The Google Cloud Platform has been added to the federal government’s Certified Cloud Services List (CCSL), allowing the search engine giant to provide cloud services to government agencies, up to an unclassified dissemination limiting marker (DLM) level.
The certification was handed out by the Australian Cyber Security Centre (ACSC), which took the responsibility off the Australian Signals Directorate earlier this year.
“Google sought entry into the certification program for hosting data classified up to Unclassified DLM. Because of this, Google was only assessed for this purpose,” head of the ACSC Alastair MacGibbon said.
“Protecting Australians from cyber threats is one of our greatest national security challenges. It’s important that we have rigorous standards for the management of our information.”
The ACSC’s decision certifies 16 Google Cloud Platform services and a physical datacentre located in Sydney, in categories including: Compute Engine, App Engine, and Kubernetes Engine for computing; Cloud Storage and Persistent Disk for storage; Virtual Private Cloud, Cloud Load Balancing, and Cloud DNS for networking; Cloud Key Management Service and Cloud IAM for security; Stackdriver where management is concerned; Cloud Dataflow, Cloud Dataproc, and Cloud Datalab for data analytics; and for databases, Cloud SQL and Cloud Datastore.
The CCSL now boasts 12 providers that can all store government data at the unclassified DLM level: Dimension Data, Macquarie Government, Microsoft, Sliced Tech, Vault Systems, Amazon Web Services, Dell Virtustream, Education Services Australia, IBM, Salesforce, and ServiceNow.
However, only five of these vendors are certified at a protected level, which is currently the highest security level approved by the federal government.
Local vendors Sliced Tech and Vault Systems were the first to receive protected status and were shortly followed by Macquarie Government, part of the Macquarie Telecom Group.
NTT-owned Dimension Data was then accredited to provide protected-level cloud services to Australian government entities despite being an international company, and one with datacentres outside of the country.
Microsoft was the fifth and final vendor to appear on the CCSL in a protected capacity, receiving accreditation in April for its “government-configured” clouds to be used for Australian government data classified up to that level. But unlike all previous such certifications, Microsoft’s certifications were provisional, and came with what the ASD called “consumer guides”.
During Senate Estimates earlier this year, MacGibbon was asked if there had been any negative feedback received regarding Microsoft, with the committee pointing to concerns over the legitimacy of Microsoft’s accreditation.
MacGibbon in May defended the government’s decision to hand conditional protected-level certification out to Microsoft, saying he was confident the data on Australians is safe in the hands of Microsoft despite the Washington-headquartered company having staff scattered around the globe.
Google Cloud landed in Australia in July last year.
Seven cloud vendors lining up for government security clearance
After Microsoft’s contentious addition to the Certified Cloud Services List, the Australian Signals Directorate has revealed it is working with another seven companies interested in providing cloud services to government.
DTA shifts to Microsoft’s protected cloud
DTA is the first government entity to move to Microsoft’s secure cloud environment after it received accreditation in April.
Commonwealth pushes public cloud by default
Spruiking a public cloud-first approach, the Australian government has lifted the lid off its new Secure Cloud Strategy.
Here’s what developers really think about AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud (TechRepublic)
Platform providers lack adequate support resources for developers, according to an Accenture report.
Google Cloud Platform: A cheat sheet (TechRepublic)
This comprehensive guide covers the history of Google Cloud Platform, the products and services GCP offers, and where it fits in the overall cloud market.
Phish Fight: Securing Enterprise Communications
Yes, much of the world may have moved on from email to social media and culturally dubious TikTok dances, yet traditional electronic mail remains a foundation of business communication. And sadly, it remains a prime vector for malware, data leakage, and phishing attacks that can undermine enterprise protections. It doesn’t have to be that way.
In a just released report titled “GigaOm Radar for Phishing Prevention and Detection,” GigaOm Analyst Simon Gibson surveyed more than a dozen enterprise-focused email security solutions. He found a range of approaches to securing communications that often can be fitted together to provide critical, defense-in-depth protection against even determined attackers.
Figure 1. GigaOm Radar for Email Phishing Prevention and Detection
“When evaluating these vendors and their solutions, it is important to consider your own business and workflow,” Gibson writes in the report, stressing the need to deploy solutions that best address your organization’s business workflow and email traffic. “For some it may be preferable to settle on one comprehensive solution, while for others building a best-of-breed architecture from multiple vendors may be preferable.”
In a field of competent solutions, Gibson found that Forcepoint, purchased recently by Raytheon, stood apart thanks to the layered protections provided by its Advanced Classification Engine. Area 1 and Zimperium, meanwhile, are both leaders that exhibit significant momentum, with Area 1 boosted by its recent solution partnership with Virtru, and Zimperium excelling in its deep commitment to mobile message security.
A mobile focus is timely, Gibson says in a video interview for GigaOm. He says companies are “tuning the spigot on” and enabling unprecedented access and reliance on mobile devices, which is creating an urgent need to get ahead of threats.
Gibson’s conclusion in the report? He singles out three things: Defense in depth, awareness of existing patterns and infrastructure, and a healthy respect for the “human factor” that can make security so hard to lock down.
When Is a DevSecOps Vendor Not a DevSecOps Vendor?
DevOps’ general aim is to enable a more efficient process for producing software and technology solutions and bringing stakeholders together to speed up delivery. But we know from experience that this inherently creative, outcome-driven approach often forgets about one thing until too late in the process—security. Too often, security is brought into the timeline just before deployment, risking last minute headaches and major delays. The security team is pushed into being the Greek chorus of the process, “ruining everyone’s fun” by demanding changes and slowing things down.
