ZDNet UK


Skip to Main Content

ZDNet.co.uk - Winner of Best Business Website 2007
  1. Home
  2. News
  3. Blogs
  4. Reviews
  5. Prices
  6. Resources
  7. Community
  8. My ZDNet

 

ZDNet UK RSS Feeds


IT Jobs

Security threats Toolkit

IBM: Public vulnerabilities are tip of the iceberg

Tom Espiner ZDNet.co.uk

Published: 01 Jun 2007 12:07 BST

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly
  • Post Comment

IBM's Internet Security Systems division has warned that there is a "colossal difference" between the number of publicly disclosed security vulnerabilities and the number of vulnerabilities that are discovered but not publicly disclosed.

Internet Security Systems' director of security strategy, Gunter Ollmann, wrote in his blog that although ISS researchers had analysed just over 7,000 publicly disclosed vulnerabilities last year, the number of new security vulnerabilities found in code could be as high as 139,362 per year. Ollmann arrived at this estimate by taking into account vulnerabilities that have been disclosed to a software vendor and are currently undergoing remediation, and vulnerabilities discovered internally by a vendor and patched silently.

Sentry Posts Blog

Sentry Posts Blog
Guarding the network

What you need to know — and what you and your peers have to tell us — about security management in our new community group blog

Read more +

He added that zero-day vulnerabilities may have been purchased by organisations from security researchers, which are then released under non-disclosure agreements to that organisation's customers. Other organisations and hackers also stealthily use zero-day vulnerabilities to produce malware, according to Ollmann.

According to Ollmann, vulnerabilities that have been discovered under contract — for example, through penetration testing — plus vulnerabilities discovered by researchers which are deemed "too lame" and are consequently never disclosed to the vendor, and vulnerabilities that affect non-English software that subsequently can't be understood by some analysts, all add together resulting in "a colossal number" of total vulnerabilities. 

However, some security experts questioned Ollmann's definition of known and unknown vulnerabilities. Greg Day, UK analyst for security vendor McAfee, told ZDNet.co.uk: "What [Ollmann] is classing as new and unknown vulnerabilities are really processes by which they become known." Day added that while penetration testing does reveal vulnerabilities, these are never made public and are patched internally, reducing the risk of an exploit.

Andy Buss, senior analyst for analysis firm Canalys, pointed out that many internal systems weren't directly exposed to the internet, and said the risk stated by ISS needed to be "taken with a pinch of salt". However, he added that ISS's estimate of the number of undiscovered vulnerabilities was "conservative".

"IBM ISS are likely to be being conservative with [139,362] given how much in-house software never gets tested," Buss told ZDNet.co.uk. "In my view, the number is probably way higher than that."

McAfee's Day said he wouldn't like to put a figure on the number of undisclosed vulnerabilities. "The simple reality is there's so much code — in applications, in systems and infrastructures, there's a huge potential to be capped or tested. I wouldn't like to say whether [139,362] is high or low," he said.

  • Email
  • Trackback
  • Clip Link
  • Print friendly Print with HP

Did you find this article useful?
6 out of 6 people found this useful


Full Talkback thread

0 comments

Company/Topic Alerts

Create a new alert from the list below:







Related Jobs

Pre-sales Systems Engineer SE - OEM Alliances - Virtualisation Vendor

Pre-sales Consultant -Systems Engineer SE - Virtualisation Vendor - c80,000 - OEM Alliances - Vmware, Vmware VCP, Citrix Xensource, Virtual Iron, ...

Senior Business Analyst, SAP-OIL, ETRM Vendor, City

This client is a global commodity-trading vendor. The company is originally from the US, but has also has a London office. This company is ...

Implementation Consultant, Energy Trading Risk Management Vendor, LON

You will have experience already in implementing ETRM solutions, whether it be for a vendor, management consultancy or working for an end user. ...

Sentry Posts Blog

How many headshots does one chairperso...

We got a strange request last week from the head of PR from Russian security experts Kaspersky. It seems although the company was very happy with the interview we recently carried with... More

Post a comment

Google sponsors open source security p...

Google has announced it is to sponsor oCERT, an open source computer emergency response team. In a blog post on Monday, Google security engineer Will Drewry said that one of the... More

Post a comment

Indian officials accuse China of cyber...

China is actively engaged in mapping India's computer networks, according to the Times of India. China is mounting "almost daily" attacks against Indian Government computer systems,... More

Post a comment

Featured Talkback

On the contrary, if vendors were forced to stand behind their products it should increase innovation. It would force more, and better , testing before hitting the sales floor, resulting in fewer updates and less downtime for the consumer. At present the EULA removes responsibility from the vendor, and moves it to the user, which is a step backward. Make the vendor responsibility for their code.

By: ator1940

Read full story:
RSA: Vendor liability may stifle innovation