Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I’ve had these types of conversations hundreds of times due to some architecture of various systems that I’ve worked on over the years. Mostly from the vendor side.

The only real way to combat this is to do Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) and then to look at all the data that’s being passed within that encrypted connection. The problem with this, is that at this point, the vendor has to trust that the customer is doing their due diligence to protect anything that they find within that associated connection with the same diligence that the vendor would be.

As a vendor specifically in the healthcare space, I can tell you that there is no way in hell that I am going to trust any of our customers to secure our data, more than ourselves. They will never know or understand all of the components and know where the risks lie better than the vendor.

For example, in the infancy of one of the companies that I worked at, I agreed with one of our customers to allow certificate pinning, and we would install their certificate on our servers which would allow them to inspect the traffic. Wouldn’t you know it, there was an issue where they were blocking some of our traffic that needed to go outbound, because of their deep packet inspection triggered some rule that they had enabled. Conveniently while they were pilfering through the data to troubleshoot the issue, they sent a bunch of the payloads that contained various API keys, tokens, etc. which were now just out there in the wild, that under our watch would never see the light of day.

Who knows where else those things are logged or what other places besides the 30 or so recipients that were on that email thread. As soon as we found out that they were not handling it appropriately, we took corrective actions, not only to replace the keys, but also to disallow that going forward. And this for context, is one of the biggest healthcare institutions in the United States.

I can confidently say that I have a strong security mindset and anything that gets built has security at the forefront of every release. You can’t trust people who aren’t liable for your systems, with your data, or even to protect their own data.

Maybe I am jaded, but the lesson I learned is that you shouldn’t trust anybody, and that chances are other people will not treat sensitive information with the same sensitivity that you will.



> The only real way to combat this is to do Deep Packet Inspection (DPI)

Snake oil. It's not possible to be sure what's really going on in a connection where somebody else controls both endpoints, full stop. That's what this whole post is about.

> As a vendor specifically in the healthcare space, I can tell you that there is no way in hell that I am going to trust any of our customers to secure our data, more than ourselves.

What are "your" data doing on a device you don't physically control, in a network you don't control at all, all under the supervision of somebody you don't believe should have access to those data? Anything on there is "in the wild" already. It should have no ability to affect anybody but that customer and information that that customer would have access to regardless.

The security mindset should be telling you that your whole system needs to be rearchitected.


In that sort of scenario, the appliance needs to be in a DMZ and treated like an external system.

Personally, this is why I hate systems that need this sort of connectivity beyond a SAN service processor or similar. I’d rather have the third party just run in on their premise with appropriate contracts than pretend it’s just another server in the datacenter.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: