Search results

Infographic a day in the life change management Download PDF Schedule time with one of our experts Schedule time with one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Continue

A recent news article from Bleeping Computer called out an incident involving Japanese game developer Ateam, in which a misconfiguration... Cyber Attacks & Incident Response Mitigating cloud security risks through comprehensive automated solutions Malynnda Littky-Porath 2 min read Malynnda Littky-Porath Short bio about author here Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur. Vitae donec tincidunt elementum quam laoreet duis sit enim. Duis mattis velit sit leo diam. Tags Share this article 1/8/24 Published A recent news article from Bleeping Computer called out an incident involving Japanese game developer Ateam, in which a misconfiguration in Google Drive led to the potential exposure of sensitive information for nearly one million individuals over a period of six years and eight months. Such incidents highlight the critical importance of securing cloud services to prevent data breaches. This blog post explores how organizations can avoid cloud security risks and ensuring the safety of sensitive information. What caused the Ateam Google Drive misconfiguration? Ateam, a renowned mobile game and content creator, discovered on November 21, 2023, that it had mistakenly set a Google Drive cloud storage instance to “Anyone on the internet with the link can view” since March 2017. This configuration error exposed 1,369 files containing personal information, including full names, email addresses, phone numbers, customer management numbers, and device identification numbers, for approximately 935,779 individuals. Avoiding cloud security risks by using automation To prevent such incidents and enhance cloud security, organizations can leverage tools such as AlgoSec, a comprehensive solution that addresses potential vulnerabilities and misconfigurations. It is important to look for cloud security partners who offer the following key features: Automated configuration checks: AlgoSec conducts automated checks on cloud configurations to identify and rectify any insecure settings. This ensures that sensitive data remains protected and inaccessible to unauthorized individuals. Policy compliance management: AlgoSec assists organizations in adhering to industry regulations and internal security policies by continuously monitoring cloud configurations. This proactive approach reduces the likelihood of accidental exposure of sensitive information. Risk assessment and mitigation: AlgoSec provides real-time risk assessments, allowing organizations to promptly identify and mitigate potential security risks. This proactive stance helps in preventing data breaches and maintaining the integrity of cloud services. Incident response capabilities: In the event of a misconfiguration or security incident, AlgoSec offers robust incident response capabilities. This includes rapid identification, containment, and resolution of security issues to minimize the impact on the organization. The Ateam incident serves as a stark reminder of the importance of securing cloud services to safeguard sensitive data. AlgoSec emerges as a valuable ally in this endeavor, offering automated configuration checks, policy compliance management, risk assessment, and incident response capabilities. By incorporating AlgoSec into their security strategy, organizations can significantly reduce the risk of cloud security incidents and ensure the confidentiality of their data. Request a brief demo to learn more about advanced cloud protection. Schedule a demo Related Articles Q1 at AlgoSec: What innovations and milestones defined our start to 2026? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read 2025 in review: What innovations and milestones defined AlgoSec’s transformative year in 2025? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Navigating Compliance in the Cloud AlgoSec Cloud Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Speak to one of our experts Speak to one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Schedule a call

Cloud security configuration and policy management Download PDF Schedule time with one of our experts Schedule time with one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Continue

Learn how firewall rules secure your network from cyber threats. Explore types, best practices, and management strategies to optimize your firewall security. Firewall rules & requirements (inbound vs. outbound) ---- ------- Schedule a Demo Select a size ----- Get the latest insights from the experts Use these six best practices to simplify compliance and risk mitigation with the AlgoSec platform White paper Learn how AlgoSec can help you pass PCI-DSS Audits and ensure continuous compliance Solution overview See how this customer improved compliance readiness and risk management with AlgoSec Case study Choose a better way to manage your network

As you may have heard already, the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released a joint... Cloud Security Drovorub’s Ability to Conceal C2 Traffic And Its Implications For Docker Containers Rony Moshkovich 2 min read Rony Moshkovich Short bio about author here Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur. Vitae donec tincidunt elementum quam laoreet duis sit enim. Duis mattis velit sit leo diam. Tags Share this article 8/15/20 Published As you may have heard already, the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) released a joint Cybersecurity Advisory about previously undisclosed Russian malware called Drovorub. According to the report, the malware is designed for Linux systems as part of its cyber espionage operations. Drovorub is a Linux malware toolset that consists of an implant coupled with a kernel module rootkit, a file transfer and port forwarding tool, and a Command and Control (C2) server. The name Drovorub originates from the Russian language. It is a complex word that consists of 2 roots (not the full words): “drov” and “rub” . The “o” in between is used to join both roots together. The root “drov” forms a noun “drova” , which translates to “firewood” , or “wood” . The root “rub” /ˈruːb/ forms a verb “rubit” , which translates to “to fell” , or “to chop” . Hence, the original meaning of this word is indeed a “woodcutter” . What the report omits, however, is that apart from the classic interpretation, there is also slang. In the Russian computer slang, the word “drova” is widely used to denote “drivers” . The word “rubit” also has other meanings in Russian. It may mean to kill, to disable, to switch off. In the Russian slang, “rubit” also means to understand something very well, to be professional in a specific field. It resonates with the English word “sharp” – to be able to cut through the problem. Hence, we have 3 possible interpretations of ‘ Drovorub ‘: someone who chops wood – “дроворуб” someone who disables other kernel-mode drivers – “тот, кто отрубает / рубит драйвера” someone who understands kernel-mode drivers very well – “тот, кто (хорошо) рубит в драйверах” Given that Drovorub does not disable other drivers, the last interpretation could be the intended one. In that case, “Drovorub” could be a code name of the project or even someone’s nickname. Let’s put aside the intricacies of the Russian translations and get a closer look into the report. DISCLAIMER Before we dive into some of the Drovorub analysis aspects, we need to make clear that neither FBI nor NSA has shared any hashes or any samples of Drovorub. Without the samples, it’s impossible to conduct a full reverse engineering analysis of the malware. Netfilter Hiding According to the report, the Drovorub-kernel module registers a Netfilter hook. A network packet filter with a Netfilter hook ( NF_INET_LOCAL_IN and NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT ) is a common malware technique. It allows a backdoor to watch passively for certain magic packets or series of packets, to extract C2 traffic. What is interesting though, is that the driver also hooks the kernel’s nf_register_hook() function. The hook handler will register the original Netfilter hook, then un-register it, then re-register the kernel’s own Netfilter hook. According to the nf_register_hook() function in the Netfilter’s source , if two hooks have the same protocol family (e.g., PF_INET ), and the same hook identifier (e.g., NF_IP_INPUT ), the hook execution sequence is determined by priority. The hook list enumerator breaks at the position of an existing hook with a priority number elem->priority higher than the new hook’s priority number reg->priority : int nf_register_hook ( struct nf_hook_ops * reg) { struct nf_hook_ops * elem; int err; err = mutex_lock_interruptible( & nf_hook_mutex); if (err < 0 ) return err; list_for_each_entry(elem, & nf_hooks[reg -> pf][reg -> hooknum], list) { if (reg -> priority < elem -> priority) break ; } list_add_rcu( & reg -> list, elem -> list.prev); mutex_unlock( & nf_hook_mutex); ... return 0 ; } In that case, the new hook is inserted into the list, so that the higher-priority hook’s PREVIOUS link would point into the newly inserted hook. What happens if the new hook’s priority is also the same, such as NF_IP_PRI_FIRST – the maximum hook priority? In that case, the break condition will not be met, the list iterator list_for_each_entry will slide past the existing hook, and the new hook will be inserted after it as if the new hook’s priority was higher. By re-inserting its Netfilter hook in the hook handler of the nf_register_hook() function, the driver makes sure the Drovorub’s Netfilter hook will beat any other registered hook at the same hook number and with the same (maximum) priority. If the intercepted TCP packet does not belong to the hidden TCP connection, or if it’s destined to or originates from another process, hidden by Drovorub’s kernel-mode driver, the hook will return 5 ( NF_STOP ). Doing so will prevent other hooks from being called to process the same packet. Security Implications For Docker Containers Given that Drovorub toolset targets Linux and contains a port forwarding tool to route network traffic to other hosts on the compromised network, it would not be entirely unreasonable to assume that this toolset was detected in a client’s cloud infrastructure. According to Gartner’s prediction , in just two years, more than 75% of global organizations will be running cloud-native containerized applications in production, up from less than 30% today. Would the Drovorub toolset survive, if the client’s cloud infrastructure was running containerized applications? Would that facilitate the attack or would it disrupt it? Would it make the breach stealthier? To answer these questions, we have tested a different malicious toolset, CloudSnooper, reported earlier this year by Sophos. Just like Drovorub, CloudSnooper’s kernel-mode driver also relies on a Netfilter hook ( NF_INET_LOCAL_IN and NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT ) to extract C2 traffic from the intercepted TCP packets. As seen in the FBI/NSA report, the Volatility framework was used to carve the Drovorub kernel module out of the host, running CentOS. In our little lab experiment, let’s also use CentOS host. To build a new Docker container image, let’s construct the following Dockerfile: FROM scratch ADD centos-7.4.1708-docker.tar.xz / ADD rootkit.ko / CMD [“/bin/bash”] The new image, built from scratch, will have the CentOS 7.4 installed. The kernel-mode rootkit will be added to its root directory. Let’s build an image from our Dockerfile, and call it ‘test’: [root@localhost 1]# docker build . -t test Sending build context to Docker daemon 43.6MB Step 1/4 : FROM scratch —> Step 2/4 : ADD centos-7.4.1708-docker.tar.xz / —> 0c3c322f2e28 Step 3/4 : ADD rootkit.ko / —> 5aaa26212769 Step 4/4 : CMD [“/bin/bash”] —> Running in 8e34940342a2 Removing intermediate container 8e34940342a2 —> 575e3875cdab Successfully built 575e3875cdab Successfully tagged test:latest Next, let’s execute our image interactively (with pseudo-TTY and STDIN ): docker