slides/slides04.tex
changeset 119 0cea882f03c7
parent 118 a42bbdfe5dd9
child 120 99d408cfcfb3
equal deleted inserted replaced
118:a42bbdfe5dd9 119:0cea882f03c7
   381   \bl{$P$}'s security level is lower or equal than \bl{$O$}'s.
   381   \bl{$P$}'s security level is lower or equal than \bl{$O$}'s.
   382   \item \alert{Write Rule}: A principal \bl{$P$} can write an object \bl{$O$} if and only if
   382   \item \alert{Write Rule}: A principal \bl{$P$} can write an object \bl{$O$} if and only if
   383   \bl{$O$}'s security level is lower or equal than \bl{$P$}'s.
   383   \bl{$O$}'s security level is lower or equal than \bl{$P$}'s.
   384   \end{itemize}\bigskip\bigskip\pause
   384   \end{itemize}\bigskip\bigskip\pause
   385 
   385 
   386   E.g.~Generals write orders to officers; officers write oders to solidiers\\
   386   E.g.~Firewalls: you can read from inside the firewall, but not from outside\\
   387   Firewall: you can read from inside the firewall, but not from outside\\
       
   388   Phishing: you can look at an approved PDF, but not one from a random email\\
   387   Phishing: you can look at an approved PDF, but not one from a random email\\
   389 
   388 
   390   \end{frame}}
   389   \end{frame}}
   391   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   390   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   392 %
   391 %
       
   392 
       
   393 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   394 \mode<presentation>{
       
   395 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   396 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Security Levels (2)\end{tabular}}
       
   397 
       
   398 \begin{itemize}
       
   399 \item Bell --- La Padula preserves data secrecy, but not data integrity\bigskip\pause
       
   400 
       
   401 \item Biba model is for data integrity  
       
   402 
       
   403 \begin{itemize}
       
   404 \item read: your own level and above
       
   405 \item write: your own level and below
       
   406 \end{itemize}
       
   407 \end{itemize}
       
   408 
       
   409 \end{frame}}
       
   410 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   411 
       
   412 
       
   413 
   393 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   414 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   394 \mode<presentation>{
   415 \mode<presentation>{
   395 \begin{frame}[c]
   416 \begin{frame}[c]
   396 \frametitle{Shared Access Control}
   417 \frametitle{Shared Access Control}
   397 
   418 
   438   \frametitle{Protocols}
   459   \frametitle{Protocols}
   439  
   460  
   440 \mbox{} 
   461 \mbox{} 
   441   
   462   
   442 \begin{tabular}{l}
   463 \begin{tabular}{l}
   443 {\Large \bl{$A\;\text{sends}\; B : \ldots$}}\\
   464 {\Large \bl{$A\;\rightarrow\; B : \ldots$}}\\
   444 \onslide<2->{\Large \bl{$B\;\text{sends}\; A : \ldots$}}\\
   465 \onslide<2->{\Large \bl{$B\;\rightarrow\; A : \ldots$}}\\
   445 \onslide<2->{\Large \;\;\;\;\;\bl{$:$}}\bigskip
   466 \onslide<2->{\Large \;\;\;\;\;\bl{$:$}}\bigskip
   446 \end{tabular}  
   467 \end{tabular}  
   447   
   468   
   448  \begin{itemize}
   469  \begin{itemize}
   449  \item by convention \bl{$A$}, \bl{$B$} are named principals \bl{Alice\ldots}\\
   470  \item by convention \bl{$A$}, \bl{$B$} are named principals \bl{Alice\ldots}\\
   466 \begin{tabular}{ll}
   487 \begin{tabular}{ll}
   467 \bl{$A \rightarrow B$:} & \bl{$N_a$}\\  
   488 \bl{$A \rightarrow B$:} & \bl{$N_a$}\\  
   468 \bl{$B \rightarrow A$:} & \bl{$\{N_a, N_b\}_{K_{ab}}$}\\
   489 \bl{$B \rightarrow A$:} & \bl{$\{N_a, N_b\}_{K_{ab}}$}\\
   469 \bl{$A \rightarrow B$:} & \bl{$N_b$}\\
   490 \bl{$A \rightarrow B$:} & \bl{$N_b$}\\
   470 \end{tabular}
   491 \end{tabular}
   471 \end{center}
   492 \end{center}\pause
   472 
   493 
   473 Explain how an attacker \bl{$B'$} can launch an impersonation attack by 
   494 An attacker \bl{$E$} can launch an impersonation attack by 
   474 intercepting all messages for \bl{$B$} and make \bl{$A$} decrypt her own challenges.
   495 intercepting all messages for \bl{$B$} and make \bl{$A$} decrypt her own challenges.
   475 
   496 
   476 \end{frame}}
   497 \end{frame}}
   477 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%     
   498 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%     
   478 
   499 
   497 \item if only you and me know the key, the message must have come from you
   518 \item if only you and me know the key, the message must have come from you
   498 \end{itemize}
   519 \end{itemize}
   499 
   520 
   500 \end{frame}}
   521 \end{frame}}
   501 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
   522 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   523 
       
