You're assuming that having a user's credentials allows the bad guy to install 
a backdoor. It doesn't necessarily, though, depending on other security factors.

And there's the key... The goal is a layered security approach. We all know 
that no one action, product, etc. will fix everything because there are so many 
attack vectors. So we combine techniques, with the plan being that that each 
technique will further improve security-even though we know that some 
techniques are more effective than others.

If the cost of implementing security exceeds the cost of a security compromise, 
then we have a problem. I'm not convinced that requiring regular password 
changes does this, though (depending on the interval, of course). As I 
mentioned earlier, the time it takes is miniscule. In our case, approximately 
one minute ever 60 days. If the user forgets their new password, that could 
bump it up to five minutes since they'll have to use the self-service system to 
pick a new one-but I'm betting they don't do that more than a time or two 
before they start getting better about remembering.

Another factor is liability. We deal with student records that, by law, we're 
obligated to keep private. I'm sure most every organization has some sort of 
data on hand that's governed by law from a privacy standpoint. If a breach of 
security were to occur, I want to be able to prove that we followed best 
practices for security. We're probably going to do better in court if we show 
that we're adhering to the recommendations of the GAO and the Florida Auditor 
General's office.


John



From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 1:05 PM
To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: please don't change your password!

>>Would I rather the bad guy had access to the user's data for 180 days, or 30 
>>days?

Almost every bad-guy is going to attempt to create a backdoor on the system 
such that the user credentials are no longer needed for access.

Therefore, the difference between 30 days and infinity is negligible.

-ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:02 AM, John Hornbuckle 
<john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> 
wrote:
How do we mitigate the effect of passwords compromised as a result of social 
engineering? User training is certainly a factor, but let's say the user still 
gives his/her password away to a bad guy. Would I rather the bad guy had access 
to the user's data for 180 days, or 30 days?

I'm not actually advocating a 30-day change interval-just pointing out that 
there are real security risks that password changes can mitigate.

BTW... I forwarded the article to our state auditor; a recent audit issued a 
finding against us for having a 90-day password expiration policy. She remained 
unmoved. Her office follows the GAO's FISCAM, which recommends: "Passwords are 
changed periodically, about every 30 to 90 days. The more sensitive the data or 
the function, the more frequently passwords should be changed." Florida's 
Auditor General goes with 60 days for network passwords. And personally, I 
don't find 60 days to be egregious.



John



From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com<mailto:asbz...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 10:49 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: please don't change your password!

Okay, let's look at it this way:

Let's say that one environment has a 30 day password change policy, and another 
has a 90 day change policy?

In terms of raw opportunity for brute force attacks, the latter environment has 
2-3x the risk of attack as the former.   In terms of *practical* security 
differences, however, it is almost negligible.  Why?

 *   It doesn't take anywhere near 30 days to brute force passwords if you had 
access to the hash
 *   Most attacks aren't going to try to brute force passwords remotely because 
it is too obvious to notice in many cases
 *   You could spend far less time port scanning for vulnerable ports or 
protocols
 *   You could spend far less time social engineering access to the password
 *   You could spend far less time sending a well crafted email to take 
advantage of a vulnerability or to spear phish the user

So, other than the theoretical, there is very little difference in security 
between the two aforementioned environments if maximum password age is all that 
separates them.

If someone intends to brute-force accounts in your domain, then even 7 days is 
too long of a password age.  Password length and complexity is vastly more 
important to overall security than is password age.

I'd rather be in an environment with password changes every 120-180 days, and 
with passwords of 12+ characters, including special chars, than one with your 
typical 8 characters and changes every 30-45 days.

The practicality of the former significantly outweighs the latter.

-ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 10:27 AM, John Hornbuckle 
<john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> 
wrote:
I agree that scripted attacks (which aren't mitigated by password changes) 
dominate, and targeted attacks are less common. Nevertheless, the latter do 
occur. As for brute-force attacks... Cryptography isn't my specialty, but I 
think you may be underestimating the time it takes to crack a complex 
password/passphrase.