run -it test The executed image will be waiting for our commands: [root@8921e4c7d45e /]# Next, let’s try to load the malicious kernel module: [root@8921e4c7d45e /]# insmod rootkit.ko The output of this command is: insmod: ERROR: could not insert module rootkit.ko: Operation not permitted The reason why it failed is that by default, Docker containers are ‘unprivileged’. Loading a kernel module from a docker container requires a special privilege that allows it doing so. Let’s repeat our experiment. This time, let’s execute our image either in a fully privileged mode or by enabling only one capability – a capability to load and unload kernel modules ( SYS_MODULE ). docker run -it –privileged test or docker run -it –cap-add SYS_MODULE test Let’s load our driver again: [root@547451b8bf87 /]# insmod rootkit.ko This time, the command is executed silently. Running lsmod command allows us to enlist the driver and to prove it was loaded just fine. A little magic here is to quit the docker container and then delete its image: docker rmi -f test Next, let’s execute lsmod again, only this time on the host. The output produced by lsmod will confirm the rootkit module is loaded on the host even after the container image is fully unloaded from memory and deleted! Let’s see what ports are open on the host: [root@localhost 1]# netstat -tulpn Active Internet connections (only servers) Proto Recv-Q Send-Q Local Address Foreign Address State PID/Program name tcp 0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1044/sshd With the SSH server running on port 22 , let’s send a C2 ‘ping’ command to the rootkit over port 22 : [root@localhost 1]# python client.py 127.0.0.1 22 8080 rrootkit-negotiation: hello The ‘hello’ response from the rootkit proves it’s fully operational. The Netfilter hook detects a command concealed in a TCP packet transferred over port 22 , even though the host runs SSH server on port 22 . How was it possible that a rootkit loaded from a docker container ended up loaded on the host? The answer is simple: a docker container is not a virtual machine. Despite the namespace and ‘control groups’ isolation, it still relies on the same kernel as the host. Therefore, a kernel-mode rootkit loaded from inside a Docker container instantly compromises the host, thus allowing the attackers to compromise other containers that reside on the same host. It is true that by default, a Docker container is ‘unprivileged’ and hence, may not load kernel-mode drivers. However, if a host is compromised, or if a trojanized container image detects the presence of the SYS_MODULE capability (as required by many legitimate Docker containers), loading a kernel-mode rootkit on a host from inside a container becomes a trivial task. Detecting the SYS_MODULE capability ( cap_sys_module ) from inside the container: [root@80402f9c2e4c /]# capsh –print Current: = cap_chown, … cap_sys_module, … Conclusion This post is drawing a parallel between the recently reported Drovorub rootkit and CloudSnooper, a rootkit reported earlier this year. Allegedly built by different teams, both of these Linux rootkits have one mechanism in common: a Netfilter hook ( NF_INET_LOCAL_IN and NF_INET_LOCAL_OUT ) and a toolset that enables tunneling of the traffic to other hosts within the same compromised cloud infrastructure. We are still hunting for the hashes and samples of Drovorub. Unfortunately, the YARA rules published by FBI/NSA cause False Positives. For example, the “Rule to detect Drovorub-server, Drovorub-agent, and Drovorub-client binaries based on unique strings and strings indicating statically linked libraries” enlists the following strings: “Poco” “Json” “OpenSSL” “clientid” “—–BEGIN” “—–END” “tunnel” The string “Poco” comes from the POCO C++ Libraries that are used for over 15 years. It is w-a-a-a-a-y too generic, even in combination with other generic strings. As a result, all these strings, along with the ELF header and a file size between 1MB and 10MB, produce a false hit on legitimate ARM libraries, such as a library used for GPS navigation on Android devices: f058ebb581f22882290b27725df94bb302b89504 56c36bfd4bbb1e3084e8e87657f02dbc4ba87755 Nevertheless, based on the information available today, our interest is naturally drawn to the security implications of these Linux rootkits for the Docker containers. Regardless of what security mechanisms may have been compromised, Docker containers contribute an additional attack surface, another opportunity for the attackers to compromise the hosts and other containers within the same organization. The scenario outlined in this post is purely hypothetical. There is no evidence that supports that Drovorub may have affected any containers. However, an increase in volume and sophistication of attacks against Linux-based cloud-native production environments, coupled with the increased proliferation of containers, suggests that such a scenario may, in fact, be plausible. Schedule a demo Related Articles Q1 at AlgoSec: What innovations and milestones defined our start to 2026? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read 2025 in review: What innovations and milestones defined AlgoSec’s transformative year in 2025? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Navigating Compliance in the Cloud AlgoSec Cloud Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Speak to one of our experts Speak to one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Schedule a call

