What is the best way to determine the acceptable balance between damage received by a potential DOS attack and damage caused by legitimate info filtered out accidentally by anti-DOS security measures
I believe determining the acceptable balance involves conducting a comprehensive risk assessment, weighing the potential impact of a DoS attack against the consequences of filtering legitimate traffic. Employing multi-layered defenses, fine-tuning security controls, implementing redundancy, and regularly testing measures are vital. Engaging stakeholders and maintaining a culture of continuous improvement ensures alignment with business objectives while mitigating risks effectively without overly restricting legitimate traffic.
Is loss of availability from a DDOS attack worst, just as bad, or not as bad as loss of confidentiality or integrity as, for example, a breach of the customer data server?
This is an interesting question that stems from an organization’s own needs and what specific asset is targeted. For example, is the target of the DDoS attack a server that no one really uses besides for occasional data checks but has very sensitive information? If so, a loss of availability is not as bad as a loss of confidentiality. Another example is a server that is used very often by an entire organization but is mainly something like a login page that is completely encrypted end-to-end. A loss of availability would be much more pressing than a loss of integrity or confidentiality. There are other situations where any attack on any of the three is devastating for an organization, it is all dependent on the organization’s asset.
How do emerging technologies like Zero Trust Architecture and Software-Defined Networking contribute to enhancing network security, and what are their potential challenges in implementation and maintenance?
Of all the techniques for mitigation/prevention we’ve studied this week for DDoS attacks what do you think is the most effective strategy or countermeasure to mitigate the impact of these attacks and why?
When validating digital certificates, particularly through paired encryption keys, it’s usually done by providing the public key so that anyone can verify the certificate. The private key is the key for creating the certificate. To validate, the public key is used to decrypt the signature attached to a certificate. The hash from the decrypted signature should match the hash value of the certificate’s content, which then validates the certificate. There are other checks involved like making sure the certificate is valid, not expired, properly authorized, and more but this is the main process.
Asymmetric encryption offers secure communication without the need for a shared secret, facilitating digital signatures and establishing trust. However, it’s slower and computationally intensive compared to symmetric encryption. Don’t let that fool you. The overhead is negligible for most applications.
Symmetric encryption, on the other hand, is faster and more efficient for large volumes of data, but it requires the secure exchange of a secret key between parties, posing a risk if the key is intercepted.
Symmetric encryption has the advantage of being faster than asymmetric encryption, as it requires less computational power for both encryption and decryption
Put simply, asymmetric encryption offers advantages in key distribution and non-repudiation but tends to be slower and computationally intensive, while symmetric encryption is faster and more efficient but requires secure key distribution channels and lacks non-repudiation capabilities.
How does the implementation of X.509 certificates within a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) framework enhance the security of digital transactions and communications over potentially insecure networks like the internet?
The implementation of X.509 certificates within a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) framework enhances the security of digital transactions and communications over potentially insecure networks like the internet in several ways:
-Authentication: X.509 certificates bind a public key to an entity’s identity, such as a website, individual, or device. This binding is verified through the digital signature of a trusted Certificate Authority (CA). This ensures that users can trust the identity associated with the public key, providing a robust mechanism for authenticating entities in digital transactions.
-Encryption: X.509 certificates play a crucial role in enabling secure communication through encryption. For example, in SSL/TLS protocols used for secure web browsing, the public key from the server’s X.509 certificate is used to establish a secure connection. This encryption safeguards data during transmission, protecting it from potential eavesdropping or tampering.
-Data Integrity: X.509 certificates, by virtue of the digital signatures from CAs, help verify the integrity of transmitted data. If the data has been altered in transit, the digital signature verification will fail, signaling potential tampering and ensuring data integrity.
-Trust Establishment: The hierarchical nature of PKI, with CAs at the top of the trust chain, establishes a trust framework. Users can trust the validity of X.509 certificates by verifying the digital signatures of the issuing CAs. This trust model prevents malicious actors from easily impersonating entities in digital transactions.