Changing passwords is a nominal task. It takes maybe 60 seconds to do. The real 
loss of productivity and introduction of new risk come from forgetting the new 
password or writing it down and storing it in an obvious location-both of which 
are behaviors that can easily be changed with a bit of training.





John





From: Andrew S. Baker [mailto:asbz...@gmail.com<mailto:asbz...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, April 16, 2010 10:14 AM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: Re: please don't change your password!

This fails to consider the situation where a user's password is compromised and 
the bad guy accesses the user's information on an ongoing basis. For instance, 
monitoring a folder that contains files with information about patent filings 
to see when new  files show up, or logging into OWA to keep an eye on e-mail 
messages. The unauthorized access will end once the password is changed 
(assuming a variety of other factors, such as the bad guy not getting the new 
password, etc.), and thus requiring regular password changes can be of value.


We live in a world where scripted attacks dominate, and where targeted attacks 
are against highly privileged assets.

Add to that, most scripted attacks are aimed at an application or OS or 
protocol vulnerability, with the primary intent of sending spam or rooting the 
machine in some way.

Thus, the changing of passwords does little to mitigate any of the 
aforementioned.

Even a targeted attack is likely to take steps to elevate privileges and 
creating a new account for the purpose of removing reliance on the compromised 
account.


Similarly, regular password changes can mitigate the risk from brute-force 
attacks. If a password has to be changed every 60 days, for instance, the bad 
guy will only have 60 days to try to determine the user's password. This is 
generally considered to be better than the bad guy having an infinite amount of 
time to try to determine it.


In most cases, it doesn't take weeks to brute force an account.  Mostly hours, 
and occasionally days.  (Doesn't everyone have a quad-core system or set of 
systems?)

But that's not really the point.  Most breaches today aren't accomplished via 
brute force of the password.  There are hundreds of other approaches to get 
into systems remote that require far less time and effort, and all lead to 
elevated rights.

-ASB: http://XeeSM.com/AndrewBaker

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 8:51 AM, John Hornbuckle 
<john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us<mailto:john.hornbuc...@taylor.k12.fl.us>> 
wrote:
There's a flaw in the logic.

The Globe article states:

" . . . [U]sers are admonished to change passwords regularly, but redoing them 
is not an effective preventive step against online infiltration unless the 
cyber attacker (or evil colleague) who steals your sign-in sequence waits to 
employ it until after you've switched to a new one, Herley wrote. That's about 
as likely as a crook lifting a house key and then waiting until the lock is 
changed before sticking it in the door."

This fails to consider the situation where a user's password is compromised and 
the bad guy accesses the user's information on an ongoing basis. For instance, 
monitoring a folder that contains files with information about patent filings 
to see when new  files show up, or logging into OWA to keep an eye on e-mail 
messages. The unauthorized access will end once the password is changed 
(assuming a variety of other factors, such as the bad guy not getting the new 
password, etc.), and thus requiring regular password changes can be of value.

Similarly, regular password changes can mitigate the risk from brute-force 
attacks. If a password has to be changed every 60 days, for instance, the bad 
guy will only have 60 days to try to determine the user's password. This is 
generally considered to be better than the bad guy having an infinite amount of 
time to try to determine it.



John Hornbuckle
MIS Department
Taylor County School District
www.taylor.k12.fl.us<http://www.taylor.k12.fl.us>





From: Brian Clark 
[mailto:brianclark2...@googlemail.com<mailto:brianclark2...@googlemail.com>]
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 4:38 PM

To: NT System Admin Issues
Subject: please don't change your password!

After a long week doing a SBS migration I didn't know how to take this article 
and needed to share it!!

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/04/11/please_do_not_change_your_password/?page=1


Brian











NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to 
or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and 
the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public 
disclosure.










NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to 
or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and 
the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public 
disclosure.








NOTICE: Florida has a broad public records law. Most written communications to 
or from this entity are public records that will be disclosed to the public and 
the media upon request. E-mail communications may be subject to public 
disclosure.

~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~
~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/>  ~

Reply via email to