Threat actors are continuously honing their skills to find new ways to penetrate networks, disrupt business-critical systems and steal confidential data. In the early days of the internet, adversaries used file-based malware to carry out attacks, and it was relatively easy to stop them with signature-based defenses. Modern threat actors have a much wider variety of tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) at their disposal.

Kubernetes Ingress is one of today’s most important Kubernetes resources. First introduced in 2015, it achieved GA status in 2020. Its goal is to simplify and secure the routing mechanism of incoming traffic to your defined services. Ingress allows you to expose HTTP and HTTPS from outside the cluster to your services within the cluster by leveraging traffic routing rules you define while creating the Ingress.

HTTP Response Splitting entails a kind of attack in which an attacker can fiddle with response headers that will be interpreted by the client. The attack is simple: an attacker passes malicious data to a vulnerable application, and the application includes the malicious data in the single HTTP response, thus leading a way to set arbitrary headers and embedding data according to the whims and wishes of the attacker.

Enterprise data systems are like busy family households. You see a constant flow of activity to varying degrees from room to room. This activity includes people wandering, opening and closing doors. And then there are other streams constantly flowing through the household- electricity, water, Wi-Fi networks and more. In modern enterprises, the data deluge is a critical issue. While we take the complexity for granted in a household, such is not allowed in a connected enterprise.

The average company can’t do business without their third parties. Vendors, suppliers, partners, distributors, and contractors — third parties make it so much simpler to build, distribute and sell a product or service.

Managing the risks of your software supply chain requires more than a basic understanding of the software components that make up your applications. My wife and I have four children, which means we’ve done a ton of shopping at Costco over the years. First it was diapers, then cereal, then every other kind of food, all of which provided significant savings for our family of six.

A few days ago, Snyk reported on a new type of threat vector in the open source community: protestware. The advisory was about a transitive vulnerability — peacenotwar — in node-ipc that impacted the supply chain of a great deal of developers. Snyk uses various intel threat feeds and algorithms to monitor chatter on potential threats to open source, and we believe this may just be the tip of a protestware iceberg.

Just a few years ago, security orchestration, automation and response (SOAR) was the new buzzword associated with security modernization. Today, however, SOAR platforms are increasingly assuming a legacy look and feel. Although SOARs still have their place in a modern SecOps strategy, the key to driving SecOps forward today is no-code security automation.

This is the second post in the Threat-Based Methodology series. The first post introduced Threat-Based Methodology and the analysis conducted by the FedRAMP PMO and NIST. That post concluded with a list of the top seven controls based on their Protection Value. This post will explore CM-6 in greater depth and explain how Devo supports the ability to meet this control. CM-6, Configuration Settings, was determined to provide the most Protection Value with a score of 208.86.