerabilities is needed.

    Overall, the survey found nearly all respondents (98%) recognized that software supply chain issues pose a significant business risk. Nearly 90% reported detecting security or other issues in their software supply chain in the last 12 months. Those issues stemmed from internally developed software (47%) as much as open source software (49%), followed by commercial software (30%), the survey finds.

    Tyson Whitten, vice president of global marketing for ReversingLabs, said the survey results make it clear that software supply chain issues extend well beyond open source software dependencies. Use of open source software has expanded greatly over the last decade, but security flaws in software are pervasive, he noted.

    In addition, many of these issues stemmed from software created by contractors and third-party companies, added Whitten. More than half of respondents worked for organizations that use contractors (67%) and third-party development companies (59%) and many organizations don’t have the tools required to review applications before they are deployed in a production environment.

    Software supply chain security has become a major issue in the wake of a series of high-profile breaches. The challenge is shortage of cybersecurity expertise available to secure those supply chains. Usually, someone on the DevOps team needs to emerge as a security champion for the good of the larger application development team. Unfortunately, most developers have had limited exposure to cybersecurity training, so it can take a significant amount of time for those champions to emerge.

    In the meantime, it’s less clear whether organizations will upgrade their DevOps environments to make them more secure, but it’s clear they will soon be held more accountable for application security. Governments around the world are currently drafting legislation that would impose penalties should it be determined an organization recklessly built and deployed software. Once that legislation is passed, it may only be a matter of time before the pressure on organizations to adopt DevSecOps workflows increases. The issue is determining how quickly to get in front of that issue before a potential legal quagmire ensues.

  • DORA Report 2022: The Magnitude of Software Supply Chain Security  

    DORA Report 2022: The Magnitude of Software Supply Chain Security  

    The term ‘software supply chain security’ (SSC) can be interpreted in many ways. Following the White House executive order in May 2021 and the European Cyber Resilience Act (CRA) of 2022, both governments and corporations are taking a more active role in ensuring their software is secure. Fundamentals such as having a software bill of materials (SBOM) and being able to cross-reference it with known common vulnerabilities and exposures (CVEs) are now the standard, but supply chain security covers far more than just the software that builds your products.

    To create certainty and clarity, leading standardization bodies such as OWASP, OpenSSF and others have set up ongoing efforts to define and mitigate SSC threats. They have active working groups, SIGs and TACs all working in vendor-neutral ways to help define and solve parts of the SSC problem.

    A great example of this is the continuous work being done by Google Cloud’s DevOps Research and Assessment (DORA) initiative. More specifically, the subject was reflected in the September 2022 DORA report that focused on security in general and supply chain security in particular. Using the Supply-chain Levels for Secure Artifacts (SLSA) framework as well as the NIST’s Secure Software Development Framework (SSDF) as benchmarks for actively addressing supply chain security issues, the researchers assessed how organizations were successful in approaching and addressing threats at all levels of the organization.

    My view of the major findings of the DORA report are summarized below.

    Who Owns Software Supply Chain Security?

    The report stated that organizations should empower individual teams and developers to “own” security while administering a consistent security policy and posture across its products. While I agree with this, we need to examine both sides of the ‘ownership’ coin. By nature, this hybrid approach creates complexity—and even friction—between the security team that, by definition, is responsible for all facets of security and the developers that are being tasked to ‘fix’ security issues in addition to their daily tasks. There has to be common ground between developers, their tasks associated with security and the security team.

    Individuals in organizations that build software care about what they build; they have a stake in the overall success of the final product and this feeling of ownership strengthens that level of care. However, asking for such ownership while adding a security component to the mix without providing sufficient knowledge, tools, proofs, and “power” to make decisions could lead to  a lack of trust, confusion, execution problems and frustration. To alleviate this, the security team should provide developers the tools, education and resources they need to feel empowered to enhance security efforts at the source. Organizations that provide evidence in a scalable, digestible manner are successful in building trust and creating common ground between the developer, security and the security team.