Firewall misconfigurations are one of the most common and preventable security issues that organizations face. Comprehensively managing... Firewall Change Management How to fix misconfigured firewalls (and prevent firewall breaches) Kyle Wickert 2 min read Kyle Wickert Short bio about author here Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur. Vitae donec tincidunt elementum quam laoreet duis sit enim. Duis mattis velit sit leo diam. Tags Share this article 8/9/23 Published Firewall misconfigurations are one of the most common and preventable security issues that organizations face. Comprehensively managing access control, addressing vulnerabilities, and detecting configuration mistakes under these conditions is not easy It’s especially challenging for organizations that use the default firewall rules provided by their vendor. Your firewall policies should reflect your organization’s unique cybersecurity risk profile. This requires some degree of customization, and intelligence into kinds of cyber attacks hackers use to target your organization. Understanding security misconfigurations and their impact on network security Security misconfigurations happen when elements of your security tech stack expose preventable vulnerabilities that hackers can exploit. These misconfigurations can take a variety of forms, putting a wide range of security tools and open ports at risk. Network firewall misconfigurations can have a wide-ranging impact on your organization’s overall security posture. Hackers that target vulnerable infrastructure pose a threat to the entire application stack. They may be able to gain access to network services, application servers, and virtual machines. Depending on the specific misconfiguration, they may be able to compromise hardware routers and endpoints as well. In organizations with complex firewall deployments, attackers may be able to exploit misconfigurations, bypass security policies, and escalate their own privileges to make arbitrary changes to firewall security. From this point, attackers can easily modify access control lists (ACLs) to specifically allow the malware they wish to run, compromising the first line of defense against data breaches. This is exactly why Gartner recommends implementing a centralized solution for firewall management . Centralized visibility and control is crucial for maintaining effective firewall configurations and updating them accordingly. Otherwise, ensuring compliance with security best practices like the principle of least privilege becomes difficult or impossible. Routing network traffic through complex cloud-native infrastructure securely requires deep visibility into firewall configuration status, effective authentication processes, and automation-friendly security solutions. How hackers exploit misconfigured firewalls Common misconfigurations include implementing overly permissive rules, disabling critical security features, and neglecting to protect open ports against unauthorized access. This leaves organizations vulnerable to Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks, remote control, and data breaches . Here are some of the ways cybercriminals can exploit misconfigured firewalls: 1. Taking advantage of permissions misconfigurations Overly permissive firewall rules are a common problem among organizations with complex cloud-enabled infrastructure. Often, the organization’s demand for productivity and connectivity take precedence over the need to protect sensitive data from unauthorized network traffic. Additionally, IT team members may misunderstand the cloud provider’s shared responsibility model and assume that the provider has already secured the data center from all potential threats. These situations are particularly risky when the organization is undergoing change. For example, many security professionals start with completely open permissions and tighten them as they learn more about the network’s needs. Obvious and highly visible permissions get secured first, while less visible parts of the security framework are deprioritized – or never addressed at all. Hackers can exploit this situation by focusing on less obvious access points first. Instead of sending malicious traffic to IP addresses associated with core business servers, they might infiltrate the network through an unsecured API, or look for an unpatched operating system somewhere in the network. 2. Exploiting disabled security features Many firewalls offer advanced security features to organizations willing to configure them. However, security teams are often strained for time and resources. They may already be flooded with a backlog of high-priority security alerts to address, making it challenging to spend extra time configuring advanced firewall policies or fine-tuning their security posture. Even organizations that can enable advanced features don’t always do it. Features like leak detection and port scan alerts can put additional strain on limited computing resources, impacting performance. Other features may generate false positives, which only add to the security workload. But many of these features offer clear benefits to organizations that use them. Sophisticated technologies like application and identity-based inspection allow organizations to prioritize firewall performance more efficiently throughout the network. If threat actors find out that advanced security features like these are disabled, they are free to deploy the attack techniques these features protect against. For example, in the case of identity-based inspection, a hacker may be able to impersonate an unidentified administrator-level account and gain access to sensitive security controls without additional authentication. 3. Scanning for unsecured open ports Hackers use specialized penetration testing tools to scan for open ports. Tools like Nmap, Unicornscan , and Angry IP Scanner can find open ports and determine the security controls that apply to them. If a hacker finds out that your ACLs neglect to cover a particular port, they will immediately look for ways to exploit that vulnerability and gain access to your network. These tools are the same network discovery tools that system administrators and network engineers use on a routine basis. Tools like Nmap allow IT professionals to run security audits on local and remote networks, identifying hosts responding to network requests, discovering operating system names and versions, and more. Threat actors can even determine what kind of apps are running and find the version number of those apps. They also allow threat actors to collect data on weak points in your organization’s security defenses. For example, they