Protecting your data against cyber attacks in big data environments

ISSA
DEVELOPING AND CONNECTING
CYBERSECURITY LEADERS GLOBALLY
Protecting Your Data
against Cyber Attacks in
Big Data Environments
14 – ISSA Journal | February 2016
E
nterprise adoption of big data is maturing as both a
strategy and an architectural destination in the jour-
ney toward a modern data architecture. The majority
(70 percent) of companies already involved in this transfor-
mation are using Hadoop for data discovery, data science,
and big data projects.1
There is a big impediment to big data
moving into production, however, especially for those built
around Hadoop—an open source framework for storing
and running applications on commodity hardware—due to
security concerns. As top use cases include data science/big
data projects, real-time analytics for operational insights,
and centralized data acquisition or staging for other systems,
massive quantities of data including highly sensitive payment
card data (PCI), personally identifiable information (PII),
and protected health information (PHI) are being moved into
these environments. The fear is not unreasonable; the risk is
high given what cyber attackers are after and the extreme
damages that may result from a successful data breach.
The challenge
Consider the steps taken before a data breach. The first step
attackers take would be to construct a map laying out the net-
1 “Data Lake Adoption and Maturity Survey Findings Report,” Radiant Advisors
– http://radiantadvisors.com/2015/10/19/new-research-data-lake-adoption-and-
maturity-survey-findings-report/.
work of the target organization, identifying what and where
systems are located. This is an important step as the goal is
typically not to disrupt the company, but rather to set up
mechanisms to acquire data over as long a run as possible—
and monetize it. Preferably they would want to include hooks
so that they get periodic data updates from their target.
Now when an IT organization builds a big data environment,
the target has already done a lot of work for the attacker. With
big data environments the enterprise will have actually cre-
ated a single location for all the valuable data assets attackers
are seeking. Many times the data is even cleaned and consol-
idated so that attackers can conveniently monetize the data
even faster.
Making matters even worse is the fact that when Hadoop was
developed, security was never a concern for the early devel-
opers. Their objective was to develop a platform that can scale
to huge volumes of data and process this data in extremely
fast ways. So when Hadoop finally made its way from a re-
search project into the business world, security components
were bolted on to make the system more manageable from a
security perspective.
However, all those security add-ons to Hadoop are only se-
curing the perimeter and not the sensitive data inside Ha-
doop. It is a well-known fact that while perimeter security is
This article discusses the inherent risk of big data environments such as Hadoop and how
companies can take steps to protect the data in such an environment from current attacks.
It describes the best practices in applying current technology to secure sensitive data
without removing analytical capabilities.
By Reiner Kappenberger
©2016 ISSA • www.issa.org • editor@issa.org • All rights reserved.

