Social Media Security Mitigations
Social Media Security Mitigations
Social Media Security Mitigations
Version 1.1
12/3/2009
Social Media Security Mitigations
VERSION HISTORY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 4
3 RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................................................... 6
APPENDIX A: REFERENCES....................................................................................................8
1 INTRODUCTION
Social media sites and other Web 2.0 technologies, such as Facebook, YouTube and
Twitter, offer health communicators powerful new channels to deliver relevant and
targeted health messages, often facilitated through trusted sources, when, where and how
users want information. Since these technologies are newly emerging and are
unfortunately prone to security vulnerabilities and attack vectors, mitigating these risks to
protect the CDC network remains paramount to the Office of the Chief Information
Security Officer (OCISO) and the programs alike.
Risks associated with social media sites may be classified into two main realms: the risk
associated with CDC content hosted on these sites (social media sites as systems); and
risks to the CDC networks from staff using these sites for official or personal reasons
(social media sites as vectors). This document focuses mainly on social media sites as
vectors and mitigating the risks to the CDC network. However, some recommendations
such as password policies, incident response plans, and security concerns such as
malicious applications, overlap both realms.
Many groups within the federal government are working to address the various security
issues associated with social networking sites. For social media sites viewed as systems,
NIST has adapted SP 800-53 Rev 3 to make allowances for accrediting hosted services
where agencies are afforded limited or no negotiations, such as free services like Twitter
and YouTube. A draft report to the federal CIO Council by the Web 2.0 Security Working
Group addresses more of the issues with social media sites as vector. This document is
intended to be CDC specific guidelines and recommendations, and as such may not be
applicable for other agencies or organizations. Furthermore, since the landscape is
constantly shifting, the recommendations and risks mentioned in this document are only
as good as the latest draft and should not be considered exhaustive or comprehensive. As
we learn more from our colleagues, we will regularly update this document to reflect the
best practices to secure CDC’s network and still uphold our public health mission.
Social media sites are not, for the most part, any more or less inherently insecure than
other types of Web application sites. Technical vulnerabilities such as cross-site scripting
(XSS), SQL Injection, and header splitting are the same across all web applications. The
mitigations for all such systems are essentially the same. Application security
communities, such as OWASP, do an excellent job of classifying and documenting these
vulnerabilities, as well as educating developers on ways to secure their systems. Social
media sites raise the profile and the stakes for attackers to exploit these vulnerabilities.
One unique risk associated with social media sites that differentiate them from other Web
applications is information leakage, mainly in the form of personal information which can
be used for social engineering attacks (spear-phishing / ‘whaling’, architecting attacks for
specific high-profile individuals, etc.) or used to compromise personnel in the traditional
espionage manner.
The use of social media sites at CDC increases risk to CDC systems and data via four
main mechanisms: 1) Web mail communication; which by-passes enterprise mail filtering,
2) public comments on blog posts; which are particularly vulnerable to cross-site scripting
or spear-phishing attacks, 3) malicious ‘friends’; whereby those who are accepted as
Revision Date: 07/30/2009 Page 4
‘friends’, may change their profiles after being approved to purposely include malicious
code, spurious, offensive, inappropriate or political content, and 4) malicious applications.
This document aims to outline the steps of risk assessment for individual sites and
recommendations for mitigating these known risks when they are present.
This document will address these four classes of vulnerabilities from a business
need/health communication aspect and make recommendations on how to mitigate these
risks when the use of Web mail and comments are warranted as well as newly emerging
risks of malicious friends and malicious applications.
2 VULNERABILITY CLASSES
If Web mail is required to effectively use the site, then a computer off the CDC network will
have to be used to manage and maintain the site. This requires separate hardware and
connection to the Internet to be approved and secured by OCISO.
However, to not allow comments on blog posts and other web content is not only contrary
to the very nature of these peer-to-peer communications platforms, but it reduces the
site’s effectiveness, and often generates a negative backlash which undermines the
effectiveness of our communications efforts.
Public comments may also contain links to false locations designed for CDC staff to follow
in a directed attempt to infiltrate the CDC network. These attacks are called spear-
phishing attacks since they are aimed at specific individuals or classes of individuals.
Sites that use URL redirection services, such as TinyURL, are particularly hard to secure.
The uses of such services are commonplace in Twitter and other micro blogging sites
where character count is at a premium. Extreme caution must be maintained when
following such links or accepting comments that contain such links.
whereas others such as Facebook randomly place any of your friends on the main page,
in which case, care must be taken in approving friends.
This vulnerability is the same as attacks whereby developers work to get a site high in
Google or other search engine results, and then change the content of their pages to
purposely introduce attacks.
Again, the main recommendation is to use computer resources off the CDC network to
manage and maintain the profile. This requires separate hardware and connection to the
Internet.
3 PRIMARY RECOMMENDATIONS
Programs must work to control those aspects of security that they can control. If a social
media site does not require strong password policies, the program developed and OCISO
approved Rules of Behavior (ROB) should contain strong password policies and policies
on frequency of changing the password. Written Incident Response Plans (IRP) should
be developed to handle possible compromises of passwords, data/site disfiguration, etc.,
which state what to do, who to contact internally (OCISO, DeHM) and externally (account
managers at social media site, security at social media site, etc) as well as having
prepared media inquiry responses for why the agency is involved in the channel, what we
do to mitigate the risks, how we’re working to get the problem resolved and so on.