    There’s also another dimension that could potentially create silos between developers and security teams rather than bringing the two together: There’s no one single security team or owner of SSC. SSC is tricky to define as a category; it involves shift left security, runtime security and everything in between. Some portions of it are being governed by the security office, some by AppSec, some by DevOps and some by the developer. The ownership of each isn’t well-defined and the entire effort is very difficult to consolidate as one process or methodology. In addition to upskilling the developer with tools and training, long-term education, thought leadership and access to good technology are the keys to gradually reduce these friction points..

    Security Processes Slow Down Development

    Defining the tools, methodologies and processes that should be employed in an organization to add sufficient security while not impacting development speed is not a trivial task.

    ­­The following are four principals I think correspond well with the SLSA framework and that help address the development slowdown challenge:

    Set preventive measures: Avoid using known vulnerable and malicious packages from the beginning of development. By eliminating vulnerabilities introduced in first-party code (due to bad coding practices) as well as misconfigurations, wrong encryption and secrets exposures, you are preventing known threats from entering your product.

    Examine proactively and continuously: The security state of software changes because the software itself always evolves and new vulnerabilities are continuously being introduced. It makes a software artifact that was just secured suddenly become susceptible to attack. This requires continuously rescanning and revisiting software artifacts as well as frequently recalculating any potential risk.

    Set preemptive measures: Create a plan that initiates a prompt response when a potential risk is discovered. Both development and security teams should create the plan for decision making and execution. The measures should include ways to identify vulnerable artifacts across development and production, how to understand exploitability and true impact and how to prioritize and remediate accordingly.

    Do it all in an automated manner: Create automated processes based on reliable data and scanning tools to dramatically reduce the effort needed by developers and DevOps teams.

    DORA report co-author Eric Maxwell said one of the main principles is to remain tool- and platform-agnostic while focusing on capabilities and practices. From that perspective, automation is essential and it is enabled by security-as-code. Having a common language–code–allows teams to communicate about security as well as collaborate. It drives the things we discussed earlier around democratizing the security process and helps break down silos.

    The DORA findings—alongside the topics described above—encourage community awareness and continued shared efforts to bring much-needed attention to software supply chain security. Gradually, SSC security will evolve, but as it does so, the only way to properly address it is by ensuring the developers and security teams are on the same page and both have ownership of responding to and resolving issues as they appear. For more in depth review of the DORA report I encourage you to view Leap Left for Security: The DORA Report Roundtable.

  • npm is Scam-Spam Cesspool ¦ Google in Microsoft Antitrust Thrust

    npm is Scam-Spam Cesspool ¦ Google in Microsoft Antitrust Thrust

    Welcome to The Long View—where we peruse the news of the week and strip it to the essentials. Let’s work out what really matters.

    This week: The npm registry suffers spam infestation, and Microsoft makes Google sad. (more…)

  • Software Supply Chain Risk Management: A 2023 Guide

    Software Supply Chain Risk Management: A 2023 Guide

    Software supply chain risk management (SSCRM) refers to the process of identifying, assessing and mitigating risks associated with third-party software components and services that are integrated into software products. SSCRM involves understanding the potential vulnerabilities that may arise from these components and taking measures to reduce the risk of exploitation or compromise to the software system or end-users.

    Why Software Supply Chain Attacks are Becoming More Common

    Software supply chain attacks have become common due to several factors: 

    • Larger attack surface: The increased use of third-party software components and services in software development has expanded the attack surface for cybercriminals. This means that attackers can exploit vulnerabilities in these third-party components to gain access to the larger software system. 
    • Rise of open source: The proliferation of open source software has also contributed to the rise of supply chain attacks as attackers can inject malicious code into open source repositories, which can then be used by developers in their software products.
    • Difficulty to detect: Detecting supply chain attacks can be challenging since attackers often use legitimate-looking code that may be difficult to distinguish from normal code. This can make it difficult for traditional security measures to detect the attack. Additionally, the attack may not manifest itself until much later, making it even harder to trace back to its source.
    • Automation: Supply chain attacks are also becoming more sophisticated through the use of automation. Attackers can use automated tools to scan for vulnerabilities in third-party components and inject malicious code into them. This means that they can quickly and efficiently compromise a large number of software products.
    • Evasion techniques: Attackers can evade traditional security measures through techniques such as code obfuscation and encryption. This makes it difficult for security measures to detect malicious code, which can easily slip through undetected.
    • Sophistication: Supply chain attacks are becoming more challenging to combat due to the use of advanced malware techniques to change shape. Attackers can use polymorphic malware that can change its code and behavior to avoid detection. This means that even if the malware is detected, it can quickly change its form to evade detection in the future.