A simple and efficient way to do this is to apply Format-Pre-
serving Encryption.
Format-preserving encryption (FPE) has been around for a
while and is in the process of being recognized by important
standards bodies such as NIST (Recommendation for Block
Cipher Modes of Operation: Methods for Format-Preserving
Encryption – SP800-38G4
). This standard defines two modes
of format-preserving encryption, identified as FF1 and FF2 in
the publication. It is important when applying FPE that the
vendor providing the solution has been vetted by third parties
such as the NIST standardization process. Not all encryption
algorithms are perfectly safe, but the peer review that is part
of the NIST standardization process can detect such prob-
lems and thus ensure the data will be adequately protected.
4 NIST, SP800-38G – http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/drafts/800-38g/sp800_38g_
draft.pdf.
an important aspect in any company’s security portfolio, it is
also increasingly insufficient. “On average it takes an organi-
zation 200 days to find out it has been compromised” – Dick
Bussiere, Tenable Network Security.2
This leaves the most
sensitive data assets at risk for over 200 days during which
time the cyber attackers can funnel the most valuable data
out of their target, with the scale of the breach growing every
day.
With this in mind companies are trying to avoid being the
lead article in the news by going slow in adoption of promis-
ing new strategies and technologies such as big data adoption.
A major data breach can severely damage a business for years
due to fines, loss of customer confidence and trust, loss of
stakeholders no longer willing to invest in the company due
to the bad publicity, and damage to the brand and corporate
reputation. According to a 2015 Ponemon Institute study on
the cost of cybercrime—recovery from such an incident on
average can cost $3.79M—can take years to emerge from, or
may not be possible; a data breach could put a company com-
pletely out of business.3
The way forward
With attacks becoming more frequent and larger in size, it is
natural that companies are putting more and more effort into
protecting their most valuable assets—the data itself—with
data-centric security technology. Data-centric security ren-
ders the data unusable for attackers in the event of a breach.
2 “Improve Your Data Security and Keep the Hackers Out,” INTHEBLACK (July 1,
2015) – http://intheblack.com/articles/2015/06/01/improve-your-data-security-
and-keep-the-hackers-out. See also M-Trends 2015: A View from the Front Lines:
“Organizations made some gains, but attackers still had a free rein in breached
environments far too long before being detected—a median of 205 days in 2014 vs.
229 days in 2013.” –https://www2.fireeye.com/rs/fireye/images/rpt-m-trends-2015.
pdf.
3 “Cost of Cyber Crime Study” - 2015 Ponemon Institute Research Report – http://
www8.hp.com/us/en/software-solutions/ponemon-cyber-security-report/.
Apache Hadoop
Hadoop is an open-source software framework for storing
data and running applications on clusters of commodity
hardware. It provides massive storage for any kind of data,
enormous processing power, and the ability to handle virtu-
ally limitless concurrent tasks or jobs.
SAS – www.sas.com/en_us/insights/big-data/hadoop.html
The Apache Hadoop software library is a framework that al-
lows for the distributed processing of large data sets across
clusters of computers using simple programming models.
It is designed to scale up from single servers to thousands
of machines, each offering local computation and storage.
Rather than rely on hardware to deliver high-availability, the
library itself is designed to detect and handle failures at the
application layer, so delivering a highly available service on
top of a cluster of computers, each of which may be prone
to failures.
Apache Hadoop – hadoop.apache.org
February 2016 | ISSA Journal – 15
Protecting Your Data against Cyber Attacks in Big Data Environments | Reiner Kappenberger

Advantages of FPE
But what actually is FPE? It is a form of AES encryption that
has been in use for some time, mainly in encrypting disc
drives and communications between end points such as SSL/
TLS and VPNs. But unlike AES, which encrypts data into a
large block of random numbers and letters, FPE encrypts the
original value into something that looks like the original. For
example, a credit card number still looks like a credit card
number.
Another advantage of FPE is that certain data elements can
be preserved during the encryption process. An example of
this is to preserve the bank routing number (the first six dig-
its) in a credit card number so that the inherent value of this
information can be maintained for analytical purposes.
As with any encryption the same plaintext will encrypt to
the same ciphertext. This allows referential integrity to be
maintained. This means that when combining multiple data
sources into the big data environment where all data is en-
crypted, all the links between the data will work just as well
as before. A social security number is frequently used to link
data records from different sources. So after encrypting those
values with FPE, the linkage functions exactly as it did on the
original unencrypted data.
How to implement FPE in a big data environment
The most frequent use is to encrypt data during the ingestion
process when data is passed from the source system to the big
data ecosystem. This is especially critical for Hadoop envi-
ronments because once data is ingested, it is very difficult to
identify on which disc drive the data is residing. One of the
reasons is that Hadoop automatically keeps three copies of
the data by default. A traditional approach to security would
be to use disc-drive or volume-level encryption with Hadoop.
However, the experience many people have reported with this
approach is a dramatic performance penalty. While this level
of performance penalty can be workable with a very small
Hadoop cluster, it is cost-prohibitive for larger Hadoop in-
stances.
But integrating FPE into the ingestion process can be a simple
addition to existing process work flows built around Sqoop5
for Hadoop or inside Informatica, Data Stage, and other tools
that extract and transform data from a source system, such
as a regular database, into the big data environment. This
approach puts the encryption as close to the data source as
possible. When data is actually streamed into Hadoop, inte-
gration points such as Flume6
and Storm7
allow data protec-
tion to happen in-stream, before entering the actual Hadoop
ecosystem.
However, this approach is not always feasible or suited for
every situation. Sometimes people prefer a landing-zone ap-
proach where they can deposit data directly into Hadoop. In
this scenario, there are two typical ways to address the need
for data-centric security.
The first approach is to utilize Transparent Data Encryption
(TDE) in Hadoop to provide file/folder-level encryption.
While analysts frequently discourage the use of TDE in pro-
duction environments due to the lack of proper key manage-
ment or security of the key manager, there are solutions avail-
able in the market that provide an alternative key manager
for TDE that actually delivers the proper security and audit
elements needed for proper key management. From a work-
flow viewpoint, users can load data directly into Hadoop,
where the data is protected at rest by encryption and access
controls for the encryption zone in TDE. Once the data is
5 Apache Sqoop – http://sqoop.apache.org.
6 Apache Flume – https://flume.apache.org/.
7 Apache Storm – http://storm.apache.org/.
A Wealth of Resources for the Information Security Professional – www.ISSA.org
2015 Security Review & Predictions for 2016
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: January 26, 2016
Forensics: Tracking the Hacker
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: November 17, 2015
Big Data–Trust and Reputation, Privacy–Cyberthreat Intel
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, October 27, 2015
Security of IOT–One and One Makes Zero
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, September, 22, 2015
Biometrics & Identity Technology Status Review
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, August 25, 2015
Network Security Testing – Are There Really Different Types
of Testing?
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, July 28, 2015
Global Cybersecurity Outlook: Legislative, Regulatory and
Policy Landscapes
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, June 23, 2015
Breach Report: How Do You Utilize It?
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, May 26, 2015
Open Software and Trust--Better Than Free?
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, April 28, 2015
Continuous Forensic Analytics – Issues and Answers
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: April 14, 2015
Secure Development Life Cycle for Your Infrastructure
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: Tuesday, March 24, 2015
What? You Didn’t Know Computers Control You? / ICS and
SCADA
2-Hour Event Recorded Live: March 2, 2015
Click here for On-Demand Conferences
www.issa.org/?OnDemandWebConf