Secure Email and Document Signing: X.509 certificates are utilized in email security protocols like S/MIME for digitally signing emails. This ensures the authenticity and integrity of the sender’s message. Similarly, in document signing, X.509 certificates are employed to create digital signatures, providing a secure way to verify the origin and integrity of electronic documents.
In summary, the implementation of X.509 certificates within a PKI framework adds layers of security to digital transactions and communications by enabling strong authentication, encryption, data integrity verification, and establishing trust in potentially insecure network environments like the internet.
A fully cloud-based infrastructure offers benefits such as scalability, flexibility, cost-effectiveness, and improved accessibility. However, drawbacks include potential downtime, security concerns, and ongoing costs. Whether small businesses can implement this depends on factors like budget, technical expertise, and specific business needs, requiring careful consideration before transitioning. I will recommend a hybrid approach.
Earlier I would have said that cloud computing is not a viable option, but after learning more about it, I realize cloud computing is a fantastic option as the companies that hold the data have amazing security, probably better than what a small business would implement if they stored their crucial data. While it is a drawback that they won’t have physical access to their data by seeing it stored in an in house system, it’s also a pro as that means it’s harder to get physically stolen.
I think DoS are still in use today, just last week the PA court experience a DOS and their website was not reachable. I think as attacks evolve more Dos will have new techniques and become more sophisticated.
Andrew Young says
What is the best way to determine the acceptable balance between damage received by a potential DOS attack and damage caused by legitimate info filtered out accidentally by anti-DOS security measures
Ikenna Alajemba says
I believe determining the acceptable balance involves conducting a comprehensive risk assessment, weighing the potential impact of a DoS attack against the consequences of filtering legitimate traffic. Employing multi-layered defenses, fine-tuning security controls, implementing redundancy, and regularly testing measures are vital. Engaging stakeholders and maintaining a culture of continuous improvement ensures alignment with business objectives while mitigating risks effectively without overly restricting legitimate traffic.
Mariam Hazali says
Why is the access control threat to wireless LANs more severe?
Nicholas Nirenberg says
Is loss of availability from a DDOS attack worst, just as bad, or not as bad as loss of confidentiality or integrity as, for example, a breach of the customer data server?
Kenneth Saltisky says
This is an interesting question that stems from an organization’s own needs and what specific asset is targeted. For example, is the target of the DDoS attack a server that no one really uses besides for occasional data checks but has very sensitive information? If so, a loss of availability is not as bad as a loss of confidentiality. Another example is a server that is used very often by an entire organization but is mainly something like a login page that is completely encrypted end-to-end. A loss of availability would be much more pressing than a loss of integrity or confidentiality. There are other situations where any attack on any of the three is devastating for an organization, it is all dependent on the organization’s asset.
Michael Obiukwu says
What is the difference between DDOS and DOS attack?
Jeffrey Sullivan says
Short answer, the number of attackers involved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9EjuOQRUdg
Mariam Hazali says
DoS attack involves a single system targeting the victim, while DDoS attack involves multiple systems attacking the victim.
Ikenna Alajemba says
How do emerging technologies like Zero Trust Architecture and Software-Defined Networking contribute to enhancing network security, and what are their potential challenges in implementation and maintenance?
Alex Ruiz says
Of all the techniques for mitigation/prevention we’ve studied this week for DDoS attacks what do you think is the most effective strategy or countermeasure to mitigate the impact of these attacks and why?
Jeffrey Sullivan says
Make sure that your CA is 100% authenticated and validated. That way you know the private and public is not compromised.
Jeffrey Sullivan says
How does one validate a digital certificate?
Kenneth Saltisky says
When validating digital certificates, particularly through paired encryption keys, it’s usually done by providing the public key so that anyone can verify the certificate. The private key is the key for creating the certificate. To validate, the public key is used to decrypt the signature attached to a certificate. The hash from the decrypted signature should match the hash value of the certificate’s content, which then validates the certificate. There are other checks involved like making sure the certificate is valid, not expired, properly authorized, and more but this is the main process.
Kenneth Saltisky says
What are the advantages and disadvantages when using asymmetric and symmetric encryption?
