News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by whydoineedthis on Monday July 29, 2019 @07:43PM (#20560695)
"there are a lot of safeguards that these banks use to make sure that any data that touches the shared server persistent storage is encrypted. And when I say safeguards, I mean automation to make sure that this sort of scenario shouldn't ever happen." ROTFLMAO....you have clearly never worked for a bank, no offense mate. Capital left this shit in plain text on an S3 bucket, I guarantee you
Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by parzivalm on Monday July 29, 2019 @08:49PM (#20561076)
If you took ten seconds to look at the posted source note above, you would see Cloud Custodian has a policy to enforce bucket encryption.
Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by dopylitty on Monday July 29, 2019 @09:13PM (#20561191)
Bucket encryption doesn't protect against anything except someone getting access to the hard drives underlying S3 and somehow recovering data.

If you've somehow left access to a bucket open the odds are that you also have it configured to let anyone with access to the bucket decrypt the files. AWS calls this server side encryption, where S3 automatically encrypts and decrypts files for you. You can also do client side encryption, of course, but it's much more difficult to manage because you have to deal with keys in your application.

Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by gnerix on Monday July 29, 2019 @11:07PM (#20561802)
Default bucket encryption would require you to misconfigure two controls instead of one. S3 only automatically decrypts if you are an authorized principal on the KMS key, having S3 permission is not enough.
Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by hvo on Tuesday July 30, 2019 @10:12AM (#20564983)
"You can also do client side encryption, of course, but it's much more difficult to manage because you have to deal with keys in your application."

Well,SSE-KMS is not difficult to manage if you have sensitive customers data like Capital One does. I use it all the time. You can pretty much audit the buckets and see what is going on.

And if Capital One has used SSE-KMS on the buckets,we might not be talking about this data breach today.Incompetence? Complacency?

Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by parzivalm on Monday July 29, 2019 @10:21PM (#20561570)
I am well aware how S3 works, I just mean you can use custodian to enforce SSE on the bucket as well as KMS based encryption, so the original commenter is just being a troll was the point I was getting at.
Re:Capital One Says Breach Hit 100M Individuals in U.S by whydoineedthis on Tuesday July 30, 2019 @05:41AM (#20563340)
And if you knew anything of what you were talking about, you would see how easy it is for an engineer to make a mistake and there is 0 auditing or oversight. Also, if YOU actually took 10 seconds, you would see all the data was un-encrypted and in plain text. So where is all this "safety" the dude is speaking of? Cloud Custodian does shit when implemented incorrectly -and that's my point. You think banks are making all this effort, but in reality, the security team is completely understaffed, often not listened to, and in the end - we find this stuff happening all the time.

There, I gave you more than 10 seconds. Trying keeping up.