Feeds

Multi-site bug exposes cloud computing's dark lining

One vuln fits all

The essential guide to IT transformation

More dark linings have been exposed in the cloud computing craze, this time by web security expert Russ McRee, who demonstrates how a flaw in a single provider can spell trouble for numerous customers it serves.

In this case, the provider is software-as-a-service, or SaaS, provider Baynote, which offers search and other online services for technology, ecommerce, and other types of websites. After McRee discovered an XSS, or cross-site scripting error, in a Baynote feature known as Social Search, he had all he needed to carry out attacks on a wide swath of the customers who used it.

The bug made exploitation the electronic equivalent of a paint-by-numbers exercise with http://[Insert customer here].com/socialsearch/query?cn=[customer]&cc=us&q= as the template. LSI Corporation, a maker of host bus adapters and other electronics, and data management provider NetApp, were just two of the Baynote customers who were made vulnerable, according to this video.

McRee stresses that Baynote "was responsive and fixed the issue quickly." But his discovery points out a potential Achilles Heel of cloud computing: An oversight by a single vendor creates a single point of failure that can have devastating effects on an untold number of its customers.

"Should that SaaS vendor have just one chink in their armor, perhaps a web application flaw, a lapse in network security, or a physical security indiscretion, its clients and their customers all share the same risk," he writes here. "An enterprise is only as strong as its weakest link, and if someone else is managing that link for you, you have some questions to ask before marrying your business to theirs."

This isn't the first time businesses have been warned about putting too many eggs in one basket. A Salesforce.com outage in January that left more than 900,000 customers without access to crucial data also demonstrates the risks of relying on a single provider.

It's not that cloud computing is automatically a bad idea, since outages and security flaws happen in-house too. Rather, SaaS can't be viewed as a panacea and due care must be taken to assess a provider's safety. Or, as McRee puts it: "Quite simply, SaaS vendors should be held to higher standards than traditional product providers." ®

Next gen security for virtualised datacentres

More from The Register

next story
Snowden on NSA's MonsterMind TERROR: It may trigger cyberwar
Plus: Syria's internet going down? That was a US cock-up
Who needs hackers? 'Password1' opens a third of all biz doors
GPU-powered pen test yields more bad news about defences and passwords
e-Borders fiasco: Brits stung for £224m after US IT giant sues UK govt
Defeat to Raytheon branded 'catastrophic result'
Microsoft cries UNINSTALL in the wake of Blue Screens of Death™
Cache crash causes contained choloric calamity
Germany 'accidentally' snooped on John Kerry and Hillary Clinton
Dragnet surveillance picks up EVERYTHING, USA, m'kay?
Linux kernel devs made to finger their dongles before contributing code
Two-factor auth enabled for Kernel.org repositories
prev story

Whitepapers

5 things you didn’t know about cloud backup
IT departments are embracing cloud backup, but there’s a lot you need to know before choosing a service provider. Learn all the critical things you need to know.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Build a business case: developing custom apps
Learn how to maximize the value of custom applications by accelerating and simplifying their development.
Rethinking backup and recovery in the modern data center
Combining intelligence, operational analytics, and automation to enable efficient, data-driven IT organizations using the HP ABR approach.
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.