Federal Data Security Law: 'Careful What You Wish For'

A federal cybersecurity law edged closer to reality late last week when the Senate Judiciary Committee approved a bill to protect the personal data of Americans. It's exactly what many security experts have been calling for - one federal law that would supersede the growing mountain of state data security laws and give enterprises a simplified, one-size-fits-all roadmap to work from. The bill is a bipartisan effort sponsored by Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and co-sponsored by former Chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, that would, among other things, force companies and data brokers to institute data privacy and security programs. Also see Mass 201 CMR 17: A Survival Guide for the Anxious And yet, when asked if a federal law is a good idea Tuesday during a panel discussion on the seventh-annual Global Information Security survey, which CSO and CIO magazines conducted with PricewaterhouseCoopers (see survey results here), one attendee who happens to work for the federal government deadpanned, "Careful what you wish for." That seems to be the consensus among IT security pros these days.

But in a recent, informal and unscientific poll CSOonline conducted on LinkedIn, a majority of respondents expressed doubt that a federal law would make their jobs easier. True, the patchwork of state laws can indeed be confusing to companies looking for a one-size-fits-all approach to security compliance. If anything, they said, the opposite would probably be the result. Here's what four respondents said: Gregory Anderson, desktop security SEPM lead manager and wise application packager at Qwest CommunicationsI have no faith in the U.S. government to implement useful strategies and security measures that don't fall completely apart when political cowards take the reins. The question we asked in various LinkedIn forums was if a federal cybersecurity law was the right way to proceed.

James McGovern, Hartford, Conn., chapter leader for the Open Web Application Security Project (OWASP)One thing I believe is missing is that the government needs to acknowledge that while their security practice is probably more rigorous through the lens of process than their enterprise counterparts, they can learn something from enterprises in terms of community sharing of knowledge, ability to work under scenarios of smaller budgets and how to accomplish the job with less bureaucracy. When was the last time a government CIO or enterprise architect ever traded notes with their enterprise peers? We don't need more enforcement, but collaboration. Good security requires understanding multiple perspectives and not thinking in such an insular manner. And, the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act isn't really about breaches but more about the legal and punishment aspects.

Michael S. Black, manager of information security operations at Barclaycard U.S.Well, the Data Breach Notification Act has an exemption for data that "was rendered indecipherable through the use of best practices or methods, such as redaction, access controls, or other such mechanisms, that are widely accepted as an effective industry practice, or an effective industry standard." It doesn't really have any teeth, does it? So we are left with PR and not a framework to increase security. David Robbins, director, systems development at the Taubman CompanyNo, it is not. It's something to let politicians thump their chest and say "We are working hard to help you," but it actually doesn't help the average person whose data gets stolen and resold, and has his credit destroyed. Powers not enumerated in the Constitution are relegated to the states or the citizenry. Assistance with oversight would probably be viewed in the same light - with frivolity.

The feds have outsourced the production of many electronic components for our military, to the point where we may become crippled should an escalated conflict occur. Breaches in security will have no consequences except when brought forth to a committee. How will this secure us? That's the Congress, the same people who vote on bills that they don't really read, or for that matter, bills that haven't been completely written. Will AT&T be under greater scrutiny, or will they buy off the politicians?

China's online video piracy jumps to Internet TVs

Internet-linked televisions, many containing peer-to-peer download tools, are winning buyers in China despite piracy concerns and a battle between government factions over how to regulate the industry, according to analysts. The devices allow downloads of movies and TV series, often through tools such as Xunlei, offered by a Chinese peer-to-peer download network operator that was sued last year for copyright infringement by members of the Motion Picture Association. China's wealthy elite have taken well to Internet-connected TVs in the months since major vendors started selling them in the country. But one government regulatory body sees the TVs as a threat to profits at China's state-owned cable operators.

Xunlei is one of several peer-to-peer download tools that Internet TVs are using in China, said Natkin. And as authorities have taken steps toward regulating the Internet TV industry, at least two film distributors have unveiled plans to file copyright lawsuits against the TV makers themselves in recent weeks. "Various content providers are sensing the attitude of the authorities and jumping on the related opportunities to advance or protect their own interests," said Mark Natkin, managing director of Marbridge Consulting in Beijing. Others include PPLive, PPS.tv and a service from Sohu, which also runs a major Internet portal. Sales of Internet-connected TVs in China will reach 500,000 this year and grow to about 14 million by 2013, technology consultancy iSuppli forecasts. Haier, a major Chinese vendor of household appliances and electronics, has content deals with Xunlei and Sohu for its Internet TVs, said a Haier employee reached by phone who asked not to be named.

A 42-inch Internet TV costs around 7,000 yuan (US$1,030) in China. Online film distributor Union Voole Technology has filed a separate suit against TCL. When asked about the suits, the Haier employee said the availability of pirated videos on Xunlei or other download networks was "a problem in their own operation." Haier chose Xunlei as a content partner because the service is convenient and has a large range of content, he said. Chinese online video content provider NetMovie.com recently said it plans to file a copyright infringement lawsuit against Haier and three other major Chinese vendors selling Internet TVs, Changhong, TCL and Hisense. Xunlei, widely popular among Chinese PC users, says it oversees tens of millions of downloads each day. No one turns black to white in one night." Pirated DVDs, software and CDs are often sold openly on street corners and in small shops across China.

The removal of pirated content from Internet TVs in China will be a slow process, said Michael Qiang Zhang, an analyst at In-Stat. "It's turning to the legal market, but on the way of course you have some pirated content," he said. "You can't actually avoid it. Copyright owners have also complained about pirated content appearing on Chinese streaming video Web sites such as Youku.com and Tudou.com. One Chinese regulator, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (SARFT), has seen Internet TVs as an unwelcome source of competition for state-owned cable operators. On top of the lawsuits, China's Internet TV makers face a wave of regulation that could slow their industry's growth. The peer-to-peer download networks used by the Internet TVs can support streaming, but some TV makers have balked at adding the feature for fear of speeding government regulation of the industry, said Natkin. "The strongest competitive concern about this was from the cable operators," he said. "The cable operators are all part of SARFT's family." SARFT issued an order in August banning companies from channeling Internet content onto TVs without a permit.

Internet TV makers have the backing of China's IT ministry, which wants to regulate the industry but "not to kill it," Zhang said. But it is unclear whether any companies have applied for such a permit, and Internet TVs are being sold just as they were before the order. "I think nobody actually cares," said Zhang. That backing may have protected them from the permit order. Japan, where many TV makers are based, may lead adoption of the devices, but Europe and North America will also see fast growth, he said. Internet-linked TVs are being promoted globally by top manufacturers, said Randy Lawson, a senior analyst at iSuppli. Global sales of Internet-linked TVs will reach 15 million this year, about as much as will be sold in China in five years, according to iSuppli.

Nortel users need to keep tabs on Avaya integration plans

The biggest issue facing Nortel enterprise customers on the heels of Avaya's $900 million purchase of that business is product overlap, consolidation and subsequent support, analysts say. Now comes the uneasy task of sifting through the product portfolio and eliminating redundancies - an ordeal that could leave Nortel and even Avaya users with a shortened life span on their investments. "There may be some surprises there," says Bob Hafner, an analyst with Gartner. "These are going to be two large companies coming together. Avaya emerged as the winning bidder for Nortel's enterprise business Monday, beating out Siemens Enterprise Communications. It's not the easiest thing to do.

Avaya is the leading revenue market share vendor in enterprise telephony, according to Dell'Oro Group, while Nortel is No. 4. (See our test of Avaya's unified communications platform.) Less overlap will be found in routers, switches and other infrastructure products, where Nortel has a larger market share and installed base than Avaya. "The biggest issue for users is, 'Show me the [product] road map,'" says Henry Dewing of Forrester Research. "They want to see hardcore product plans [and] how they are going to actually consolidate product lines." Avaya has pledged near term support for the Nortel enterprise products, including those serviced by Verizon, a Nortel reseller. These things never go without issues, problems or concerns." Slideshow: Rise and Fall of Nortel   Significant overlap is expected in the IP telephony/unified communications portfolios of both companies - IP PBXs, handsets and call management software. Verizon filed motions last week seeking assurances that Avaya would continue to support the Verizon accounts, which the carrier says include many federal law enforcement agencies. "I'd be surprised if that issue doesn't work itself out," says IDC analyst Abner Germanow of the Verizon/Avaya impasse. "I'd have a hard time believing they'd leave the U.S. government out to dry." Nonetheless, Germanow is advising Nortel customers to accelerate any assessment or planning activities in light of the Avaya takeover. "They should figure out where their own needs lie and how to most effectively migrate," he says. "They should hold companies to their multi-vendor visions - that open means open." Gartner's Hafner agrees. "Customers need to pay attention to what's going on in the [merged] organization" to detect any potential distractions or turf battles that may adversely affect them, he says. For a recap of 2009's hottest tech M&A deals, check out our slideshow. 