    Supply Chain Security and DevSecOps

    DevSecOps is an approach that integrates security into all stages of the software development process. Adopting DevSecOps practices can help businesses manage supply chain risks by building security into their software development and delivery pipelines. 

    Continuous integration/continuous deployment (CI/CD) pipelines are a key component of DevSecOps, as they allow developers to rapidly test and deploy code changes while ensuring that security and compliance requirements are met.

    Here are some ways DevOps tools in the CI/CD pipeline can help manage supply chain risks:

    • Automating security testing: DevSecOps enables businesses to automate security testing throughout the software development life cycle, including during the development, testing and deployment phases. This can help identify and mitigate security vulnerabilities early in the process, reducing the likelihood of supply chain risks.
    • Continuous monitoring: DevSecOps enables continuous monitoring of software and infrastructure, providing real-time visibility into the security posture of the supply chain. This can help identify and respond to security threats quickly and effectively.
    • Secure coding practices: DevSecOps encourages the use of secure coding practices, such as input validation, access control and error handling, reducing the likelihood of supply chain risks.
    • Risk management: DevSecOps incorporates risk management into the software development process, ensuring that supply chain risks are identified, assessed and managed effectively.

    Tools and Solutions to Help Manage Supply Chain Risks

    Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM)

    SCRM solutions are software tools and services that help organizations manage and mitigate supply chain risks. These solutions provide visibility into the supply chain operations, identify potential risks and enable organizations to take proactive measures to mitigate these risks. 

    They may include features such as supplier risk assessments, real-time monitoring of supply chain operations, analytics and reporting and incident response planning. SCRM solutions are often available as a service (SaaS) and can help organizations to enhance supply chain resilience, reduce disruption and ensure business continuity.

    Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

    Software Composition Analysis (SCA) is a software security practice that involves identifying and managing open source and third-party components used in the development of software applications. SCA tools scan the software codebase, detect and report the presence of third-party and open-source components and identify known vulnerabilities in these components. 

    SCA helps organizations to identify and manage risks associated with third-party components, including license compliance, intellectual property infringement and security vulnerabilities. SCA is an essential component of SSCRM and can help organizations to ensure the security and integrity of the software products they develop and distribute.

    Third-Party and Supplier Risk Management

    Third-party and supplier risk management software is designed to help businesses manage the risks associated with their third-party vendors and suppliers. This software provides tools and resources to identify, assess and manage the risks associated with third-party relationships.

    Here are some features of third-party and supplier risk management software:

    • Supplier management: The software provides tools to manage supplier relationships, including supplier performance monitoring, supplier compliance and supplier risk assessment.
    • Risk assessment: The software enables businesses to assess the risks associated with their third-party relationships, including financial risks, operational risks and reputational risks.
    • Compliance management: The software helps businesses comply with regulations and standards, such as GDPR, HIPAA and ISO 9001.
    • Data analytics: The software uses data analytics tools to help businesses identify trends and patterns in third-party data, enabling them to anticipate and mitigate risks.
    • Incident management: The software provides tools to help businesses respond to and manage incidents related to third-party relationships, such as data breaches or compliance violations.

    Best Practices for Software Supply Chain Risk Management

    The following are some best practices for managing supply chain risks.

    Identifying Supply Chain Threats and Potential Weaknesses

    The first step in managing supply chain risks is to identify potential threats and vulnerabilities in the supply chain. This involves conducting a comprehensive risk assessment that considers all potential sources of risk, including geopolitical factors, natural disasters, cyber threats and other disruptions. The risk assessment should consider the entire supply chain, including all vendors, suppliers and partners.

    During the risk assessment, organizations should identify the critical components and services that are essential to their operations. They should also evaluate the potential impact of a disruption to these critical components and services, including the financial, reputational and operational impact.

    Establishing a Supply Chain Risk Management Framework

    After identifying potential threats and vulnerabilities, organizations should establish a supply chain risk management framework that outlines the policies, procedures and controls required to mitigate these risks. The risk management framework should be aligned with the organization’s overall risk management strategy and should include the following components:

    • Risk management policy: This policy should outline the organization’s approach to supply chain risk management and define the roles and responsibilities of key stakeholders.
    • Risk assessment procedures: These procedures should describe how the organization conducts risk assessments, including the criteria used to evaluate risks and the frequency of assessments.
    • Risk mitigation controls: These controls should outline the specific measures the organization will take to mitigate identified risks.
    • Incident response plan: This plan should describe the steps the organization will take in the event of a supply chain disruption.

    Continuously Monitoring Risks

    Once the supply chain risk management framework is in place, organizations should continuously monitor supply chain and third-party risks and take proactive measures to mitigate them. This includes establishing a patching cadence to ensure that all software components are up to date and protected against known vulnerabilities.

    Organizations should also implement endpoint security controls, such as antivirus software and intrusion detection systems, to protect against malware and other cyber threats. Network security controls, such as firewalls and access controls, should be implemented to protect against unauthorized access to systems and data.

    Web application security controls should also be implemented to protect against web-based attacks, such as SQL injection and cross-site scripting. This includes conducting regular vulnerability assessments and penetration testing of web applications.

    Promoting a Culture of Awareness

    Finally, organizations should promote a culture of awareness among all stakeholders, including employees, vendors, and suppliers. This includes providing risk awareness training to employees, so they understand the risks associated with the supply chain and the steps they can take to mitigate these risks.

    Organizations should also communicate their supply chain risk management policies clearly to vendors and suppliers so they understand their obligations and responsibilities in managing supply chain risks. This includes conducting due diligence on vendors and suppliers to ensure they meet security standards and policies.

    Conclusion

    Managing supply chain risks is a critical task for organizations that rely on third-party vendors and suppliers to deliver goods and services. These risks can arise from a range of sources, including geopolitical factors, natural disasters, cyber threats and other disruptions.

     To effectively manage these risks, organizations need to adopt best practices such as identifying threats and potential weaknesses, establishing a supply chain risk management framework, continuously monitoring risks and promoting a culture of awareness.

    As we look ahead to 2023, it is clear that software supply chain management will continue to be a priority for organizations across industries. With the increasing complexity of software supply chains and the evolving threat landscape, organizations must remain vigilant in their efforts to identify and mitigate potential risks.

  • Awareness of Software Supply Chain Security Issues Improves

    Awareness of Software Supply Chain Security Issues Improves

    A global survey of 167 software professionals suggested that, while there is a lot more awareness of application security issues, the adoption of DevSecOps best practices is still not pervasive.

    The survey, conducted by Chainguard, the Eclipse Foundation, the Rust Foundation and the Open Source Security Foundation (OpenSSF), found that just over half (51%) of respondents are either concerned or are extremely concerned about software supply chain security.

    In addition, only a third of respondents (33%) reported they are familiar with the Supply-chain Levels for Software Artifacts (SLSA) framework for building more secure applications. Well over a third (36%), however, said they had never heard of it.

    Only a quarter of respondents (25%) reported that their team always signed built artifacts, the survey found.

    The survey identified the most challenging issues developers are encountering and found they are reproducing builds (64%) followed by creating hermetic builds that are isolated from other software libraries (62%).

    Mikaël Barbero, head of cybersecurity for the Eclipse Foundation, said while awareness of software supply chain issues is higher, it’s apparent that other priorities are still getting in the way of adoption of DevSecOps best practices. For example, software bills of materials (SBOMs) may generate a lot of headlines, but their adoption remains mixed, he added.

    John Speed Meyers, a security data scientist for Chainguard, noted that incentives still need to change; too many managers that hire developers still emphasize performance and delivery times over application security. Many developers, as a result, still tend to view cybersecurity as an obstacle to be overcome or worked around rather than a core capability that they will be graded on, he added.

    In theory, as responsibility for application security shifts left toward developers, overall cybersecurity will improve. Most developers, however, have little to no cybersecurity training, so the odds they will be able to resolve these issues are low. Instead, many organizations are either trying to embed cybersecurity professionals within DevOps workflows or, at the very least, deputize at least one developer to advocate for cybersecurity within those teams.

