Self-Policing Networks? 55
An Anonymous Coward writes: "IBM is looking to build self-policing networks with project eLiza, as reported in Wired. Sounds pretty cool, but I don't see it being all that effective. And if it is, security teams will get pretty lax, and not be able to handle an attack that breaks eLiza." Also a USA Today article. It's a insightful idea, and one that I'm sure will *eventually* become part of many major networks, but somehow I suspect that this is one of those things that appears difficult on the surface, and turns out to be ten times as difficult when you get into it.
Re:Anyone have some gas they'd like to release? (Score:1)
Cyberdyne systems (Score:1)
Re:snake oil (Score:1)
Link to learning algorithm employed in Eliza (Score:2)
sad state of security today (Score:5)
(a) Used frontpage to design their website;
(b) Didn't bother to password protect it;
and
(c) Included the sysadmin username and password for their oracle database in the asp code. This was done simply so they could dynamically populate a list of sales regions. The same database had their entire financials on it.
If Eliza can protect against actions such as these then I'm all for it. It had better be cheap though neither the CEO or the CIO of this company thought much of it, stating "Its only our website. Thats not really important to us." followed by "No security is foolproof."
Re:An easier way to more secure networks (Score:1)
Internet? (Score:2)
Re:What Cyberdyne systems is (Score:1)
--
TRON (Score:2)
It could even patrol the Master Control Program.
......
--
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:1)
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:2)
Slashdot effect or DOS? (Score:2)
Re:Eliza? (Score:5)
computer1: intruder detected
eLiza: How does that make you feel?
computer1: security breached!
eLiza: What do you think about the beach?
-schussat
Re:What Cyberdyne systems is (Score:4)
Eliza? (Score:5)
--
Re: A Nicer World Please? (Score:1)
Definitely. Happy endings abound.
Hell, we've seen how they deal with guilt [imdb.com] :-)
-Iorek
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:2)
-Puk
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:1)
Cracking tools will get better too (Score:5)
As always, the advantage goes to the offensive tools over the defensive ones.
Frankenstein (Score:4)
Project Eliza is going to cause a lot of havoc with all the perfectly normal activity it will combat, all the false alarms it will respond to. Hell, it might begin to view it's controllers as the real oppressors, and try to protect itself from them yet too.
Keep in mind . . . (Score:2)
I realize they're only claiming that it will aid in system administration, but I worry that this will give too many people a false sense of security (business executives, for example, who know little about security). I don't know about you, but, to me, a false sense of security is worse than bad (or no) security. At least with bad security, you know what to look for.
How can you tell what the server's been up to, anyway? Will it print out logs, or what? I'd rather administer my own box, to my own taste, than trust automated software to do it for me.
Finally, if the software is defective, could a company sue IBM . . . ? Or would this be more like firewalls (you've gotta maintain it yourself)?
Re:snake oil (Score:1)
Here, published means basically the same as Open Source.
Re:What Cyberdyne systems is (Score:1)
An easier way to more secure networks (Score:3)
Far and away, the most common type of security breach is those involving buffer overflows (including the recently popular "printf" attacks).
Go ahead and blame it on the programmer, but the truth is: C makes it easy for programmers, even experienced ones, to make these kinds of mistakes.
C is an inappropriate language for writing high-level network applications. Other than the fact that it has "always been that way", Why is wu_ftpd written in C? fingerd? sshd? bind?
Please, write your network applications in a safe language. Go ahead and use Java if you need it to look like C. There are many other even more appropriate choices.
If the community isn't willing to do that (and they clearly aren't), why aren't they willing to ship something like stackguard in the default install of popular distributions? There is no way users will notice the difference, except that the ones who aren't reading bugtraq and staying up-to-the-hour on patches won't get rooted. Before we need to bother with elaborate AI systems checking networks for us, we need a BIG CHANGE in the way we implement network applications.
Nativity (Score:3)
However, I have to say, I can see several reasons to encourage such a system. Essentially, though, they all come down to the system being the closest entity to itself. No system administrator can know his system as intimately as it could know itself (if it were capable of doing so.) In terms of speed of response, comprehensive scanning, and endurance, an automated protection service could not be besten by a live admin.
Obviously, a human being wins in terms of potential intelligence, user discrimination and imagination, but I think it's foolish to attack a system that could lend the qualities of the machine to it's own protection rather than encourage training. Frankly you should do both.
But as far as tool making people sloppy, I don't see anyone bitching about the Microsoft development packages subconciously training bad coders.