might identify a healthcare organization using an outdated app to store sensitive clinical trial data. From there, it’s easy to look up the latest patch data to find out what exploits the outdated app is vulnerable to. How to optimize firewall configuration Protecting your organization from firewall breaches demands paying close attention to the policies, patch versions, and additional features your firewall provider offers. Here are three steps security leaders can take to address misconfiguration risks and ensure a robust security posture against external threats: 1. Audit your firewall policies regularly This is especially important for organizations undergoing the transition to cloud-native infrastructure. It’s virtually guaranteed that certain rules and permissions will no longer be needed as the organization adjusts to this period of change over time. Make sure that your firewall rules are constantly updated to address these changes and adapt to them accordingly. Auditing should take place under a strict change management framework . Implement a change log and incorporate it into your firewall auditing workflow so that you can easily access information about historical configuration changes. This change log will provide security professionals with readymade data about who implemented configuration changes, what time those changes took place, and why they were made in the first place. This gives you at-a-glance coverage of historical firewall performance, which puts you one step closer to building a unified, centralized solution for handling firewall policies. 2. Update and patch firewall software frequently Like every element in your security tech stack, firewall software needs to be updated promptly when developers release new patches. This applies both to hardware firewalls operating on-premises and software firewalls working throughout your network. These patches address known vulnerabilities, and they are often the first line of defense against rapidly emerging threats. The sooner you can deploy software patches to your firewalls, the more robust your network security posture will be. These changes should also be noted in a change log. This provides valuable evidence for the strength of your security posture against known emerging threats. If hackers start testing your defenses by abusing known post-patch vulnerabilities, you will be prepared for them. 3. Implement an intrusion detection system (IDS) Firewalls form the foundation of good network security, and intrusion detection systems supplement their capabilities by providing an additional line of defense. Organizations with robust IDS capabilities are much harder to compromise without triggering alerts. IDS solutions passively monitor traffic for signs of potential threats. When they detect a threat, they generate an alert, allowing security operations personnel to investigate and respond. This adds additional layers of value to the basic function of the firewall – allowing or denying traffic based on ACLs and network security rules. Many next-generation firewalls include intrusion detection system capabilities as part of an integrated solutions. This simplifies security management considerably and reduces the number of different devices and technologies security teams must gain familiarity with. Pay attention to firewall limitations – and prepare for them Properly configured firewalls offer valuable security performance to organizations with complex network infrastructure. However, they can’t prevent every cyber attack and block every bit of malicious code. Security leaders should be aware of firewall limitations and deploy security measures that compensate appropriately. Even with properly configured firewalls, you’ll have to address some of the following issues: Zero-day attacks Firewalls may not block attacks that exploit new and undiscovered vulnerabilities. Since these are not previously known vulnerabilities, security teams have not yet had time to develop patches or fixes that address them. These types of attacks are generally able to bypass more firewall solutions. However, some next-generation firewalls do offer advanced features capable of addressing zero-day attacks. Identity-based inspection is one example of a firewall technology that can detect these attacks because it enforces security policies based on user identity rather than IP address. Sandboxes are another next-generation firewall technology capable of blocking zero-day attacks. However, no single technology can reliably block 100% of all zero-day attacks. Some solutions are better-equipped to handle these types of attacks than others, but it takes a robust multi-layered security posture to consistently protect against unknown threats. Timely incident response Firewall configuration plays an important role in incident response. Properly configured firewalls help provide visibility into your security posture in real-time, enabling security teams to create high-performance incident response playbooks. Custom playbooks ensure timely incident response by prioritizing the types of threats found in real-world firewall data. If your firewalls are misconfigured, your incident response playbooks may reflect a risk profile that doesn’t match with your real-world security posture. This can lead to security complications that reduce the effectiveness of incident response processes down the line. Planned outages when updating firewalls Updating firewalls is an important part of maintaining an optimal firewall configuration for your organization. However, the update process can be lengthy. At the same time, it usually requires scheduling an outage in advance, which will temporarily expose your organization to the threats your firewall normally protects against. In some cases, there may be compatibility issues with incoming version of the firewall software being updated. This may lengthen the amount of time that the organization has to endure a service outage, which complicates firewall security. This is one reason why many security leaders intentionally delay