Hacked Opinions: Vulnerability disclosure – Chuck Bloomquist

InteliSecure's Chuck Bloomquist talks about disclosure, bounty programs, and vulnerability marketing with CSO, in the first of a series of topical discussions with industry leaders and experts.

Hacked Opinions is an ongoing series of Q&As with industry leaders and experts on a number of topics that impact the security community. The first set of discussions focus on disclosure and how pending regulation could impact it. In addition, we asked about marketed vulnerabilities such as Heartbleed and bounty programs, do they make sense?

CSO encourages everyone to take part in the Hacked Opinions series. If you would like to participate, email Steve Ragan with your answers to the questions presented in this Q&A, or feel free to suggest topics for future consideration.

Where do you stand: Full Disclosure, Responsible Disclosure, or somewhere in the middle?

Chuck Bloomquist, co-founder and CTO, InteliSecure (CB):

Somewhere in the middle. Context and magnitude of the vulnerability will determine the appropriate response. Responsible disclosure makes sense in the case of smaller developers with a limited customer base.

It gives the developer, who may have limited resources, the time to develop and test the remedy and coordinate a roll out to the affected base before announcing the risk to the public.

In the case of widely used applications, full disclosure makes sense to allow affected users the ability to respond and apply immediate countermeasures to mitigate risk while a solution is being developed.

If a researcher chooses to follow responsible / coordinated disclosure and the vendor goes silent -- or CERT stops responding to them -- is Full Disclosure proper at this point? If not, why not?

CB: The Information Security industry's goal should be the development of a collaborative environment where information is released responsibly with the goal of minimizing risk while remediation takes place.

If the context, severity and magnitude achieve a critical threshold, and the developers as well as other organizations fail to report based on their published policy, then the researcher has the duty to fully disclose. The intent should be to surface a hidden risk and steer a course to remediation.

Bug Bounty programs are becoming more common, but sometimes the reward being offered is far less than the perceived value of the bug / exploit. What do you think can be done to make it worth the researcher's time and effort to work with a vendor directly?

CB: Bug Bounties now exist and researchers have entered the marketplace. The market will determine the value placed on the time and energy invested in the research.

Do you think vulnerability disclosures with a clear marketing campaign and PR process, such as Heartbleed, POODLE, or Shellshock, have value?

CB: Our goal should be to raise awareness of risk in the ecosystem and provide guidance on how to efficiently mitigate that risk.

PR and marketing can achieve this goal effectively. However, the message must be clearly mapped to the level of risk, severity and potential impact. If not, the marketplace will become numb to the messaging and the program will lose its effectiveness.

If the proposed changes pass, how do you think Wassenaar will impact the disclosure process? Will it kill full disclosure with proof-of-concept code, or move researchers away from the public entirely preventing serious issues from seeing the light of day? Or, perhaps, could it see a boom in responsible disclosure out of fear of being on the wrong side of the law?

CB: Initially, Wassenaar will likely have some disruptive effect on the disclosure process as there is a lack of clarity on what can be used for research.

There also is ambiguity around POC Code and an overly broad definition of IDS software and IP network surveillance systems; it needs refinement and a clearer definition.

Wassenaar is unlikely to kill the full disclosure concept. The intrusion software clause intends to apply to weaponized exploits and not production systems used to identify threats on a network.

There is no enforcement arm within the Arrangement, but it may provide a prosecutorial tool to the participating states once a violation has been detected. The Arrangement will likely have little impact on the volume of disclosure.

Join the CSO newsletter!

Error: Please check your email address.

Tags Hacked Opinionssecurity industrysecurityFull DisclosureCSOintel

More about CSOQ

Show Comments

Featured Whitepapers

Editor's Recommendations

Solution Centres

Stories by Steve Ragan

Latest Videos

  • 150x50

    CSO Webinar: Will your data protection strategy be enough when disaster strikes?

    Speakers: - Paul O’Connor, Engagement leader - Performance Audit Group, Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO) - Nigel Phair, Managing Director, Centre for Internet Safety - Joshua Stenhouse, Technical Evangelist, Zerto - Anthony Caruana, CSO MC & Moderator

    Play Video

  • 150x50

    CSO Webinar: The Human Factor - Your people are your biggest security weakness

    ​Speakers: David Lacey, Researcher and former CISO Royal Mail David Turner - Global Risk Management Expert Mark Guntrip - Group Manager, Email Protection, Proofpoint

    Play Video

  • 150x50

    CSO Webinar: Current ransomware defences are failing – but machine learning can drive a more proactive solution

    Speakers • Ty Miller, Director, Threat Intelligence • Mark Gregory, Leader, Network Engineering Research Group, RMIT • Jeff Lanza, Retired FBI Agent (USA) • Andy Solterbeck, VP Asia Pacific, Cylance • David Braue, CSO MC/Moderator What to expect: ​Hear from industry experts on the local and global ransomware threat landscape. Explore a new approach to dealing with ransomware using machine-learning techniques and by thinking about the problem in a fundamentally different way. Apply techniques for gathering insight into ransomware behaviour and find out what elements must go into a truly effective ransomware defence. Get a first-hand look at how ransomware actually works in practice, and how machine-learning techniques can pick up on its activities long before your employees do.

    Play Video

  • 150x50

    CSO Webinar: Get real about metadata to avoid a false sense of security

    Speakers: • Anthony Caruana – CSO MC and moderator • Ian Farquhar, Worldwide Virtual Security Team Lead, Gigamon • John Lindsay, Former CTO, iiNet • Skeeve Stevens, Futurist, Future Sumo • David Vaile - Vice chair of APF, Co-Convenor of the Cyberspace Law And Policy Community, UNSW Law Faculty This webinar covers: - A 101 on metadata - what it is and how to use it - Insight into a typical attack, what happens and what we would find when looking into the metadata - How to collect metadata, use this to detect attacks and get greater insight into how you can use this to protect your organisation - Learn how much raw data and metadata to retain and how long for - Get a reality check on how you're using your metadata and if this is enough to secure your organisation

    Play Video

  • 150x50

    CSO Webinar: How banking trojans work and how you can stop them

    CSO Webinar: How banking trojans work and how you can stop them Featuring: • John Baird, Director of Global Technology Production, Deutsche Bank • Samantha Macleod, GM Cyber Security, ME Bank • Sherrod DeGrippo, Director of Emerging Threats, Proofpoint (USA)

    Play Video

More videos

Blog Posts

Market Place