Information risks a-gurgling

There are clearly substantial information risks associated with the redaction of sensitive elements from disclosed reports and other formats, risks that the controls don't necessarily fully mitigate.

Yes, controls are fallible and constrained, leaving residual risks. This is hardly Earth-shattering news to any competent professional or enlightened infidel, and yet others are frequently shocked. 

A new report* from a research team at the University of Illinois specifically concerns failures in the redaction processes and tools applied to PDF documents. The physical size of redacted text denoted (covered or replaced) with a variable-length black rectangle may give clues as to the original content, while historically a disappointing number of redaction attempts have failed to prevent the original information being recovered simply by removing the cover images or selecting then pasting the underlying text. Doh!

If the original text uses monospaced fonts and left or right paragraph justification, the number of redacted characters is trivial to determine. Proportional fonts and full justification make the information recovery process a little more involved and less accurate but certainly not impossible.  

On top of that, there may be many other clues as to the redacted content from the document (e.g. the context and metadata, plus unredacted copies or ) or from other sources (e.g. correlated information), and even wild guesses can reduce the number of possibilities compared to an effectively redacted document. If you work in, say, countersurveillance or counterterrorism actively hunting for moles, spies or whistleblowers in the camp, you may well start with a shortlist of named suspects, significantly increasing the probability of correctly guessing their names from the character counts if they appear in ineptly-redacted disclosures.

Furthermore, there are information risks associated with the redaction and publication process as a whole, including governance and transparency issues.  These risks and possible controls are out of scope of the research paper and are largely ignored by redaction standards and advisories such as ISO/IEC 27038, NSA Report # I333-015R-2005 and assorted guidance from the US courts**.

As if that's not enough already, most of the advice in this area concerns redaction of documents produced by office software: redaction of audio and video streams, or databases, or statistical data sets, or biometrics, faces some shared and some novel risks requiring still further controls. 

Hinson tip: whispering top secret spy matters in a hotel bathroom with the shower running, or in a tawdry bedsit with the radio turned up loud, is not a terribly effective form of audio redaction. As to spooks using bugs, or laser/microwave monitoring of sound waves on reflective surfaces, or lip-reading through binoculars or drones, well if that kind of stuff truly matters to you, I sincerely hope you know a lot more than me about it!  

The assurance aspect intrigues me. Particularly if the risks - the combination of threats, vulnerabilities and impacts, remember - are significant (such as when disclosing reports that name victims, suspects, informants or spies), it makes sense to invest effort into detecting as well as avoiding or preventing redaction failures, but I am not presently aware of any readily-available standards, advice, methods or tools in this area. Of course those too would have information risks (such as access to the redacted documents submitted for testing, plus procedural errors, design flaws, bugs And All That) as information risk spirals away down the plughole.

Maybe it's time to accept that redaction, as currently recommended and practiced, is a rotten, unreliable, fragile control. There's a lot to be said for preparing, reviewing and releasing carefully and competently-crafted summaries or precis of important content rather than attempting to redact the originals, or simply of course refusing outright to divulge the information at all or denying its very existence, Ultra-style (provided those information risks are appropriately managed: plughole, here we come again). 

* Thanks to someone's heads-up mention on LinkeDin and a piece in Wired for pointing it out.

**  By the way, US District Court of the Southern District of Alabama, physically snipping out and shredding pieces of paper containing redacted print may be close to but is not 100% effective. See the 2nd paragraph of this very piece. Security is asymptotic.

Popular posts from this blog

Pragmatic ISMS implementation guide (FREE!)

Image
Early this morning ( very  early!) I remotely attended an ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 27/WG 1 editing meeting in London discussing the planned revision of ISO/IEC 27003:2017 . Overall, the meeting was very productive in that we got through a  long  list of expert comments on the preliminary draft standard, debated the objectives of the project and the standard and reached consensus on most points. In summary: 27003 is to be revised to align with the current 2022 releases of ISO/IEC 27001 , 27002 and 27005 : These changes are  mostly  minor aside from the new section 6.3 on ISMS changes.
Read more

Two dozen information risks that ISO forgot

Image
Selecting the wrong controls - controls that are inappropriate, ineffective, too costly, impracticable, fragile, unnecessary, counterproductive or whatever, often as a result of blind faith in fads and fashions of the day and FOMO e.g. MFA, AI, cyber Failing to select the right controls - controls that are ideal for the particular situation, both now and in perpetuity, for whatever reason - mostly ignorance and prejudice Selecting and implementing controls at the wrong time or in the wrong way (where 'wrong' includes ineffective, inappropriate, sub-optimal e.g. bolting on controls rather than designing and building them in) Inept and inaccurate identification, analysis and quantification of risk, including reliance on p oor quality (incomplete, inaccurate, out of date, misleading, unreliable ...) information about actual risks, particularly subtle and emerging risks plus those involving deliberate concealment and misdirection e.g. fraud, misinformation, disinformation, propagan
Read more