updating their firewalls. As with many other aspects of running and maintaining good security policies, effective change management is an important aspect of planning firewall updates. Security leaders should stagger their scheduled updates to avoid reducing risk exposure and provide the organization with meaningful security controls during the update process. Automate change management and avoid misconfigurations with algoSec AlgoSec helps organizations deploy security policy changes while maintaining accuracy and control over their security posture. Use automation to update firewall configuration policies, download new security patches, and validate results without spending additional time and energy on manual processes. AlgoSec’s Firewall Analyzer gives you the ability to discover and map business applications throughout your network. Find out how new security policies will impact traffic and perform detailed simulations of potential security scenarios with unlimited visibility. Schedule a demo to see AlgoSec in action for yourself. Schedule a demo Related Articles Q1 at AlgoSec: What innovations and milestones defined our start to 2026? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read 2025 in review: What innovations and milestones defined AlgoSec’s transformative year in 2025? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Navigating Compliance in the Cloud AlgoSec Cloud Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Speak to one of our experts Speak to one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Schedule a call

AlgoSec AppViz Application visibility for AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer Download PDF Schedule time with one of our experts Schedule time with one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Continue

Explore Algosec's customer success stories to see how organizations worldwide improve security, compliance, and efficiency with our solutions. State of Utah Network Security Management Breaks the Service Bottleneck Organization State of Utah Industry Government Headquarters Salt Lake City, Utah, United States Download case study Share Customer
success stories "With AlgoSec, I am able to get requests completed within minutes." State government rapidly accelerates security policy changes while increasing security and compliance Background Utah is home to over three million people. It is one of America’s fastest-growing states and the fastest-growing economy by job growth in the nation. The Department of Technology Services (DTS) is the technology service provider for the executive branch of the State of Utah, providing services to Utah’s citizens. DTS supports the computing infrastructure for the state government, including 22,000 telephones, 20,000 desktop computers, 2,400 servers, 1,300 online services, monitors over 4 million visits to Utah.gov per month, and secures against more than 500 million daily IT intrusion attempts. Challenge Over forty firewall pairs and hundreds of other devices help the Department of Technology Services serve and secure the Utah government.“Before AlgoSec, it was very challenging for us to manage firewalls,” stated the department’s Director of Information Technology. Some of the challenges included: Firewall rule requests took up 70% of employees’ daily time. Agencies and staff frequently complained about slow response times, impacting their productivity while staff worked through a lengthy manual process to fulfill requests. Human errors slowed down the processes, requiring extra layers of quality assurance. Large rule request projects took several months to complete. Employee onboarding took several months. New employees could not independently support firewall request changes for the first few months after joining the team. Solutions The State of Utah was searching for a solution that provided: Automation of firewall management Actionable reports to ease compliance requirements Ease of deployment Following an in-depth evaluation, the State of Utah selected AlgoSec’s security policy management solution.“We evaluated several other products but none of them really automated at the level that we wanted,” said the director of IT. “AlgoSec’s automation really stood out.” The State of Utah chose to start with AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer (AFA) and AlgoSec FireFlow (AFF), two of the flagship products in the AlgoSec suite.AlgoSec Firewall Analyzer delivers visibility and analysis of complex network security policies across on-premise, cloud, and hybrid networks. It automates and simplifies security operations including troubleshooting, auditing, and risk analysis. Using Firewall Analyzer, the State of Utah can optimize the configuration of firewalls, and network infrastructure to ensure security and compliance. AlgoSec FireFlow enables security staff to automate the entire security policy change process from design and submission to proactive risk analysis, implementation, validation, and auditing. Its intelligent, automated workflows save time and improve security by eliminating manual errors and reducing risk. Results By using the AlgoSec Security Management solution, the State of Utah was able to accelerate their security policy management, provide better and faster service to state agencies, accelerate employee onboarding, and enhance network segmentation.Some of the benefits gained include: Fast and easy deployment – they were up and running within a few weeks. Faster turnaround to firewall requests from staff supporting agencies and priority initiatives. Reduced time to implement large rule request for projects, such as deployments, migrations, and decommissions — from months to minutes. Better knowledge sharing – hosting staff and extended staff outside of network operations get more accurate insights into firewalls and infrastructure topologies and traffic flows. This sped up troubleshooting and reduced superfluous requests covered by existing rules. Elimination of human error and rework thanks to policy automation. Accelerated employee onboarding – employees joining our network operations team are now able to fulfill firewall change requests within two weeks of starting work – down from 3 months – an 80% reduction. “I’ve been able to jump in and use AlgoSec. It’s been really intuitive” , concluded the IT director. “I am very pleased with this product! ” Schedule time with one of our experts