    Regardless of commitment level, it’s apparent that organizations need to address everything from locking down developer environments to thwart phishing attacks to ensuring application builds are not inadvertently infected with malware. The challenge organizations face is both technical and cultural, so the amount of effort required should not be underestimated.

    In the meantime, organizations should expect to see cybercriminals increase their attempts to compromise software supply chains. Infecting malware into software components that will be used by multiple downstream applications is, from their perspective, one of the most efficient means of wreaking havoc. Right now, organizations make it too easy for cybercriminals to compromise application environments.

    Organizations should also recognize that tolerance for insecure applications is also declining, as evidenced by the National Cybersecurity Strategy put forward by the Biden administration. It’s not so much a question of whether organizations that create software will be held liable for application security issues as much as it is to what degree.

  • Addressing Software Supply Chain Security

    Addressing Software Supply Chain Security

    It’s essential for organizations to learn more about the software supply chains they rely on and the steps needed to secure them. In just the past few years, we have seen a major uptick in malicious actors exploiting vulnerabilities in software supply chains to facilitate attacks on organizations. However, it’s important to remember that these attacks are not a new phenomenon. In fact, they’ve been around for decades. Therefore, the need to secure the software we rely on is not new, though the industry turning its attention to this problem is.

    Software supply chain attacks are also far from simple. Given the fact that software supply chains are highly complex and made up of a number of constantly changing components, the avenues that malicious actors can take to pull off an attack are plentiful. For example, software artifacts are partially made up of components downloaded from open source software repositories. These platforms have become a favored attack avenue, given how frequently they are used by developers and the trust extended to them by development organizations. According to GitHub, anywhere from 85-97% of enterprise codebases come from open source repositories. Two of these repositories, npm and PyPI, have seen a nearly 300% spike in the number of attacks on their platforms in the past four years, impacting thousands of software supply chains globally.

    One example of the kinds of software supply chain attacks that are now common is IconBurst, a major attack from last year where more than two dozen typosquatted packages were discovered on npm. As with other recent attacks, the IconBurst attackers used typosquatting – uploading malicious packages to repositories with names that closely resemble popular and legitimate packages on the same platform. Developers, in a rush to complete their work, are often tricked into downloading these typosquatted packages. In the case of the IconBurst campaign, for example, one of the malicious packages discovered was downloaded over 17,000 times!

    Given the significant increase in the number of software supply chain attacks, organizations must make more of an effort to understand how these attacks work and then take steps to secure their software supply chains from compromise.

    Say Goodbye to “Shift Left”

    To begin with, development organizations need to reevaluate the mantra to “shift left.”

    For years, industry leaders promoted the notion of “shifting left” as a call to marry application security with application development: Embedding secure development tools and practices into the continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) process. But times are changing and the industry is beginning to understand that while shifting left is necessary, it is not sufficient to secure software supply chains.

    “Don’t shift left; shift everywhere!” said Tanya Janca, founder and CEO of WeHackPurple. Janca was speaking as a member of a recent Techstrong panel, “Software Supply Chain: It’s All About The Code” at the Predict 2023 virtual event. Janca pointed out the industry’s past fixation on “shift left” and the gaps in security that this caused since threats to the software supply chain not only happen during development but also throughout the entire software release process.

    In fact, the notion of shifting left may do development organizations and developers a disservice: Leaving the work of securing applications entirely to them. “It’s unfair to expect developers to write perfect code,” said Jeff Williams, co-founder and CTO of Contrast Security, another member of the panel.

    Software engineers are already under pressure to develop software quickly to meet development and project milestones. That makes it difficult for them to implement perfect security measures, like vetting every single line of third-party code they use while also watching out for social engineering attacks.

    A New Approach to Secure the Software Supply Chain

    For organizations looking to secure the software supply chains they rely on, they must choose the right tools. But much of the secure development and application security testing (AST) technology out there won’t cut it. For instance, tools such as dynamic or static application security testing (DAST/SAST) are critical components of the secure development life cycle (SDLC). However, they don’t provide holistic coverage of all of the supply chain threats out there, including software tampering and the risk posed by compromised open source and third-party libraries. On the other hand, tools such as software composition analysis (SCA) can help vet open source components but often fail to detect malicious modules or provide total security coverage of software supply chains. Knowing that your application depends on a malicious open source package after the fact is of little consolation when you release code at the speed of DevOps.