Programs must work with OCISO to develop and implement appropriate Rules of
Behavior (ROB) for those who will use the special hardware to manage these profiles.
These ROB will include provisions of not connecting the hardware to the CDC network,
trying to re-enable ports if OCISO has blocked them, or moving files from the system to
the network directly in any way. Special connections to the Internet must be acquired,
which is usually a wireless Internet card. If DSL, cable or T1 connections are required,
then the program must also include ITSO in on the discussions at an early stage.
Programs should develop a system to regularly and systematically review the URLs in any
comment for XSS on the destination. Those who do the scanning and review should be
trained on how to look for suspicious XSS type of code in a page. The uses of automated
tools are generally restricted by license agreements.
Programs should also develop a system too regularly and systematically review the profile
pages of friends as well, to ensure that content has not changed since initial acceptance
and that those profiles have not been compromised.
Programs should also routinely scan the security environment and vulnerabilities
databases to stay breast of the changing security landscape associated with these sites.
Until these sites can be made more secure across the board, it is not recommended at
this time to treat the information published to these systems as information of record or
official. Disclaimers should be made on the profiles of each of these sites to state that
official CDC information can be found at CDC.gov and that in the case of any
discrepancies that the content on CDC.gov be considered correct. Even though clear
system boundaries are established, programs participating in the spaces must assume
the risk that content may be subject to attack and change, since ITSO and OCISO do not
maintain these systems.
“Strategic recommendations for the secure use of Social Media within the Federal Government”
Federal CIO Council, Information Security and Identity Management Committee, Network and
Infrastructure Security Subcommittee, Web 2.0 Security Working Group. Version 0.4, July 23,
2009 Draft.
National Institute of Standards and Technology. "“NIST Special Publication 800-53 Revision 3."
NIST – Computer Security Resource Center, August, 2009. Web. 1 Dec. 2009.
<http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-53-Rev3/sp800-53-rev3-final-errata.pdf>
<http://www.owasp.org/index.php/Category:OWASP_Top_Ten_Project#tab=Main>.
MySpace: Since this site relies on Web mail to solicit and accept friends and the blog
moderating functions have been known to have XSS vulnerabilities in the past, it is
recommended that to use this site for CDC communications, it be done so from
specially designated hardware off the CDC network following guidelines developed
in conjunction with OCISO.
Facebook: Since this site allows blog posts and there is limited to no control over which
of your friends appear on your home page, it is recommended that to use this site for
CDC communications, it be done so from specially designated hardware off the
CDC network following guidelines developed in conjunction with OCISO.
Twitter: An interesting site in terms of social media in that comments and posts are
allowed, but are limited to 140 characters with no HTML or JS allowed. Hyperlinks are
allowed and are automatically converted to the actual HTML code by the system. Eg –
http://www.cdc.gov becomes <a href=http://www.cdc.gov>http://www.cdc.gov</a>
automatically. Comments are designed to be sent by SMS messaging, which is text
based. Requests for followers come through email and can be accepted without Web
mail. Whereas it does seem to be secure against XSS exploits, the site does rely on AJAX
technologies and can be used to post links to malicious sites. In order to vet these links,
they must be followed, which would put the system at risk. The use of URL redirection
sites is common in Twitter and is particularly vulnerable to phishing or spear-phishing
attacks. It is recommended that to use this site for CDC communications, it be done
so from specially designated hardware off the CDC network following guidelines
developed in conjunction with OCISO.
DailyStrength: This site relies on Web mail to solicit and accept friends, allows blog
comments and has limited to no control over which of your friends show up on your main
profile page. It is recommended that to use this site for CDC communications, it be
done so from specially designated hardware off the CDC network following
guidelines developed in conjunction with OCISO.
YouTube: This site allows comments on videos and has limited to no control over which
of your friends show up on your main profile page. It is recommended that to use this
site for CDC communications, it be done so from specially designated hardware off
the CDC network following guidelines developed in conjunction with OCISO.
Flickr: This site allows comments and has limited to no control over which of your friends
show up on your main profile page. It is recommended that to use this site for CDC
communications, it be done so from specially designated hardware off the CDC
network following guidelines developed in conjunction with OCISO.
LinkedIn: This site relies on Web mail to solicit and accept friends and now allows for
applications to be embedded in profile pages. It is recommended that to use this site
for CDC communications, it be done so from specially designated hardware off the
CDC network following guidelines developed in conjunction with OCISO.
• I will report lost or stolen equipment immediately to CDC Physical Security Activity by e-mail
at mailto:cdcsecurit@cdc.gov or by calling (404) 639-3175.
1) Daily review of profile pages to ensure that content is still correct and hasn’t been
compromised.
2) Daily review of friends’ photos and other non-CDC controlled content on profile page
still fits within accepted guidelines.
3) Routinely check to see that friends’ profiles are still in spirit as when they were originally
accepted; that they are not advocating health practices not in keeping with CDC
recommendations; that they are not advocating hate speech; that they are not advocating
anti-governmental speech; that they are not baselessly critical of the administration; etc.
4) Routinely scan links to see that the destination pages have not been compromised or
being used to promote attacks.
5) Routinely check on-line vulnerabilities reports for the sites you are using.
For regular review of reported vulnerabilities, you would access the databases at these
three locations for vulnerabilities in the requested product. Be specific for the version
being requested: