Posts

In a move that has set the cybersecurity world on alert, Palo Alto Networks has sounded the alarm on a significant security flaw in their Expedition tool, a platform designed to streamline the migration of firewall configurations to their proprietary PAN-OS. This vulnerability, codified as CVE-2024-5910, underscores the critical importance of authentication protocols in safeguarding digital boundaries. The flaw itself—a missing authentication mechanism—permits attackers with mere network access the alarming ability to reset administrator credentials, effectively opening the gate to unauthorized access and potentially compromising configuration secrets, credentials, and sensitive data that lie at the heart of an organization’s digital defenses.

The gravity of this flaw is underscored by the immediate attention of the U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), which has not only added the vulnerability to its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog but also issued a direct mandate: all federal agencies must address this vulnerability by November 28, 2024. The urgency of this deadline signifies more than just bureaucratic efficiency; it speaks to the alarming nature of a vulnerability that CISA reports is being exploited in the wild, thus shifting this issue from a theoretical risk to an active threat.

Palo Alto Networks has responded with characteristic clarity, outlining a series of robust security measures to mitigate this vulnerability. They emphasize restricting the PAN-OS management interface to trusted internal IP addresses, advising against exposure to the open internet. In addition, they recommend isolating the management interface within a dedicated VLAN, further securing communications through SSH and HTTPS. These measures, while straightforward, demand a high level of attention to detail in implementation—an effort that could very well mean the difference between a fortified system and a compromised one.

Meanwhile, in a strategic pivot, Palo Alto Networks has announced that the core functionalities of Expedition will soon be integrated into new offerings, marking the end of Expedition support as of January 2025. The shift signals a broader evolution within the company’s ecosystem, perhaps heralding more advanced, integrated solutions that can preemptively address vulnerabilities before they surface.

The directive to apply patches and adhere to the recommended security configurations is not just sound advice; it is, as security expert Wesinger noted, a necessary defensive measure in a rapidly shifting landscape where the stability of one’s systems rests on the relentless vigilance of their custodians. The events unfolding around CVE-2024-5910 are a reminder that in cybersecurity, as in any theater of conflict, complacency remains the greatest vulnerability.

By Skeeter Wesinger

November 14, 2024

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/new-front-cybersecurity-exposed-skeeter-wesinger-rjypf

In early 2024, a team of researchers at the University of Michigan and Auburn University stumbled upon an overlooked flaw in Dominion’s Democracy Suite voting system. The flaw, astonishing in its simplicity, harked back to the 1970s: a rudimentary linear congruential generator for creating random numbers, a method already marked as insecure half a century ago. Yet there it lay, embedded in the heart of America’s election machinery. This flaw, known as DVSorder, allowed the order of ballots to be exposed, violating a voter’s sacred right to secrecy without needing inside access or privileged software.

Dominion Voting Systems responded, as companies often do, with carefully measured words—a single-page advisory noting that “best practices” and “legal advisors” could mitigate the flaw. A software update, Democracy Suite 5.17, was eventually rolled out, claiming to resolve the vulnerability. Yet this patch, touted as a “solution,” seemed only to deepen the questions surrounding Dominion’s response. Was it a fix, or merely a stopgap?

A Bureaucratic Response: The Slow March of Democracy Suite 5.17

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission granted its stamp of approval to Democracy Suite 5.17 in March 2023, seemingly content with its certification. But the rollout that followed revealed the entrenched and fragmented nature of America’s election infrastructure. Election officials, bound by local constraints, cited logistical challenges, costs, and the impending presidential election as reasons to delay. In the absence of federal urgency or clear guidance from the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), the vulnerability remained in effect, a silent threat from Georgia to California.

Even as researchers watched from the sidelines, Dominion and federal agencies moved cautiously, with state adoption of Democracy Suite 5.17 proceeding at a glacial pace. Some states, like Michigan and Minnesota, made efforts to upgrade, but others deferred, considering the patch a burden best shouldered after the election. Thus, the DVSorder vulnerability persisted, largely unresolved in precincts where patching was deemed too disruptive.

The Patchwork of Democracy Suite 5.17: A System in Pieces

As expected, Democracy Suite 5.17 encountered obstacles in deployment, emblematic of the fractured approach to American election security. States such as Michigan tried to sanitize data to safeguard voter privacy, but the result was incomplete; others attempted to shuffle ballots, a solution whose effectiveness remained dubious. The whole exercise appeared as a microcosm of America’s approach to its electoral machinery: decentralized, hesitant, and all too often compromised by cost and convenience.

A Sobering Reminder for Democracy’s Future

The DVSorder affair serves as a reminder that elections, despite their image of order, depend on fallible human governance and systems. In this case, a mere oversight in programming triggered a vulnerability that risked eroding voter privacy, a cornerstone of democracy itself. Dominion’s response, slow and bureaucratic, reveals the unsettling reality that our reliance on technology in elections opens doors to errors whose repercussions may be profound.

The researchers who exposed this flaw were not saboteurs but, in a sense, stewards of public trust. They brought to light a sobering truth: that in the age of digital democracy, even the smallest vulnerability can ripple outward, potentially undermining the promises of privacy and integrity on which the system stands.

As the dust settles, DVSorder may join the list of vulnerabilities patched and closed, yet a shadow lingers. With each election cycle, new threats and oversights emerge, casting a faint but persistent question over the future of American democracy. One wonders—will we be ready for the next vulnerability that arises? Who knows.

By Skeeter Wesinger

November 4, 2024

 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/dominion-voting-systems-dvsorder-affair-saga-american-wesinger-i4qoe