Microsoft plans six patches next week, ties November record

Microsoft today said it will deliver six security updates Tuesday, less than half the number it issued last month, to fix flaws in Windows and Office. The six slated for next week, however, tie the record for the most issued in November, traditionally a light month for Microsoft updates. The updates will patch a total of 15 separate vulnerabilities , Microsoft said in a follow-up entry to its security response center's blog. "Six is the lucky number this month," said Andrew Storms, director of security operations at nCircle Network Security. "Really, anything less than 13 is a lucky number." Last month, Microsoft released 13 updates that patched 34 vulnerabilities, both records since the company started shipping monthly updates more than six years ago.

In November 2006, the company also delivered a half-dozen security updates. Four of the six affect one or more editions of Windows or Windows Server; the other two will patch Office, specifically Word and Excel. In 2007 and 2008, however, it shipped just two each year in November, while it released only one in 2005. Of the half-dozen updates, Microsoft tagged three as "critical," the highest severity rating in its four-step scoring system, while the remaining trio were labeled "important," the next-lowest ranking. Because there are no outstanding Microsoft-generated security advisories, Storms was at a loss about what next week's updates might fix. "But Bulletin 1 looks interesting," he said, noting that the critical update would patch only Vista and Server 2008. "Historically, you would expect a Vista patch to also affect XP, and maybe even Windows 7," Storms explained. Last month, Microsoft released the first patches for Windows 7's final code. "There aren't any Windows 7 patches at all," Storms said. "So, so far so good." Windows 7 will be worth watching, however. "It will be more interesting down the road to see if Microsoft disclosed bugs they found in Windows 7, and fixed during development, but are just now going back and fixing in the older OSes." Another update to watch carefully next week is the one Microsoft named "Bulletin 3" in its advance notification , the monthly forewarning that includes only the barest of details. None of Tuesday's updates will affect Windows 7, Microsoft's just-released operating system, or the also-new Windows Server 2008 R2, the companion server software.

That update, also rated critical, affects everything version from the aged Windows 2000 to Vista and Server 2008. "I think No. 3 is the big one to watch next week," said Storms. The first update will impact Word 2002 and Word 2003 on Windows, and Word 2004 and Word 2008 on the Mac. Another researcher agreed. "Our sources unanimously suggest that Bulletin 3 will be the issue that needs to be addressed first this month," echoed Sheldon Malm, senior director of security strategy at Rapid7, in an e-mail. "[Users] should take inventory of where Windows versions are within their environments so they can plan testing and roll-out of the patch for Bulletin 3 as quickly as possible." The two Office updates, both important, will address issues in Word and Excel. The Excel update, on the other hand, will patch one or more problems in Excel 2002, Excel 2003 and Excel 2007 on the PC, Excel 2004 and Excel 2008 on the Mac. "The Office updates are interesting, but from what Microsoft gave us today, I think they'll be the kind of file format parsing bugs we've all come to know and love," Storms said today. Earlier this week, Microsoft acknowledged that the bulk of all attacks targeting Office in the first half of 2009 were leveraging a single vulnerability, which Microsoft patched in June 2006. This is the second month in a row that Microsoft has disclosed not only the number of updates it will ship next week, but also the number of flaws those patches will fix. Vulnerabilities in Office file formats have been a treasure trove for hackers, who have successfully exploited them for years.

And that's a good thing, said Storms. "That's great," he said. "It aids the planning process, because six bulletins could be six vulnerabilities or 20." Microsoft will release the six updates at approximately 1 p.m. ET on Nov. 11.