How I learned about corporate firewalls
141–150 of 204 posts
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#142I worked in a financial company in mid 2000s where the network head did not believe in internal firewalls so that all internal users were on the same network as all the web app servers and database servers. If someone was downloading a movie then customer web access slowed; since everyone used Windows everyone was required to run virus scanners on their computers and that included the app and database server machines…
You won't believe it, but the "one network" came back nowadays. It's called "zero trust", basically treating your internal network as public.
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#143I work at a government agency and here are my tales. 1) They install a root certificate on all machines and use that to MITM all TLS connections using a firewall appliance. They turn this MITM on one day without notifying any developer. Overnight, all our builds (run on-prem) fail because npm install, pip install etc fail and we spent a long time trying to figure it out. They are still failing to this day and I have…
And that kids is how it looks when security team just sits in their ivory tower and shits on everyone else in name of security theathre they're paid to play > Overnight, all our builds (run on-prem) fail because npm install, pip install etc fail and we spent a long time trying to figure it out. They are still failing to this day and I have to get off the VPN every time I need to run these simple commands. IT absolute…
That's the fun part: every technology and tool has its own bespoke way of handling certificates, and it often isn't as simple as adding a certificate to the system store.
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
If "your IT team" has merely created a snapshot of an external repo, how is this any more "secure?" I've asked a similar question below. I really want to understand the thinking here. No IT department is going to go line-by-line through all the packages in "artificatory" or Ruby gems or NPM packages or NuGet's repo, checking them all against known vulnerabilities. No one's going to vet the actual code. If there's a p…
there are IT security vendors that provide static code analysis and scanning for known signatures, that can detect and block malicious packages. Just target SCA at local artifactory and this will be a solved problem. CISO just needs to buy solution and IT admins just needs to deploy that software once and it will keep scanning. Absolutely no extra work from meatbags is required
It seems that Microsoft has built an internal tool that runs such a scan on NuGet (https://devblogs.microsoft.com/nuget/how-to-scan-nuget-packa...), at least against your individual app's packages. (That would be a very rare h/t to Microsoft from me.)
EDIT: Apparently, you can also do this with npm packages (https://docs.npmjs.com/auditing-package-dependencies-for-sec...). I don't see any facility to do this with Ruby gems.
It looks like the common practice would be to outsource the issue database to GitHub, and let whatever scanner you're using cross-reference that list?
What happens when it finds a reported problem? Does it automatically delete that mirrored package, and/or block it from being downloaded or used from the on-prem repo?
This is all new to me, and has helped put this in context, but what actual software are you talking about using for analysis?
EDIT EDIT: Running `yarn audit` in my main Rails app (just using webpacker to bundle the JS):
97 vulnerabilities found - Packages audited: 1074
Severity: 2 Low | 34 Moderate | 52 High | 9 Critical
I just did a `yarn upgrade` about a week ago, so it's not like I'm completely out of date. What would a centrally-managed SCA do about this situation?Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#145> It helpfully spits out this HTML response in return but, of course, my frontend code was expecting a JSON response. I had no idea I was ever going to get anything different. I wish more front-end devs recognized that they're building HTTP clients whenever they make HTTP requests. There's a whole specification written about how to do that well so one doesn't have to learn things like this the hard way. Specs may loo…
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#146I wonder what _showHtmlPage_ does? Did he just write something, something that allows 3rd party (corporate firewalls) inject HTML under his domain within TLS protected connection? Cannot judge by not knowing how he displays errors. But a question to HN public: Is opening unknown HTML under my domain within another window safe? Or is there any possibility to strip down any "permissions" to cookies, requests, resources…
What's the safest way to handle this? Open it in an iframe?
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
If "your IT team" has merely created a snapshot of an external repo, how is this any more "secure?" I've asked a similar question below. I really want to understand the thinking here. No IT department is going to go line-by-line through all the packages in "artificatory" or Ruby gems or NPM packages or NuGet's repo, checking them all against known vulnerabilities. No one's going to vet the actual code. If there's a p…
there are IT security vendors that provide static code analysis and scanning for known signatures, that can detect and block malicious packages. Just target SCA at local artifactory and this will be a solved problem. CISO just needs to buy solution and IT admins just needs to deploy that software once and it will keep scanning. Absolutely no extra work from meatbags is required
Unfortunately this is rarely true in practice. There is always some degree of friction or error that ought to be managed; ignoring it is how shadow IT proliferates, e.g. a dev is tired of their builds failing due to a false positive and decides to circumvent artifactory altogether.
You're spot-on otherwise.
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#148I wonder what _showHtmlPage_ does? Did he just write something, something that allows 3rd party (corporate firewalls) inject HTML under his domain within TLS protected connection? Cannot judge by not knowing how he displays errors. But a question to HN public: Is opening unknown HTML under my domain within another window safe? Or is there any possibility to strip down any "permissions" to cookies, requests, resources…
That seems pretty unsafe without running it through some sanitizer. Trying not to judge too hard, but I would be concerned about the implementation of showHtmlPage by the same author that didn't handle non-json responses.
What's the safest way to handle this? Open it in an iframe?
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#149I was expecting another section about all the other ways a corporate firewall can cause issues. Not all firewalls will give you a 403. Sometimes it will be a 200 with the error in the body. Sometimes you'll just never get a response at all. Sometimes you will get an SSL certificate error, because the error response is signed using the certificate for the firewall vendor's domain instead of yours. And etc.
Re: How I learned about corporate firewalls
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
there are IT security vendors that provide static code analysis and scanning for known signatures, that can detect and block malicious packages. Just target SCA at local artifactory and this will be a solved problem. CISO just needs to buy solution and IT admins just needs to deploy that software once and it will keep scanning. Absolutely no extra work from meatbags is required
So these bulk scanners exist, and the issue is a solved problem, but none of the "root" repos for the popular language stacks are using them? It seems that Microsoft has built an internal tool that runs such a scan on NuGet ( https://devblogs.microsoft.com/nuget/how-to-scan-nuget-packa... ), at least against your individual app's packages. (That would be a very rare h/t to Microsoft from me.) EDIT: Apparently, you ca…
I could talk at length about this; unfortunately, I'm on my phone with a shotty connection.
The tl;dr is that companies like Snyk make money by requiring companies to pay to check for vulnerabilities once they've been downloaded. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that, but a philanthropic company could make things significantly safer for everyone if they weren't concerned about making money. Initiatives like the OSSF will hopefully have a positive impact, for this reason.