DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

US-CERT’s do’s-and-don’ts for after the cyber hack

Posted on September 12, 2015 by Dissent

Jason Miller reports that US-CERT is offering best practices for after an attack. Here’s a bit of what he reports:

Hacked organizations shouldn’t automatically initiate reactive measures to the network without first consulting incident response experts. Barron-DiCamillo said US-CERT and a host of other companies do incident responses for a living as opposed systems administrators or other IT experts who respond to cyber problems only when they happen.

“This can cause loss of volatile data such as memory and other host-based artifacts. We also see them touching adversary infrastructure. It seems unusual, but we do,” she said. “They are pinging or doing name server (NS) look up, browsing to certain sites. Agency staff is trying to investigate the incident, naturally, and they want to conduct the analysis on suspicious domains or IPs. However, these actions can tip off the adversaries that they have been detected. Again, a no-no. You don’t want to do that.”

Read more on Federal News Radio.

Category: Commentaries and AnalysesOf Note

Post navigation

← CVS confirms customer data stolen in PNI Digital Media attack (updated)
Highmark’s statement on the Excellus BlueCross BlueShield security breach. →

2 thoughts on “US-CERT’s do’s-and-don’ts for after the cyber hack”

  1. JJ says:
    September 12, 2015 at 11:33 am

    Translated: “You smell of smoke. You find a small fire on your kitchen stove. DO NOT GRAB THE FIRE EXTINGUISHER AND PUT IT OUT OR TAKE THE POT OFF THE STOVE OR COVER IT OR DO ANYTHING ELSE! Just let it burn until the fire department, which is eight hours away, gets there. They will need to investigate how it started.”

    I was an emergency responder for many years and in that kind of job the first two tasks are “Stop the burning and stop the bleeding.” The analogy holds here. Doing nothing while you wait for the “experts” to arrive can make the damage to you and your company worse. US-CERT and the consultants aren’t going to take the brunt of the damage; you are.

    Figuring out how it happened is called attribution, which is usually not possible anyways, and does the breached entity little good. You’re still going to call it a “sophisticated cyberattack” no matter how much your negligence played into the cause.

    1. Dissent says:
      September 12, 2015 at 12:09 pm

      I was an emergency responder, too, so I know exactly what you mean. 🙂

      That said, I’ve seen entities screw themselves by their breach response making it impossible for them to ultimately figure out what data (and whose) was compromised. Case in point: the MCCCD breach that I’ve blogged a lot about. Their initial steps made more thorough investigation impossible.

Comments are closed.

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • Alabama Man Sentenced to 14 Months in Connection with Securities and Exchange Commission X Hack that Spiked Bitcoin Prices
  • Japan enacts new Active Cyberdefense Law allowing for offensive cyber operations
  • Breachforums Boss “Pompompurin” to Pay $700k in Healthcare Breach
  • HHS Office for Civil Rights Settles HIPAA Cybersecurity Investigation with Vision Upright MRI
  • Additional 12 Defendants Charged in RICO Conspiracy for over $263 Million Cryptocurrency Thefts, Money Laundering, Home Break-Ins
  • RIBridges firewall worked. But forensic report says hundreds of alarms went unnoticed by Deloitte.
  • Chinese Hackers Hit Drone Sector in Supply Chain Attacks
  • Coinbase says hackers bribed staff to steal customer data and are demanding $20 million ransom
  • $28 million in Texas’ cybersecurity funding for schools left unspent
  • Cybersecurity incident at Central Point School District 6

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Privacy enforcement under Andrew Ferguson’s FTC
  • “We would be less confidential than Google” – Proton threatens to quit Switzerland over new surveillance law
  • CFPB Quietly Kills Rule to Shield Americans From Data Brokers
  • South Korea fines Temu for data protection violations
  • The BR Privacy & Security Download: May 2025
  • License Plate Reader Company Flock Is Building a Massive People Lookup Tool, Leak Shows
  • FTC dismisses privacy concerns in Google breakup

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.