Philosophical phriday - compliance risk

Image
According to a vendor's promotional video interview I saw recently, the 'cybersecurity compliance burden' has allegedly become so significant that [customer] organisations are eagerly buying [their] software tools and services to help them manage and fulfil their obligations. The vendor's argument goes that, instead of accumulating a ragtag bunch of policies and other controls relating to user Identification and Authentication (I&A), for instance, it makes sense to:  Identify all the cybersecurity-related laws, regulations and standards that apply to the organisation; Examine them for any security control requirements relating to, say, I&A; Rationalise the I&A controls down to the smallest set that satisfies all the requirements - the lowest common denominator; Design, implement, use, manage and maintain those I&A controls; Have the I&A controls checked or audited to gain assurance that the compliance requirements are met.  OK so far? Sounds reasonab
Read more

ISMS internal audit priorities

Image
A thread on the ISO27k Forum sparked my imagination over coffee this morning. Hope had previously asked for assistance with an ISO/IEC 27001:2022 audit plan.  Bhushan offered a lengthy and generally sound response explaining how to use a spreadsheet with tabs to plan and record the audit work performed on 100% of the main body clauses and 50% of the 93 Annex A controls, day-by-day. That's OK ... except it wasn't entirely clear that he was interpreting and elaborating on the standard's actual requirements. ISO/IEC 27001 does not explicitly require, for example, that (as Bhushan stated) "ALL the management system clauses from 4 to 10 AND their sub-clauses need to be listed and audited" in an ISMS internal audit, although evidently he interprets it in that way. In clause 9.2.1, the standard states a requirement for internal audits to provide information on whether the ISMS conforms to the organization’s own requirements for the ISMS plus the requirements of the stan
Read more

Reading between the lines of ISO27001 [L O N G]

Image
ISO/IEC 27001 is a succinct, formally-worded standard for two key reasons: It is deliberately generic, being applicable to all manner of organisations regardless of difference in location/s, size, industry, maturity, structure, information risk and security status ... and so on. In effect, it specifies the lowest common denominator - the things that ALL organisations should be doing to manage their information security controls, as a minimum. The hurdle is set low enough that every organisation ought to find value in designing, implementing and operating an I nformation S ecurity M anagement S ystem as laid out in the standard. It is a certifiable standard, explicitly specifying the characteristics that every certified organisation's ISMS is expected to have. Again, it is a minimal specification with no concept of typical, average or maximum security: that is entirely down to the organisations themselves to determine, following the information risk management processes minimally de
Read more

Passionate dispassion

Image
Someone who is actively involved in, or is managing, an activity is patently not independent of it. They may well make a conscious, rational and determined effort to be objective, dispassionately reviewing evidence etc ., but their subconscious/emotional biases/prejudices and beliefs/value-systems will inevitably influence what they do. With the best will in the world, they will struggle to challenge and assess their past decisions and activities, especially if they were "certain" or "determined" or genuinely believed they were "doing the right thing". Furthermore, it is very hard for anyone to review the things they did not do, decisions they did not make or options they did not even consider. Mostly, they remain out of sight or out of the question.
Read more

45 ISO Management Systems Standards

Image
The ISO website  currently lists 45 published M anagement S ystems S tandards: 1. ISO 7101:2023 Healthcare organization management — Management systems for quality in healthcare organizations — Requirements 2. ISO 9001:2015 Quality management systems — Requirements 3. ISO 10012:2003 Measurement management systems — Requirements for measurement processes and measuring equipment 4. ISO 13485:2016 Medical devices — Quality management systems — Requirements for regulatory purposes 5. ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems — Requirements with guidance for use 6. ISO 14298:2021 Graphic technology — Management of security printing processes
Read more

Philosophical phriday - a noncompliance ramble

Image
In a previous philosophical phriday post , I moaned about vendors of security compliance support/management tools and services over-promising and under-delivering - an admittedly biased, even cynical opinion piece about the compliance imperative . A recent article in Corporate Compliance Insights notes that "CISOs are not just defenders against cyber threats but also champions of compliance and operational resilience". Hmmm, are CISOs 'compliance champs', really? Today, I'm discussing alternatives to being compliance-driven. How else can organisations drive their information risk, security and related concerns in a positive direction?
Read more

Adaptive SME security Crowdstrike special

Image
As if on cue, along comes a golden opportunity to consider what the Adaptive SME security  approach has to say regarding the Crowdstrike incident: That's not 20/20 hindsight but foresight: I've picked out the most relevant rows from the security controls table published in the guide 24 hours before the incident.  Although Crowdstrike primarily supplies much larger enterprises than SMEs, the incident could equally have afflicted other security software, or indeed operating systems such as Windows and assorted cloud apps commonly used by SMEs. Regardless of the details, it is a wake-up call, an opportunity to consider and respond to the information risks ... and to adapt , accordingly.
Read more