But as we know, in the complex, multi-cloud and containerized environment we find ourselves in, security is becoming more important and challenging than ever. And the costs of security failure are not only measured in slower deployment, but in compliance breaches and reputational damage.
The term “DevSecOps” has been coined to characterize how security needs to be at the heart of the DevOps process. This is in part principle and part tools. As a principle, DevSecOps fits with the concept of “shifting left,” that is, ensuring that security is treated as early as possible in the development process. So far, so simple.
From a tooling perspective, however, things get more complicated, not least because the market has seen a number of platforms marketing themselves as DevSecOps. As we have been writing our Key Criteria report on the subject, we have learned that not all DevSecOps vendors are necessarily DevSecOps vendors. Specifically, we have learned to distinguish capabilities that directly enable the goals of DevSecOps from a process perspective, from those designed to support DevSecOps practices. We could define them as: “Those that do, and those that help.”
This is how to tell the two types of vendor apart and how to use them.
Vendors Enabling DevSecOps: “Tools That Do”
A number of tools work to facilitate the DevSecOps process -– let’s bite the bullet and call them DevSecOps tools. They help teams set out each stage of software development, bringing siloed teams together behind a unified vision that allows fast, high-quality development, with security considerations at its core. DevSecOps tools work across the development process, for example:
- Create: Help to set and implement policy
- Develop: Apply guidance to the process and aid its implementation
- Test: Facilitate and guide security testing procedures
- Deploy: Provide reports to assure confidence to deploy the application
The key element that sets these tool sets apart is the ability to automate and reduce friction within the development process. They will prompt action, stop a team from moving from one stage to another if the process has not adequately addressed security concerns, and guide the roadmap for the development from start to finish.
Supporting DevSecOps: “Tools That Help”
In this category we place those tools which aid the execution, and monitoring, of good DevSecOps principles. Security scanning and application/infrastructure hardening tools are a key element of these processes: Software composition analysis (SCA) forms a part of the development stage, static/dynamic application security testing (SAST/DAST) is integral to the test stage and runtime app protection (RASP) is a key to the Deploy stage.
Tools like this are a vital part of the security layer of security tooling, especially just before deployment – and they often come with APIs so they can be plugged into the CI/CD process. However, while these capabilities are very important to DevSecOps, they can be seen in more of a supporting role, rather than being DevSecOps tools per se.
DevSecOps-washing is not a good idea for the enterprise
While one might argue that security should never have been shifted right, DevSecOps exists to ensure that security best practices take place across the development lifecycle. A corollary exists to the idea of “tools that help,” namely that organizations implementing these tools are not “doing DevSecOps,” any more than vendors providing these tools are DevSecOps vendors.
The only way to “do” DevSecOps is to fully embrace security at a process management and governance level: This means assessing risk, defining policy, setting review gates, and disallowing progress for insecure deliverables. Organizations that embrace DevSecOps can get help from what we are calling DevSecOps tools, as well as from scanning and hardening tools that help support its goals.
At the end of the day, all security and governance boils down to risk: If you buy a scanning tool so you can check a box that says “DevSecOps,” you are potentially adding to your risk posture, rather than mitigating it. So, get your DevSecOps strategy fixed first, then consider how you can add automation, visibility, and control using “tools that do,” as well as benefit from “tools that help.”
High Performance Application Security Testing
This free 1-hour webinar from GigaOm Research. It is hosted by an expert in Application and API testing, and GigaOm analyst, Jake Dolezal. His presentation will focus on the results of high performance testing we completed against two security mechanisms: ModSecurity on NGINX and NGINX App Protect. Additionally, we tested the AWS Web Application Firewall (WAF) as a fully managed security offering.
While performance is important, it is only one criterion for a Web Application Firewall selection. The results of the report are revealing about these platforms. The methodology will be shown with clarity and transparency on how you might replicate these tests to mimic your own workloads and requirements.
Register now to join GigaOm and sponsor NGINX for this free expert webinar.
Both Volkswagen and Tesla are preparing cheaper EVs
A new report is going around that claims new, more affordable electric vehicles will be coming to market. According to...
Hyundai and Kia fined $210 million over vehicle recalls due to engine trouble
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced consent orders this week with Hyundai and Kia related to recalls of vehicles...
WarGames for real: How one 1983 exercise nearly triggered WWIII
Update, 11/29/20: It’s a very different Thanksgiving weekend here in 2020, but even if tables were smaller and travel non-existent,...
David Prowse, the original Darth Vader, is dead at 85
David Prowse as Darth Vader and Carrie Fisher as Princess Leia filming the original “Star Wars.” Sunset Boulevard/Corbis via Getty...
Snapchat clones TikTok, India bans 43 Chinese apps, more data on App Store commission changes – TechCrunch
Welcome back to This Week in Apps, the TechCrunch series that recaps the latest in mobile OS news, mobile applications, and the...
Social10 months ago
CrashPlan for Small Business Review
Gadgets2 years ago
A fictional Facebook Portal videochat with Mark Zuckerberg – TechCrunch
Mobile2 years ago
Memory raises $5M to bring AI to time tracking – TechCrunch
Social2 years ago
iPhone XS priciest yet in South Korea
Cars2 years ago
What’s the best cloud storage for you?
Cars2 years ago
Some internet outages predicted for the coming month as ‘768k Day’ approaches
Social2 years ago
Apple’s new iPad Pro aims to keep enterprise momentum
Cars2 years ago
Samsung, SK Telecom develop 5G standalone equipment