Secure your application delivery pipeline Download PDF Schedule time with one of our experts Schedule time with one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Continue

The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) is set to transform how financial institutions across the European Union manage and... Network Security Navigating DORA: How to ensure your network security and compliance strategy is resilient Joseph Hallman 2 min read Joseph Hallman Short bio about author here Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur. Vitae donec tincidunt elementum quam laoreet duis sit enim. Duis mattis velit sit leo diam. Tags Share this article 12/19/24 Published The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) is set to transform how financial institutions across the European Union manage and mitigate ICT (Information and Communications Technology) risks. With the official compliance deadline in January 2025, organizations are under pressure to ensure their systems can withstand and recover from disruptions—an urgent priority in an increasingly digitized financial ecosystem. DORA introduces strict requirements for ICT risk management, incident reporting, and third-party oversight, aiming to bolster the operational resilience of financial firms. But what are the key deadlines and penalties, and how can organizations ensure they stay compliant? Key Timelines and Penalties Under DORA Compliance deadline: January 2025 – Financial firms and third-party ICT providers must have operational resilience frameworks in place by this deadline. Regular testing requirements – Companies will need to conduct resilience testing regularly, with critical institutions potentially facing enhanced testing requirements. Penalties for non-compliance – Fines for failing to comply with DORA’s mandates can be substantial. Non-compliance could lead to penalties of up to 2% of annual turnover, and repeated breaches could result in even higher sanctions or operational restrictions. Additionally, firms face reputational risks if they fail to meet incident reporting and recovery expectations. Long term effect- DORA increases senior management's responsibility for ICT risk oversight, driving stronger internal controls and accountability. Executives may face liability for failing to manage risks, reinforcing the focus on compliance and governance. These regulations create a dynamic challenge, as organizations not only need to meet the initial requirements by 2025, but also adapt to the changes as the standards continue to evolve over time. Firewall rule recertification The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) emphasizes the need for financial institutions in the EU to ensure operational resilience in the face of technological risks. While DORA does not explicitly mandate firewall rule recertification , several of its broader requirements apply to the management and oversight of firewall rules and the overall security infrastructure, which would include periodic firewall rule recertification as part of maintaining a robust security posture. A few of the key areas relevant to firewall rules and the necessity for frequent recertification are highlighted below. ICT Risk Management Framework- Article 6 requires financial institutions to implement a comprehensive ICT (Information and Communication Technology) risk management framework. This includes identifying, managing, and regularly testing security policies, which would encompass firewall rules as they are a critical part of network security. Regular rule recertification helps to ensure that firewall configurations are up-to-date and aligned with security policies. Detection Solutions- Article 10 mandates that financial entities must implement effective detection solutions to identify anomalies, incidents, and cyberattacks. These solutions are required to have multiple layers of control, including defined alert thresholds that trigger incident response processes. Regular testing of these detection mechanisms is also essential to ensure their effectiveness, underscoring the need for ongoing evaluations of firewall configurations and rules ICT Business Continuity Policy- Article 11 emphasizes the importance of establishing a comprehensive ICT business continuity policy. This policy should include strategic approaches to risk management, particularly focusing on the security of ICT third-party providers. The requirement for regular testing of ICT business continuity plans, as stipulated in Article 11(6), indirectly highlights the need for frequent recertification of firewall rules. Organizations must document and test their plans at least once a year, ensuring that security measures, including firewalls, are up-to-date and effective against current threats. Backup, Restoration, and Recovery- Article 12 outlines the procedures for backup, restoration, and recovery, necessitating that these processes are tested periodically. Entities must ensure that their backup and recovery systems are segregated and effective, further supporting the requirement for regular recertification of security measures like firewalls to protect backup systems against cyber threats. Crisis Communication Plans- Article 14 details the obligations regarding communication during incidents, emphasizing that organizations must have plans in place to manage and communicate risks related to the security of their networks. This includes ensuring that firewall configurations are current and aligned with incident response protocols, necessitating regular reviews and recertifications to adapt to new threats and changes in the operational environment. In summary, firewall rule recertification supports the broader DORA requirements