during a promotion that was done with a specific credit card
issuer.
Implementing data-centric security in the data lake
Data lakes, however, are not a single environment. A data lake
is a bigger ecosystem10
that is frequently comprised of multi-
ple data warehouse solutions (e.g., Hadoop, Vertica, or Tera-
data), extraction and transformation tools (e.g., Informatica,
Data Stage, SAS, etc.), and analytical front ends. So, one of
the most important aspects of implementing a data-centric
security strategy is to identify integration points.
The best approach for integration is to select an encryption
vendor that has APIs available that either are already inte-
grated into the desired tools or can be integrated on the plat-
forms where protection is needed. Ultimately the goal would
be to protect data as early in the processing stage as feasible
and only retrieve the actual result as close to the real need as
possible.
There are multiple reasons for this. First, an analyst typical-
ly does not need to be able to identify the actual individual
behind the data analysis. An analyst should identify trends,
groups of individuals, patterns, and the like. However, the an-
alyst does not actually act on the result set. An example from
the medical field would be the need to find certain patients
that have responded in a particular manner to a medication
where an alternative treatment might be a better solution. The
analyst would run the investigation to find the group of indi-
viduals but will not contact an individual in the study. That
action would be performed by another person in the orga-
nization whose role may be to contact the doctor and make
a suggestion for certain patients about a different treatment
option.
The second reason is that data lakes frequently consist of a
traditional data warehouse environment (e.g., Vertica, Tera-
data, Greenplum, Hana) in connection with Hadoop and its
tools. This means that protected data must be able to move
freely between the environments without the need to repeat-
edly decrypt and re-encrypt the data between each environ-
ment. Data should be moved with standard tools without the
need to know whether the data is actually protected.
10 Data Lake – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_lake.
ingested, a MapReduce8
job can then be utilized to
protect the data on a field
level with FPE and transfer
the output file to the larger
cluster so that the file with
FPE-protected data is ac-
cessible by other users.
The second approach be-
ing frequently utilized is
where the data is actually
deposited outside of the big
data environment (e.g., to
a Linux server). Again, data-at-rest encryption is utilized to
protect the sensitive data coming in. Using elements such as
a file processor to take the unprotected input file and process
each data record and apply FPE creates an output file with
the protected data. This output file can then be moved into
the big data system (Hadoop, Vertica, Teradata, etc.) in its
FPE-protected form as before.
Figure 1 is an example of what protected data can look like
when applying format preserving encryption and tokeniza-
tion to the data. It shows both the original values (red table)
and the protected data (green table).
Securing the Internet of Things
When big data is used within an Internet of Things (IoT)
environment, bulk loading the data is not feasible as data is
continuously streamed from devices into big data for analysis
and decision-making. Typically in those environments, solu-
tions like Flume and Storm/Kafka9
are used with Hadoop. By
integrating format-preserving encryption and tokenization
into those streams, data can be protected during the inges-
tion and decision-making process.
As previously outlined, referential integrity can be preserved
with FPE. So, once all data is protected, the analytics can al-
most always be done with the protected data. Frequently an-
alysts state that they need the data in the clear to perform
their analytics. However, when asked why data needs to be
in the clear, the answers are usually vague. The main reason
mentioned is the need for a cleartext reference for search. It’s
a common misconception that the information in big data
would need to be decrypted to perform a search. In fact, ex-
ecuting a search against the FPE-protected data would actu-
ally yield the same result without exposing any sensitive data
during query execution.
Since elements or sub-fields from the original data format can
be exposed (e.g., the first six digits of a credit card number),
analytics can still be performed on encrypted data where cer-
tain elements of the original data are needed. In the above
example a retailer could still identify the revenue generated
8 Hadoop MapReduce: A YARN-based system for parallel processing of large data sets
– https://hadoop.apache.org.
9 Apache Kafka – http://kafka.apache.org/.
Figure 1 – Results of FPE
February 2016 | ISSA Journal – 17