   524 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   525 \mode<presentation>{
       
   526 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   527 
       
   528 \begin{center}
       
   529 \begin{tabular}{ll}
       
   530 \bl{$A \rightarrow B$:} & \bl{$N_a$}\\  
       
   531 \bl{$B \rightarrow A$:} & \bl{$\{N_a, N_b\}_{K_{ab}}$}\\
       
   532 \bl{$A \rightarrow B$:} & \bl{$N_b$}\\
       
   533 \end{tabular}
       
   534 \end{center}
       
   535 
       
   536 The attack:
       
   537 
       
   538 \begin{center}
       
   539 \begin{tabular}{ll}
       
   540 \bl{$A \rightarrow E$:} & \bl{$N_a$}\\ 
       
   541 \textcolor{gray}{$E \rightarrow A$:} & \textcolor{gray}{$N_a$}\\ 
       
   542 \textcolor{gray}{$A \rightarrow E$:} & \textcolor{gray}{$\{N_a, N_a\}_{K_{ab}}$}\\
       
   543 \bl{$E \rightarrow A$:} & \bl{$\{N_a, N_a\}_{K_{ab}}$}\\
       
   544 \bl{$A \rightarrow E$:} & \bl{$N_a \;\;(= N_b)$}\\
       
   545 \end{tabular}
       
   546 \end{center}\pause
       
   547 
       
   548 \small Solutions: \bl{$K_{ab} \not= K_{ba}$} or include an id in the second message
       
   549 \end{frame}}
       
   550 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%     
       
   551 
       
   552 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   553 \mode<presentation>{
       
   554 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   555 \frametitle{Identify Friend or Foe}
       
   556 
       
   557 \begin{center}
       
   558 \onslide<3->{\mbox{}\hspace{3.4cm}\includegraphics[scale=0.55]{pics/MigInMiddle.jpg}}
       
   559 \end{center}
       
   560 
       
   561 \begin{textblock}{6}(0.3,2)
       
   562 \onslide<2->{
       
   563 198?: war between Angola (supported by Cuba)
       
   564 and Namibia (supported by SA)}
       
   565 \end{textblock}
       
   566 
       
   567 \begin{textblock}{3}(12.5,4.6)
       
   568   \onslide<3->{
       
   569   \begin{tikzpicture}
       
   570   \node at (0,0) [single arrow, fill=red,text=white, rotate=-50, shape border rotate=180]{``bystander''};
       
   571   \end{tikzpicture}}
       
   572   \end{textblock}
       
   573 
       
   574 \begin{textblock}{3}(10.9,10)
       
   575   \onslide<3->{
       
   576   \begin{tikzpicture}
       
   577   \node at (0,0) [single arrow, fill=red,text=white, rotate=-40, shape border rotate=180]{attacker};
       
   578   \end{tikzpicture}}
       
   579   \end{textblock}
       
   580   
       
   581 \only<4->{
       
   582 \begin{textblock}{6}(0.3,9)
       
   583 being outsmarted by Angola/Cuba
       
   584 ended SA involvement (?)
       