Kelly Conger says
Asymmetric encryption offers secure communication without the need for a shared secret, facilitating digital signatures and establishing trust. However, it’s slower and computationally intensive compared to symmetric encryption. Don’t let that fool you. The overhead is negligible for most applications.
Symmetric encryption, on the other hand, is faster and more efficient for large volumes of data, but it requires the secure exchange of a secret key between parties, posing a risk if the key is intercepted.
Mariam Hazali says
Symmetric encryption has the advantage of being faster than asymmetric encryption, as it requires less computational power for both encryption and decryption
Nicholas Nirenberg says
Put simply, asymmetric encryption offers advantages in key distribution and non-repudiation but tends to be slower and computationally intensive, while symmetric encryption is faster and more efficient but requires secure key distribution channels and lacks non-repudiation capabilities.
Kelly Conger says
How does the implementation of X.509 certificates within a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) framework enhance the security of digital transactions and communications over potentially insecure networks like the internet?
Samuel Omotosho says
The implementation of X.509 certificates within a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) framework enhances the security of digital transactions and communications over potentially insecure networks like the internet in several ways:
-Authentication: X.509 certificates bind a public key to an entity’s identity, such as a website, individual, or device. This binding is verified through the digital signature of a trusted Certificate Authority (CA). This ensures that users can trust the identity associated with the public key, providing a robust mechanism for authenticating entities in digital transactions.
-Encryption: X.509 certificates play a crucial role in enabling secure communication through encryption. For example, in SSL/TLS protocols used for secure web browsing, the public key from the server’s X.509 certificate is used to establish a secure connection. This encryption safeguards data during transmission, protecting it from potential eavesdropping or tampering.
-Data Integrity: X.509 certificates, by virtue of the digital signatures from CAs, help verify the integrity of transmitted data. If the data has been altered in transit, the digital signature verification will fail, signaling potential tampering and ensuring data integrity.
-Trust Establishment: The hierarchical nature of PKI, with CAs at the top of the trust chain, establishes a trust framework. Users can trust the validity of X.509 certificates by verifying the digital signatures of the issuing CAs. This trust model prevents malicious actors from easily impersonating entities in digital transactions.
Secure Email and Document Signing: X.509 certificates are utilized in email security protocols like S/MIME for digitally signing emails. This ensures the authenticity and integrity of the sender’s message. Similarly, in document signing, X.509 certificates are employed to create digital signatures, providing a secure way to verify the origin and integrity of electronic documents.
In summary, the implementation of X.509 certificates within a PKI framework adds layers of security to digital transactions and communications by enabling strong authentication, encryption, data integrity verification, and establishing trust in potentially insecure network environments like the internet.
Samuel Omotosho says
What benefits and drawbacks come with an entirely cloud-based infrastructure? Is it feasible for small businesses to implement this?
Chidiebere Okafor says
A fully cloud-based infrastructure offers benefits such as scalability, flexibility, cost-effectiveness, and improved accessibility. However, drawbacks include potential downtime, security concerns, and ongoing costs. Whether small businesses can implement this depends on factors like budget, technical expertise, and specific business needs, requiring careful consideration before transitioning. I will recommend a hybrid approach.
Hashem Alsharif says
Earlier I would have said that cloud computing is not a viable option, but after learning more about it, I realize cloud computing is a fantastic option as the companies that hold the data have amazing security, probably better than what a small business would implement if they stored their crucial data. While it is a drawback that they won’t have physical access to their data by seeing it stored in an in house system, it’s also a pro as that means it’s harder to get physically stolen.
Chidiebere Okafor says
Which cloud service model offers organizations greater autonomy over their infrastructure, and what factors contribute to this enhanced control?
Hashem Alsharif says
Do you think DoS attacks will continue to be used as commonly as they are today, or do you think that a new type of attack will take it’s place?
Mariam Hazali says
I think DoS are still in use today, just last week the PA court experience a DOS and their website was not reachable. I think as attacks evolve more Dos will have new techniques and become more sophisticated.
Akintunde Akinmusire says
How does cloud computing help against DDOS attacks?