way to protect data against attacks while still maintaining the
value of the data and allowing analytics without imposing a
security-performance penalty. With standards-recognized
format-preserving-encryption techniques, sensitive data is
protected not only at rest in big data environments but also
in motion and in use for analytics. And in the event of a data
breach the cyber attackers gain nothing of value. Stateless
key management in combination with field-level, format-pre-
serving encryption, enables the secure portability of data
throughout Hadoop and big data ecosystems.
Additional References
—American Association for the Advancement of Science, “Na-
tional and Transnational Security Implications of Big Data
in the Life Sciences” – http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/
AAAS-FBI-UNICRI_Big_Data_Report_111014.pdf.
—Dasher, John, “Uncovering the Truth about Six Big Data
Security Analytics Myths,” IT Business Edge – http://
www.itbusinessedge.com/slideshows/uncover-
ing-the-truth-about-six-big-data-security-analytics-myths.
html.
—Elsevier, “Special Issue on Security and Privacy in Big Data
Clouds” – http://www.journals.elsevier.com/future-genera-
tion-computer-systems/call-for-papers/special-issue-on-secu-
rity-and-privacy-in-big-data-clouds/.
—Garey, Lorna, “Big Data Brings Big Security Problems, ”
Information Week (5/23/2014) – http://www.informationweek.
com/big-data/big-data-analytics/big-data-brings-big-securi-
ty-problems/d/d-id/1252747.
—Lafuente, Guillermo, “Big Data Security: Challenges &
Solutions,” MWR InfoSecurity (November 10, 2014) – https://
www.mwrinfosecurity.com/articles/big-data-security---chal-
lenges-solutions/.
—Najafabadi, Maryam M; Flavio Villanustre, Taghi M Khosh-
goftaar, Naeem Seliya, Randall Wald and Edin Muharemagic,
“Deep learning applications and challenges in big data ana-
lytics,” Journal of Big Data (24 February 2015) – http://www.
journalofbigdata.com/content/2/1/1.
—Robb, Drew, “Cyber Security’s big data Problem,” eSecurity
Planet (December 03, 2014) – http://www.esecurityplanet.
com/network-security/cyber-securitys-big-data-problem.
html.
—Zuech, Richard; Taghi M Khoshgoftaar, and Randall Wald,
“Intrusion Detection and Big Heterogeneous Data: a Survey,”
Journal of Big Data (27 February 2015) – http://www.jour-
nalofbigdata.com/content/2/1/3.
About the Author
Reiner Kappenberger has over 20 years of
computer software industry experience focus-
ing on encryption and security for big data
environments. His background ranges from
device management in the telecommunica-
tions sector to GIS and database systems. He
holds a Diploma from the FH Regensburg,
Germany, in computer science. He may be
reached at reiner.kappenberger@hpe.com.
The key to effective encryption
Encryption is not just about the actual encryption techniques
used; it is as much about key management and authentication
technologies. In order to encrypt information, an encryp-
tion key is needed. There is a saying that “key management
is hard.” So, when selecting an encryption solution, it’s very
important to consider the functionality and approach to key
management.
Traditional key management solutions are designed to store
keys in a secure environment. However, this does create chal-
lenges; one of the biggest is that keys that are stored must be
replicated between the different key servers. This approach
creates several issues. The first is that, at some point, the key
servers will spend more time synchronizing the key stores
than actually serving requests, resulting in a decrease in per-
formance and limited scalability. Also, proper backup and re-
store procedures need to be implemented because when a key
is lost, all data protected with this key is rendered unusable.
A way to avoid this key replication problem is to use a stateless
key management solution. With stateless key management,
keys are generated from a master key (or root key) that often
resides in a hardware security module (HSM) for maximum
security. With such a solution there is no physical key store
(typically implemented with a database in the key manager)
that needs to be moved between the key servers and prop-
erly maintained. Every time a key is requested, the key can
be regenerated from this root key. This typically is referred
to as Identity-Based Encryption (IBE),11
a form of ID-based
encryption where any party can generate a key from a known
identity value such as an ASCII string (e.g., a user’s email, ad-
dress, name, etc.).
Using such key management functionality simplifies backup
and restore processes: there are no keys actually stored in the
key manager. Even more importantly, this allows the system
to scale in a more linear fashion as there is no communication
required between the different key servers. When addition-
al capacity is needed—such as when expanding Hadoop—
bringing up additional key managers is a simple procedure
like adding more nodes in Hadoop.
Where this need for stateless key management becomes even
more critical is when the solution is operated from multiple
locations. This can either be a primary/backup data center
configuration or even a Hadoop instance that is distributed
across multiple locations for better availability. Key replica-
tion is never instantaneous, but when using IBE to derive keys
on the fly, the keys are always available and will never be lost.
Conclusion
The bottom line is that in order to properly protect a big data
environment against attacks, one needs to look further than
just the traditional perimeter security provided by either the
big data vendor or other traditional infrastructure tools. Pro-
tecting the data itself, using data-centric security, provides a
11 Identity Based Encryption – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ID-based_encryption.

Protecting your data against cyber attacks in big data environments

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Protecting your data against cyber attacks in big data environments

More from at MicroFocus Italy ❖✔

Recently uploaded

Protecting your data against cyber attacks in big data environments