for maintaining ICT security, managing risks, and ensuring network resilience through regular oversight and updates of critical security configurations. How AlgoSec helps meet regulatory requirements AlgoSec provides the tools, intelligence, and automation necessary to help organizations comply with DORA and other regulatory requirements while streamlining ongoing risk management and security operations. Here’s how: 1. Comprehensive network visibility AlgoSec offers full visibility into your network, including detailed insights into the application connectivity that each firewall rule supports. This application-centric approach allows you to easily identify security gaps or vulnerabilities that could lead to non-compliance. With AlgoSec, you can maintain continuous alignment with regulatory requirements like DORA by ensuring every firewall rule is tied to an active, relevant application. This helps ensure compliance with DORA's ICT risk management framework, including continuous identification and management of security policies (Article 6). Benefit : With this deep visibility, you remain audit-ready with minimal effort, eliminating manual tracking of firewall rules and reducing the risk of errors. 2. Automated risk and compliance reports AlgoSec automates compliance checks across multiple regulations, continuously analyzing your security policies for misconfigurations or risks that may violate regulatory requirements. This includes automated recertification of firewall rules, ensuring your organization stays compliant with frameworks like DORA's ICT Risk Management (Article 6). Benefit : AlgoSec saves your team significant time and reduces the likelihood of costly mistakes, while automatically generating audit-ready reports that simplify your compliance efforts. 3. Incident reporting and response DORA mandates rapid detection, reporting, and recovery during incidents. AlgoSec’s intelligent platform enhances incident detection and response by automatically identifying firewall rules that may be outdated or insecure and aligning security policies with incident response protocols. This helps ensure compliance with DORA's Detection Solutions (Article 10) and Crisis Communication Plans (Article 14). Benefit : By accelerating response times and ensuring up-to-date firewall configurations, AlgoSec helps you meet reporting deadlines and mitigate breaches before they escalate. 4. Firewall policy management AlgoSec simplifies firewall management by taking an application-centric approach to recertifying firewall rules. Instead of manually reviewing outdated rules, AlgoSec ties each firewall rule to the specific application it serves, allowing for quick identification of redundant or risky rules. This ensures compliance with DORA’s requirement for regular rule recertification in both ICT risk management and continuity planning (Articles 6 and 11). Benefit : Continuous optimization of security policies ensures that only necessary and secure rules are in place, reducing network risk and maintaining compliance. 5. Managing third-party risk DORA emphasizes the need to oversee third-party ICT providers as part of a broader risk management framework. AlgoSec integrates seamlessly with other security tools, providing unified visibility into third-party risks across your hybrid environment. With its automated recertification processes, AlgoSec ensures that security policies governing third-party access are regularly reviewed and aligned with business needs. Benefit : This proactive management of third-party risks helps prevent potential breaches and ensures compliance with DORA’s ICT Business Continuity requirements (Article 11). 6. Backup, Restoration, and Recovery AlgoSec helps secure backup and recovery systems by recertifying firewall rules that protect critical assets and applications. DORA’s Backup, Restoration, and Recovery (Article 12) requirements emphasize that security controls must be periodically tested. AlgoSec automates these tests, ensuring your firewall rules support secure, segregated backup systems. Benefit : Automated recertification prevents outdated or insecure rules from jeopardizing your backup processes, ensuring you meet regulatory demands. Stay ahead of compliance with AlgoSec Meeting evolving regulations like DORA requires more than a one-time adjustment—it demands a dynamic, proactive approach to security and compliance. AlgoSec’s application-centric platform is designed to evolve with your business, continuously aligning firewall rules with active applications and automating the process of policy recertification and compliance reporting. By automating key processes such as risk assessments, firewall rule management, and policy recertification, AlgoSec ensures that your organization is always prepared for audits. Continuous monitoring and real-time alerts keep your security posture compliant with DORA and other regulations, while automated reports simplify audit preparation—minimizing the time spent on compliance and reducing human error. With AlgoSec, businesses not only meet compliance regulations but also enhance operational efficiency, improve security, and maintain alignment with global standards. As DORA and other regulatory frameworks evolve, AlgoSec helps you ensure that compliance is an integral, seamless part of your operations. Read our latest whitepaper and watch a short video to learn more about our application-centric approach to firewall rule recertification Schedule a demo Related Articles Q1 at AlgoSec: What innovations and milestones defined our start to 2026? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read 2025 in review: What innovations and milestones defined AlgoSec’s transformative year in 2025? AlgoSec Reviews Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Navigating Compliance in the Cloud AlgoSec Cloud Mar 19, 2023 · 2 min read Speak to one of our experts Speak to one of our experts Work email* First name* Last name* Company* country* Select country... Short answer* By submitting this form, I accept AlgoSec's privacy policy Schedule a call