What happens... (Score:1)
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:2)
Self Healing - Debian? (Score:2)
This gives it an almost 'self-healing' property, which is going towards convincing me to switch all my servers over to it.
Imagine, with a simple cron job I can ensure I'll always be patched up with the latest security updates.
intrusion detection (Score:4)
Re:snake oil (Score:1)
My question... (Score:1)
aztek: the ultimate man
Re:snake oil (Score:2)
I think that's the general idea. Keeping patches up to date is almost autmatic as it is, just watch for those emails from RedHat. The next step is to teach the system to be able to tell the difference between legitimate and illegitimate access. Not an easy task, to be sure, but people have been working on it [columbia.edu] for a while.
Re:Old idea (Score:2)
Agreed. I can see the marketroids going after the pointy haired bosses saying that you can replace your staff with these AI boxes.
The only problem is when this advances to the next stage, which is AI management, AI corporations, etc. The question is if this would be good or bad. Would we have a world of AI drones producing income so that we can live off their work and have a permanent vacation at the beach with fancy drinks decorated with umbrellas?
It's going to be a long strange road.
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Robots in Charge? (Score:2)
Well. This is one of several possible scenarios when AI is pervasive enough that robots can be pervasive, and we are no longer at the top of the totem pole. Or are we going to have a society where the robots are in charge?
Check out the Vinny the Vampire [eplugz.com] comic strip
Down with the Master Control Program (Score:2)
New eLiza DOS attack (Score:3)
Working on a self policing network (Score:3)
User: That's how fast everyone else downloads around here.
Network Police: And you are downloading with unlicensed software.
User: Hey, this is shareware and I am going to register it.
Network Police: Tell that to the judge.
User: Hey, I'm booted off. Damn AOL.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~ the real world is much simpler ~~
What Cyberdyne systems is (Score:4)
I might be a little rusty on the details since I haven't been to Universal in a while...but for those of you who are confused, this DOES make sense (just not to most people
Automated Intrusion Prevention? (Score:4)
Let's imagine that you DoS attack a server, you write a little program that automates the attack, spoofing IP addresses of a particular ISP that you don't like, covering an entire C-class, or B-class or whatever. Maybe alternate the attack types.
Very soon the automated intrusion prevention system will have blocked all the IP addresses of the ISP. Bing.
It would be interesting to see though, also in regards to honeypot [slashdot.org] networks (nets designed to be hacked/cracked/attacked).
I believe that there is a tool that you use with snort [snort.org] (an IDS), to make an automated system, block IPs etc.
Anyway, my point was that for many years to come, we wont be able to live without the experienced system administrator, going through logs!
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:5)
Wasn't there a movie [imdb.com] made about this?
---
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:1)
No thanks, I'll take reality.
-- Chris
Re:Nativity (Score:1)
Actually, this is my biggest complaint about Visual Basic. It really does do what you claim nobody is complaining about.
Re:A Nicer World Please? (Score:1)
Hmmmm... I dunno, but some of the "normal" things that I do on a network might be analyzed as "attacks" under certain viewpoints. What then?
MadCow.
Self-Diagnosis (Score:4)
Also, I wouldn't mind if the machine would throttle itself to manageable levels when becoming unstable, instead of crashing.
Also, the machine should be "aware" of the other machines in the organization so it can notify them of the reduced performance.
This would essentially be a self-load balancing system.
I wonder to what extent Google has implemented something like that in their 8000-strong server farm.
Hoopla (Score:2)
eLiza, from what I can tell, is simply going to be a suit of tools which help analyze critical network attacks, maintain complicated global networks, and provide automated fixes for problems.
How they're going to do this, I don't know, but I'm sure the several billion dollar budget will help get the creative juices flowing.
The hoopla about eLiza destroying humanity is complete nonsense, and certainly isn't characteristic of the users on Slashdot. That said, not all people at
I would think what IBM wants to do is similar to what SSL and data encryption did for data security in the 1980's (and 90's). Although it is possible to break encryption, it's very difficult mathematically, and this is probably what IBM is aiming for: a globally dynamic counterattack system which is very difficult to disrupt, yet easy to manage (self-managing even).
As networks grow, there won't be enough capacity in the human mind to simplify and quantify (humans have great strengths qualitativly, but have very little depth quantitativly) the almost chaos-level interconnections which will exist in all networks, and all networks being connected to each other via one huge super network (the Internet in 20 years???).
I think what IBM is doing is great, and I've thought about something similar often. Even if it isn't a major success, the research will be interesting and might reveal something insightful about information or network theory.
For now, lets draw the line between fantasy and reality. In movies, walking drones battle in world conquest and destruction, in reality people get paranoid about the same thing happening in real life. Its interesting because it wouldn't much matter if it was machines or people destroying things, as it still gets done anyway (we've always had wars).
Give it a rest (Score:1)
If it bugs you so damn much go elsewhere you fucking idiot.
snake oil (Score:4)
You have to wonder how much of this is to market IBM so here goes my take on this.
The problem with security vulnerabilities at most is poor programming along with lousy administration, so how do they plan on bandaging a wound for a newly found vulnerabilty that has yet been exposed to the security community as a whole? Do they expect their system to just guess on its own?
Nicely put. "Our customers"
Automation is a small step. One of the biggest problems facing companies, is their administrators are poorly trained. Even if the products, their using are broken, chances are there are patches, fixes, tweaks, etc., to get it up and running properly, its the administrators job to make sure this is done.
After its done, automation should come next, not vice versa, no machine no matter what IBM thinks they're gonna do, is going to be smart enough to determine what is and what isn't secure when it comes to exposing new flaws. Sure they could patch up all the older ones as they go along, but if I sat here and coded a new vulnerability, how is that machine going to determine a fix if it hasn't been exposed without automation, to what is right and wrong?
Getting back to reality now, companies should look to training instead of spending X more on X product simply because X says it will secure your network. Total bullshit and typical snake oil salesman tactics. "Buy X product and be secured!" give me a break
#define crypto [antioffline.com]
Re:intrusion detection (Score:5)
1) When they detect intrusions, their response is to telnet to the edge router for whichever line the attack is coming through, and block the IP there, for increasingly longer periods.
2) They consider it an attack if you try to FXP a file to a server inside the U when both you and the source server are outside. This is, of course, how I first became aware of them.
The netadmin I know there tells me these boxen are called 'NetRangers', and we had a lengthy theoretical talk about how scary it is for autonomous devices to have exec access to your routers, and wondering whether they're smart enough to detect a constant barrage of packets with rotating forged sources before most of the internet is blocked at the routers.
Re:Old idea (Score:3)
A Nicer World Please? (Score:5)
Is it just me or does that sound like a frightening world to live in?
Re:Cyberdyne systems (Score:3)
It is a cookie cutter system used to punch out intellectual biscuits. AI-like initiatives such as these should be very careful of the end result. Dumber human beings on the other end are easier to predict and control because they see less alternatives. Less alternatives to controlling oligarchy is better for the sheeple on the end.
How does this all relate to a possible AI-self-correcting hack me if you can system by IBM? I believe in the abstract it does. I was made aware by a friend that individual people inside General Motors know very little about how an overall car works. They specialize on specific pieces of the system, and focus on increasing performance and driving down cost and milking old technology, but they have little regard on the impact of their work on the ~system~. Cars is one things, computers another. The dangers are the same; the users of these systems will have less and less of an idea on how to control what is going on.
Suppose IBM and some smaller company are competitors. With mega-corporations walking around, everyone is a potential competitor. How convenient would be to have a system administrator who uses no more than his brain stem in front of this uber-security software. Say the company has good stuff IBM wants. Now I am an IBM advocate, so this is purely theoretical, but it would be easy for IBM to exploit and leverage their proprietary knowledge of the system to infiltrate their corporate enemy.
Cameron's Terminator series sheds light on runaway technologies and ignoramuses buying and administering them. They are vile. There is no easy way out. We must work together to pave a golden path into the future. Think of this way, we spend a lot of time trying to take away money from one another on wealth that is based on a relative scale. Salt used to be money in some places, now it melts ice. The sooner we stop trying to eliminate the need for intelligent humans to do work (and get compensated for doing so) and research and start embracing the collective intelligence potential the better off we will all be
Ultimately, someone needs to be responsible. If the world becomes a place where no one needs to be responsible for much of anything humans in general are, well, obsolete.
Many movies come to mind when thinking of bureaucracies and AI to support the iron fist of a control trust - 'Brazil', 'Matrix' and others...
Re:Self Healing - Debian? (Score:2)
Sounds great ... until someone hacks the Debian mirror site and injects (let's make up a name here) "BackLinufice" into one of your security update patches. Game over.
(And no, signed patches shouldn't give you much more comfort than signed ActiveX controls.)
Who says it's going to be perfect? (Score:1)
Re:The Rap Bullshit Generator (Score:1)
It's secure.. but can you find it? (Score:1)