   585 \end{textblock}}
       
   586 \only<5->{
       
   587 \begin{textblock}{6}(0.3,13)
       
   588 IFF opened up a nice side-channel attack
       
   589 \end{textblock}}
       
   590 \end{frame}}
       
   591 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   592 
       
   593   %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   594   \mode<presentation>{
       
   595   \begin{frame}[c]
       
   596   \frametitle{Encryption to the Rescue?}
       
   597 
       
   598 
       
   599  \begin{itemize}
       
   600  \item \bl{$A \,\rightarrow\, B :  \{A, N_A\}_{K_{AB}}$}\hspace{1cm} encrypted\bigskip 
       
   601  \item \bl{$B\,\rightarrow\, A : \{N_A, K'_{AB}\}_{K_{AB}}$}\bigskip
       
   602  \item \bl{$A \,\rightarrow\, B : \{N_A\}_{K'_{AB}}$}\bigskip
       
   603  \end{itemize}\pause
       
   604  
       
   605 means you need to send separate ``Hello'' signals (bad), or worse 
       
   606 share a single key between many entities
       
   607 \end{frame}}
       
   608 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%      
       
   609 
       
   610 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   611 \mode<presentation>{
       
   612 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   613 \frametitle{Protocol Attacks}
       
   614 
       
   615 \begin{itemize}
       
   616 \item replay attacks
       
   617 \item reflection attacks
       
   618 \item man-in-the-middle attacks
       
   619 \item timing attacks
       
   620 \item parallel session attacks
       
   621 \item binding attacks (public key protocols)
       
   622 \item changing environment / changing assumptions\bigskip
       
   623 
       
   624 \item (social engineering attacks)
       
   625 \end{itemize}
       
   626 \end{frame}}
       
   627 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   628   
       
   629 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   630 \mode<presentation>{
       
   631 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   632 \frametitle{Replay Attacks}
       
   633 
       
   634 Schroeder-Needham protocol: exchange of a symmetric key with a trusted 3rd-party \bl{$S$}: 
       
   635 
       
   636 \begin{center}
       
   637 \begin{tabular}{r@ {\hspace{1mm}}l}
       
   638 \bl{$A \rightarrow S :$} & \bl{$A, B, N_A$}\\
       
   639 \bl{$S \rightarrow A :$} & \bl{$\{N_A, B, K_{AB},\{K_{AB}, A\}_{K_{BS}} \}_{K_{AS}}$}\\
       
   640 \bl{$A \rightarrow B :$} & \bl{$\{K_{AB}, A\}_{K_{BS}} $}\\
       
   641 \bl{$B \rightarrow A :$} & \bl{$\{N_B\}_{K_{AB}}$}\\
       
   642 \bl{$A \rightarrow B :$} & \bl{$\{N_B-1\}_{K_{AB}}$}\\
       
   643 \end{tabular}
       
   644 \end{center}\bigskip\pause
       
   645 
       
   646 at the end of the protocol both \bl{$A$} and \bl{$B$} should be in the possession of the secret key
       
   647 \bl{$K_{AB}$} and know that the other principal has the key
       
   648 
       
   649 \end{frame}}
       
   650 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   651 
   502 
   652 
   503 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   653 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   504 \mode<presentation>{
   654 \mode<presentation>{
   505 \begin{frame}[c]
   655 \begin{frame}[c]
   506 
   656 
   523 \bl{$B$} believes it is following the correct protocol,
   673 \bl{$B$} believes it is following the correct protocol,
   524 intruder \bl{$I$} can form the correct response because it knows \bl{$K_{AB}$} and
   674 intruder \bl{$I$} can form the correct response because it knows \bl{$K_{AB}$} and
   525 talks to \bl{$B$} masquerading as \bl{$A$}
   675 talks to \bl{$B$} masquerading as \bl{$A$}
   526 \end{frame}}
   676 \end{frame}}
   527 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
   677 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
   528 
       
   529 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   530 \mode<presentation>{
       
   531 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   532 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{c}Privilege Separation in\\ OpenSSH\end{tabular}}
       
   533 
       
   534 \begin{center}
       
   535 \begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
       
   536   
       
   537   \draw[line width=1mm] (0, 1.1) rectangle (1.2,2);
       
   538   \draw (4.7,1) node {Internet};
       
   539   \draw (0.6,1.7) node {\footnotesize Slave};
       
   540   \draw[line width=1mm] (0, 0) rectangle (1.2,0.9);
       
   541   \draw (0.6,1.7) node {\footnotesize Slave};
       
   542   \draw (0.6,0.6) node {\footnotesize Slave};
       
   543   \draw (0.6,-0.5) node {\footnotesize \begin{tabular}{c}unprivileged\\[-1mm] processes\end{tabular}};
       
   544   \draw (-2.7,-0.4) node {\footnotesize \begin{tabular}{c}privileged\\[-1mm] process\end{tabular}};
       
   545   
       
   546   \draw[line width=1mm] (-1.8, 0) rectangle (-3.6,2);
       
   547   \draw (-2.9,1.7) node {\footnotesize Monitor};
       
   548 
       
   549   \draw[white] (1.7,1) node (X) {};
       
   550   \draw[white] (3.7,1) node (Y) {};
       
   551   \draw[red, <->, line width = 2mm] (X) -- (Y);
       
   552  
       
   553   \draw[red, <->, line width = 1mm] (-0.4,1.4) -- (-1.4,1.1);
       
   554   \draw[red, <->, line width = 1mm] (-0.4,0.6) -- (-1.4,0.9);
       
   555 
       
   556   \end{tikzpicture}
       
   557 \end{center}
       
   558 
       
   559 \begin{itemize}
       
   560 \item pre-authorisation slave 
       
   561 \item post-authorisation\bigskip
       
   562 \item 25\% codebase is privileged, 75\% is unprivileged
       
   563 \end{itemize}
       
   564 \end{frame}}
       
   565 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%     
       
   566 
       
   567 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   568 \mode<presentation>{
       
   569 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   570 \frametitle{Network Applications}
       
   571 
       
   572 ideally network application in Unix should be designed as follows:
       
   573 
       
   574 \begin{itemize}
       
   575 \item need two distinct processes
       
   576 \begin{itemize}
       
   577 \item one that listens to the network; has no privilege
       
   578 \item one that is privileged and listens to the latter only (but does not trust it)
       
   579  
       
   580 \end{itemize}
       
   581 
       
   582 \item to implement this you need a parent process, which forks a child process
       
   583 \item this child process drops privileges and listens to hostile data\medskip
       
   584 
       
   585 \item after authentication the parent forks again and the new child becomes the user
       
   586 \end{itemize}
       
   587 
       
   588 
       
   589 \end{frame}}
       
   590 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%     
       
   591 
       
   592 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   593 \mode<presentation>{
       
   594 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   595 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Security Levels\end{tabular}}
       
   596 
       
   597 Unix essentially can only distinguish between two security levels (root and non-root).
       
   598 
       
   599 \begin{itemize}
       
   600 \item In military applications you often have many security levels (top-secret, secret, confidential, unclassified)\bigskip\pause 
       
   601 
       
   602 \item Information flow: Bell --- La Padula model
       
   603 
       
   604 \begin{itemize}
       
   605 \item read: your own level and below
       
   606 \item write: your own level and above
       
   607 \end{itemize}
       
   608 \end{itemize}
       
   609 
       
   610 \end{frame}}
       
   611 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   612 
       
   613 
       
   614 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   615 \mode<presentation>{
       
   616 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   617 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Security Levels (2)\end{tabular}}
       
   618 
       
   619 \begin{itemize}
       
   620 \item Bell --- La Padula preserves data secrecy, but not data integrity\bigskip\pause
       
   621 
       
   622 \item Biba model is for data integrity  
       
   623 
       
   624 \begin{itemize}
       
   625 \item read: your own level and above
       
   626 \item write: your own level and below
       
   627 \end{itemize}
       
   628 \end{itemize}
       
   629 
       
   630 \end{frame}}
       
   631 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   632 
       
   633 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   634 \mode<presentation>{
       
   635 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   636 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Access Control in 2000\end{tabular}}
       
   637 
       
   638 According to Ross Anderson (1st edition of his book), some senior Microsoft people held the
       
   639 following view:
       
   640 
       
   641 \begin{center}
       
   642 \begin{tikzpicture}
       
   643 \draw (0,0) node[inner sep=2mm,fill=cream, ultra thick, draw=red, rounded corners=2mm] 
       
   644 {\begin{minipage}{10.5cm}
       
   645 \small Access control does not matter. Computers are becoming single-purpose
       
   646 or single-user devices. Single-purpose devices, such as Web servers that deliver a single service, don't 
       
   647 need much in the way of access control as there's nothing for operating system access controls
       
   648 to do; the job of separating users from each other is best left to application code. As for the PC
       
   649 on your desk, if all the software on it comes from a single source, then again there's no need 
       
   650 for the operating system to provide separation. \hfill{}\textcolor{gray}{(in 2000)} 
       
   651 \end{minipage}};
       
   652 \end{tikzpicture}
       
   653 \end{center}
       
   654 
       
   655 \end{frame}}
       
   656 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   657 
       
   658 
       
   659 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   660 \mode<presentation>{
       
   661 \begin{frame}[t]
       
   662 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Research Problems\end{tabular}}
       
   663 
       
   664 \begin{itemize}
       
   665 \item with access control we are back to 1970s\bigskip
       
   666 
       
   667 \only<1>{
       
   668 \begin{tikzpicture}
       
   669 \draw (0,0) node[inner sep=2mm,fill=cream, ultra thick, draw=red, rounded corners=2mm] 
       
   670 {\begin{minipage}{10cm}
       
   671 \small Going all the way back to early time-sharing systems we systems people regarded the users, and any code they wrote, as the mortal enemies of us and each other. We were like the police force in a violent slum.\\
       
   672 \mbox{}\hfill--- Roger Needham
       
   673 \end{minipage}};
       
   674 \end{tikzpicture}}\pause
       
   675 
       
   676 \item the largest research area in access control in 2000-07 has been ``Trusted Computing'', but thankfully it
       
   677 is dead now\bigskip
       
   678 \item a useful research area is to not just have robust access control, but also usable access control --- by programmers and users\\ 
       
   679 (one possible answer is operating system virtualisation, e.g.~Xen, VMWare)\medskip\pause
       
   680 
       
   681 \item electronic voting
       
   682 \end{itemize}
       
   683 \end{frame}}
       
   684 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   685 
       
   686 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   687 \mode<presentation>{
       
   688 \begin{frame}[t]
       
   689 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Mobile OS\end{tabular}}
       
   690 
       
   691 \begin{itemize}
       
   692 \item iOS and Android solve the defence-in-depth problem by \alert{sandboxing} applications\bigskip
       
   693 
       
   694 \item you as developer have to specify the resources an application needs
       
   695 \item the OS provides a sandbox where access is restricted to only these resources
       
   696 \end{itemize}
       
   697 \end{frame}}
       
   698 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   699 
       
   700 
       
   701 
       
   702 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   703 \mode<presentation>{
       
   704 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   705 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Security Theatre\end{tabular}}
       