    This is why modern tools that go beyond these capabilities should be considered. “It’s about giving developers the tools they need to be successful,” said GitLab’s CPO David DeSanto at the event. Experts in the space agree that change is needed but that developers and development teams aren’t set up for success as it stands.

    According to Mat Matthews, an experienced practitioner in the DevOps space: “While developers are responsible for ensuring clean code, it takes a cross-functional team with a specific focus on security to reduce the attack surface against supply chain attacks.”

    To accomplish that, organizations need to look to their security operations centers (SOCs) to take on a greater role in helping to secure software supply chains. Close collaboration between development and SOC teams is the surest way to provide end-to-end security for an organization’s software supply chains. And, supplied with the right tooling, SOCs and development teams working together will be better positioned to scan software packages; achieve greater visibility into development processes; detect deviations from a set baseline; and pursue possible supply chain compromises before they can cause real harm to software publishers and their customers.

    As threats and attacks on software supply chains evolve, so must protections. A modern software supply chain security program should aim to protect the entire software development process, from the developer IDEs and their plugins to the open source components, CI/CD workflows and the release pipelines, while also being equipped to spot and pursue compromises at any point in the development life cycle. Only then will development teams be able to prevent harmful attacks like SUNBURST, IconBurst and countless others that have happened since.

  • ReversingLabs Adds Ability to Detect Secrets in Application Binaries

    ReversingLabs Adds Ability to Detect Secrets in Application Binaries

    ReversingLabs today announced it added an ability to detect secrets exposed in application binaries to its Software Supply Chain Security (SSCS) platform.

    Tomislav Peričin, chief software architect for ReversingLabs, said this addition will make it easier for DevSecOps teams to identify secrets that are inadvertently left in applications as plain text or that can be discovered because of weak cryptography, scripts that have been included in directories that have secrets configuration files, packaging automation mistakes, compromised developer accounts or the activities of malicious insiders.

    The SSCS platform can identify more than 250 secret types out of the box, including private keys, version control, certs, tokens and more. Once they are identified, the platform also surfaces their precise location, which services are affected and if those secrets are exposed or leaked elsewhere. The platform also identifies third-party, open source, testing keys and other commonly shared secrets in addition to which secrets have already been exposed. Armed with those insights, it then becomes possible to better prioritize remediation efforts on actionable issues to reduce overall manual triage fatigue, noted Peričin.

    ReversingLabs also provides guidance for sensitive information policies, including documentation of public exposures and breakdowns of secrets used for web service access credentials, web service access tokens, web service API keys and webhook service access keys.

    Most software composition analysis (SCA) tools used to secure software supply chains are limited to identifying issues in source code. As applications become more modular, however, the odds authentication credentials such as login credentials, application programming interface (API) tokens and encryption keys might be left exposed because of a developer mistake substantially increase. The overall goal is to make it possible for DevSecOps teams to discover these issues in binary code before an application is deployed, noted Peričin. That “just in time” approach to secrets management includes canary token management and custom detection policies to better ensure application security.

    In general, secrets within applications are becoming more challenging to secure as cybercriminals increasingly scan repositories and continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) platforms to find them. The ultimate goal is to inject malware into a software component that will be used in multiple downstream applications. Once activated, that malware will then create a backdoor through which cybercriminals can exfiltrate data or launch a full-blown ransomware attack. It was the latter type of attack that led to the U.S. government creating a formal National Cybersecurity Strategy to, in part, lock down the software supply chains employed by federal agencies to build applications.

    A recent survey published by ReversingLabs, however, found that while 87% of respondents agreed that software tampering has become a more frequently used cybersecurity attack, only 37% said they have any means to detect it. Only 7% said they could detect software tampering at each phase of the software development life cycle.

    It’s not clear to what degree best DevSecOps practices are currently being implemented within application development teams, but as more attacks are launched against software supply chains, it’s now only a matter of time before most DevOps teams are routinely required to scan code for exposed secrets and known vulnerabilities long before code is allowed anywhere near a production environment.