Software Vendor Security

SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.

Popular Topics

Home

Members

Calendar

Who's On

Home » SQLServerCentral.com » Editorials » Software Vendor Security

21 posts, Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 »»»

Software Vendor Security

Rate Topic

Display Mode

Topic Options

Author

Message

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

Posted Saturday, July 24, 2010 2:33 PM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 1:47 PM
Points: 31,406, Visits: 13,722

Comments posted to this topic are about the item Software Vendor Security

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help

Post #958428

SQLNightOwl

Posted Saturday, July 24, 2010 4:44 PM

SSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, April 22, 2013 3:55 PM
Points: 179, Visits: 391

Two thumbs up. We have an application (FootPrints) that we wont consolidate onto our primary SQL cluster because they insist on using the SA account for their database interaction. I'd thow using the SA account as another very dumb practice.

--Paul Hunter

Post #958440

SQLRNNR

Posted Sunday, July 25, 2010 9:50 AM

SSCoach

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 1:46 PM
Points: 18,732, Visits: 12,329

Paul Hunter (7/24/2010)

Is this the same FootPrints that is used for tracking trouble tickets?

The version we have doesn't use the sa password but the user account in use has elevated privileges. We can't change the password for that account on account of it breaking the application. We are in process of migrating away from that application on account of the horrendous security model it uses (as the primary reason).

Jason AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
I have given a name to my pain...
MCM SQL Server 2008

SQL RNNR

Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw
Posting Data Etiquette - Jeff Moden
Hidden RBAR - Jeff Moden
VLFs and the Tran Log - Kimberly Tripp

Post #958488

Steve Jones - SSC Editor

Posted Sunday, July 25, 2010 9:54 AM

SSC-Dedicated

Group: Administrators
Last Login: Yesterday @ 1:47 PM
Points: 31,406, Visits: 13,722

Mandating a specific account is a sign of a) poor securty and b) crappy development practice.

We used to use Patrol from BMC at a company, and while it required admin/sysadmin privileges on previous Windows versions, it was actually our own developers that "reused" the service account we had set up for Patrol in other places to avoid worrying about security. It took me over a year to get that password changed after I started.

Follow me on Twitter: @way0utwest

Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help

Post #958489

SQLNightOwl

Posted Sunday, July 25, 2010 3:42 PM

SSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, April 22, 2013 3:55 PM
Points: 179, Visits: 391

Is this the same FootPrints that is used for tracking trouble tickets?

Yep, that's the one. It's an OK app from the users perspective (I guess) but deserves all the scorn you can heap on it for that practice (as does any other app doing this).

Hint to application developers -- if you're doing your development using the "sa" account or any account that requires SysAdmin permission then you're doing something wrong.

--Paul Hunter

Post #958529

SQLRNNR

Posted Sunday, July 25, 2010 3:49 PM

SSCoach

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 1:46 PM
Points: 18,732, Visits: 12,329

Paul Hunter (7/25/2010)

[quote]
Hint to application developers -- if you're doing your development using the "sa" account or any account that requires SysAdmin permission then you're doing something wrong.

And they deserve scorn as well.

Post #958530

katy.park

Posted Sunday, July 25, 2010 4:27 PM

SSC Journeyman

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, May 15, 2013 10:36 AM
Points: 88, Visits: 49

I would add as a bad practice vendors that mandate using the server name as a password (?).

Post #958533

mar10br0

Posted Sunday, July 25, 2010 7:35 PM

SSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, October 05, 2012 3:30 AM
Points: 138, Visits: 351

Don't get me started on this one (if not stopped, I will rant on until deep in the night..... :p)

[rant]
As a (senior) developer myself I've always, always stuck to the rule that any kind of hardcoded configuration in application source-code is reason for immediate termination of contract. Even for one-off applications that will run as an only instance on the only known machine in the company itself for that one-off occasion to do a one-off process.
It's shocking how often I've received a piece of code from one of my developers that wouldn't even run for testing on my PC because the developer hardcoded the database-connection to his own PC-name (and of course user PCs are configured not to accept any SQL-connections from the network, basta!)...

Alas, security in general seems to be a topic everyone will try to avoid until burnt hard personally. How can I tell my son (18) that if he does not install firewalling and anti-virus, he is essentially a willing part of criminal organisations who use such "open" targets for their criminal intent (gone are the days where hacking was a sport with harmless effects like leaving "killroy was here!" messages on your screen.

But the general public and even a large portion of software developers just don't seem to grasp that leaving your PC open for attack is the same as leaving your car-keys in your car in front of a bank with a sign saying "free get-away car for grabs!".
[/rant]

Spread the word on the importance of building security into software from the inside-out, bolting it on top as an afterthought is just not good enough anymore and should not be accepted from any of your vendors.

Post #958541

jay-h

Posted Monday, July 26, 2010 7:23 AM

Say Hey Kid

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, May 14, 2013 7:38 AM
Points: 685, Visits: 1,706

On another website I've seen the suggestion that this is a problem especially for closed source products-- the priority is to get working product out the door often with generations of internal patches and bandaids. Since no one (except possibly hackers) sees these kludges, and the product works properly, the vulnerabilities can go on for decades.

Of course open source products have plenty of problems too, but they are exposed to a lot more eyes, and potentially, re-writes.

...

-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --

Post #958774

david_wendelken

Posted Monday, July 26, 2010 7:37 AM

SSC-Enthusiastic

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 1:06 PM
Points: 183, Visits: 478

One way to get some action (in US companies) is to tell your CIO that the software does comply with the required Sarbanes-Oxley (or other regulatory) guidelines.

That will get the software removed from the system asap.

Tell the vendor the reason why it was removed, and that you have written a letter detailing its security inadequacies to the appropriate regulatory agency for their review.

It will only take one stink-bomb in the press - plus the resultant contract cancellations and huge sales drop - for many software vendors to get the message.

Of course, you better be right and be able to prove you are right, 'cause the software company might come after you.

Post #958785

« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

21 posts, Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 »»»

Permissions