Blog

The cybersecurity landscape is constantly evolving, and the tools used to analyze threats need to evolve alongside it. Traditional security tools often struggle to keep pace with the ever-increasing volume and complexity of cyberattacks. These tools generate a continuous stream of alerts, leaving analysts overwhelmed with data. Unfortunately, these alerts often provide a limited view of the overall attack, making it difficult to understand the attacker's intent and the full scope of the potential compromise. Analysts are then left to manually sift through this data, struggling to piece together the complete attack narrative.

Zero Trust Architecture (ZTA) has emerged as a cornerstone for robust cybersecurity across various industries, and the Department of Defense (DoD) is no exception. However, navigating the intricacies of DoD ZTA implementation, particularly the recently published Overlays (v2.0, February 2024), can present a significant challenge. This blog equips security professionals with a practical roadmap for successful DoD ZTA implementation, while acknowledging the value of specialized solutions like ours.

I would like to share our experiences with ZTA network controls. The microsegmentation principles involved in Zero Trust Architecture can be difficult to define and manage. Imagine your network as a bustling city. ZTA is like a sophisticated security system, ensuring only authorized individuals with the right credentials can enter specific buildings (applications) at designated times (with temporary access). Least network access, in this analogy, is like issuing minimal city passes, granting access only to the essential streets and buildings needed for a specific task.

Zero Trust architecture (ZTA) is rapidly becoming the gold standard for modern security. By continuously verifying access and enforcing least privilege, ZTA significantly reduces the attack surface and minimizes potential damage from breaches. However, ensuring the least privilege is an ongoing process that requires robust verification and monitoring.

The news of the data loss at Capital One, a major financial services firm, is very unfortunate. A hacker exfiltrated roughly 100 million credit card applications, 140,000 Social Security numbers, and 80,000 bank account numbers. The bank expects the cost of this breach to exceed $100 million in the near term. The news of this attack comes days after Equifax reached a $700 million settlement with federal regulators over the 2017 cyberattack, which exposed the personal information of 147 million people.

Application Security Configuration Audits – Why Automated Validation is a Must In one of my previous blogs, I discussed the challenges for securing modern applications. The takeaway from the discussion was that modern applications change more frequently than traditional applications. And the blast radius for any security misconfigurations is high because of the large number of services pushing data over the wire to complete a single task. In this blog, I will be discussing the shortfalls associated with manual verifications.

In one of my previous blogs, I discussed the challenges for securing modern applications. The takeaway from the discussion was that modern applications change more frequently than traditional applications. And the blast radius for any security misconfigurations is high because of the large number of services pushing data over the wire to complete a single task. In this blog, I will be discussing the shortfalls associated with manual verifications. Organizations, particularly in regulated industries, are unable to benefit from the faster product and feature delivery cycles that modern technologies can provide due to the bottlenecks introduced by manual compliance audits. The root cause of the problem and how we can overcome these bottlenecks is discussed in this article.