Skip to main content

Virtualisation - More or Less Secure?

"Everything is virtual,  Nothing is real!".  Sounds like a songwriters lambast against modern day society.  It's not.  Virtualisation in a computing sense has been around a while and is here to stay.  From the virtualisation of physical machines, applications and network infrastructure, being virtual seems like an IT managers idea of heaven: less physical kit = less power = less cash = everyone's happy right?  Maybe...

Virtualisation at the server level is probably the most popular deployment.  By this I refer to the likes of VMWare or Microsoft Hyper-V which creates a hypervisor that sits on the physical tin and basically splices, isolates and distributes the physical components into virtual mini-machines.  These mini-machines can be individual servers running a plethora of different operating systems all using the same underlying physical machine. Neat eh?  Provisioning and de-provisioning a new server takes seconds.  Fault tolerance across applications, servers and infrastructure is simpler and more cost effective.  Virtualised networking allows the virtual machines to talk to each other without touching a physical ethernet cable.  Nice.

But does this concentration of resources increase of decrease or increase security?  I'm thinking from a physical perspective you have less kit to worry about.  Good thing right?  Well, you have this concentration factor which results in a smaller attack space that attackers can focus on.  If previously you had 250 physical DL380 servers racked in 4 server rooms which now becomes a pair of clustered boxes in 2 server rooms, there are less things that need protecting and there are less entry points an attacker could focus on.  However, if an attack were to be successful, the rewards are simply much higher.

If a hacker was able to gain access to the host machine (the physical kit running the hypervisor) they'd then had access to all the virtual machines running underneath?  Well perhaps not directly as they will be some logical security and isolation of those virtual machine files, but it theory you have more chance of creating a  DoS scenario than if you had 250 physical machines which would require 250 separate attacks.

From a practical perspective this virtual world will need to be managed and administered by someone.  This normally falls to a server support team of some description.  Whilst previously your pre-virtualised server world might be managed by different specialists (Unix, Solaris, Windows, Database, Web etc) the post-virtualisation world is managed at a meta level by a single team.  So again, the simplest place for an attack would be via the tools and interfaces that manage the virtual environment as that would give meta-access to the machines underneath - their configuration, their power on status, network configuration and so on.

Another area this virtualised concentration factor might influence is the physical aspect.  So previously you may have had more distributed physical machines.   Even in a concentrated virtual scenario with some sort of bi-locational clustering, you have fewer physical racks and more importantly fewer ethernet cables hosting your environment.  What changes need to be made to gain access to that physical environment?  If you gain access to the physical patching of a host machine, you potentially have access to sniff traffic from multiple machines which may in the past have taken more effort.

Whilst this is all a simplified view and there are many logical controls and processes that aide virtualisation security, many areas of weakness still exist, mainly around resource and administration concentration.  A reduced footprint can make administration and protection easier, but that protection will generally come under greater attack as the prize is now much higher.

(Simon Moffatt)

Popular posts from this blog

Top 5 Security Predictions for 2016

It's that time of year again, when the retrospective and predictive blogs come out of the closet, just before the Christmas festivities begin.  This time last year, the 2015 predictions were an interesting selection of both consumer and enterprise challenges, with a focus on:

Customer Identity ManagementThe start of IoT security awarenessReduced Passwords on MobileConsumer PrivacyCloud Single Sign On
In retrospect, a pretty accurate and ongoing list.  Consumer related identity (cIAM) is hot on most organisation's lips, and whilst the password hasn't died (and probably never will) there are more people using things like swipe login and finger print authentication than ever before.

But what will 2016 bring?

Mobile Payments to be Default for Consumers

2015 has seen the rise in things like Apple Pay and Samsung Pay hitting the consumer high street with venom.  Many retail outlets now provide the ability to "tap and pay" using a mobile device, with many banks also offer…

Customer Data: Convenience versus Security

Organisations in both the public and private sector are initiating programmes of work to convert previously physical or offline services, into more digital, on line and automated offerings.  This could include things like automated car tax purchase, through to insurance policy management and electricity meter reading submission and reporting.

Digitization versus Security

This move towards a more on line user experience, brings together several differing forces.  Firstly the driver for end user convenience and service improvement, against the requirements of data security and privacy.  Which should win?  There clearly needs to be a balance of security against service improvement.  Excessive and prohibitive security controls would result in a complex and often poor user experience, ultimately resulting in fewer users.  On the other hand, poorly defined security architectures, lead to data loss, with the impact for personal exposure and brand damage.

Online-ification: The Role of Identity

The Wikipedia entry for Digital Transformation, "refers to the changes associated with the application of digital technology in all aspects of human society".  That is a pretty broad statement.

An increased digital presence however, is being felt across all lines of both public and private sector initiatives, reaching everything from being able to pay your car tax on line, through to being able to order a taxi based on your current location.  This increased focus on the 'online-ification' of services and content, drives a need for a loosely coupled and strong view of an individual or thing based digital identity.