   706 
       
   707 
       
   708 Security theatre is the practice of investing in countermeasures intended to provide the 
       
   709 \underline{feeling} of improved security while doing little or nothing to actually achieve it.\hfill{}\textcolor{gray}{Bruce Schneier}
       
   710 
       
   711 \end{frame}}
       
   712 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   713 
       
   714 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   715 \mode<presentation>{
       
   716 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   717 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Security Theatre\end{tabular}}
       
   718 
       
   719 \begin{itemize}
       
   720 \item for example, usual locks and strap seals are security theatre
       
   721 \end{itemize}
       
   722 
       
   723 \begin{center}
       
   724 \includegraphics[scale=0.45]{pics/seal.jpg}
       
   725 \end{center}
       
   726 
       
   727 
       
   728 \end{frame}}
       
   729 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   730 
       
   731 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   732 \mode<presentation>{
       
   733 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   734 
       
   735 \begin{minipage}{11cm}
       
   736 From: Ross Anderson <Ross.Anderson@cl.cam.ac.uk>\\
       
   737 To: cl-security-research@lists.cam.ac.uk\\
       
   738 Subject: Tip off\\
       
   739 Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:12:50 +0100\\
       
   740 
       
   741 I received the following tip off, and have removed the sender's
       
   742 coordinates. I suspect it is one of many security vendors who
       
   743 don't even get the basics right; if you ever go to the RSA 
       
   744 conference, there are a thousand such firms in the hall, each
       
   745 with several eager but ignorant salesmen. A trying experience.\\
       
   746 
       
   747 Ross
       
   748 \end{minipage}
       
   749 
       
   750 \end{frame}}
       
   751 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   752 
       
   753 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
       
   754 \mode<presentation>{
       
   755 \begin{frame}[c]
       
   756 
       
   757 \begin{minipage}{11cm}
       
   758 I'd like to anonymously tip you off about this\\
       
   759 product:\\
       
   760 
       
   761 {\small http://www.strongauth.com/products/key-appliance.html}\\
       
   762 
       
   763 It sounds really clever, doesn't it?\\
       
   764 \ldots\\
       
   765 
       
   766 Anyway, it occurred to me that you and your colleagues might have a
       
   767 field day discovering weaknesses in the appliance and their
       
   768 implementation of security.  However, whilst I'd be willing to help
       
   769 and/or comment privately, it'd have to be off the record ;-)
       
   770 \end{minipage}
       
   771 
       
   772 \end{frame}}
       
   773 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
       
   774 
       
   775 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   678 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   776 \mode<presentation>{
   679 \mode<presentation>{
   777 \begin{frame}[c]
   680 \begin{frame}[c]
   778 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Schneier: Step 1\end{tabular}}
   681 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Schneier: Step 1\end{tabular}}
   779 
   682 
   808 \begin{frame}[c]
   711 \begin{frame}[c]
   809 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Schneier: Step 3\end{tabular}}
   712 \frametitle{\begin{tabular}{@ {}c@ {}}Schneier: Step 3\end{tabular}}
   810 
   713 
   811 {\bf How well does the security solution mitigate those risks?}\bigskip
   714 {\bf How well does the security solution mitigate those risks?}\bigskip
   812 
   715 
   813 Another seemingly obvious question, but one that is frequently ignored. If the security solution doesnÕt solve the problem, it's no good. This is not as simple as looking at the security solution and seeing how well it works. It involves looking at how the security solution interacts with everything around it, evaluating both its operation and its failures.
   716 Another seemingly obvious question, but one that is frequently ignored. If the security solution doesn't solve the problem, it's no good. This is not as simple as looking at the security solution and seeing how well it works. It involves looking at how the security solution interacts with everything around it, evaluating both its operation and its failures.
   814 
   717 
   815 \end{frame}}
   718 \end{frame}}
   816 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
   719 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%   
   817 
   720 
   818 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
   721 %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%