Download PDF version Contact company

Aqua Security, global platform provider for securing container-based and cloud native applications, has announced version 3.5 of its cloud native security platform, which now protects a wide range of cloud native technologies, including applications using serverless functions. Customers can deploy end-to-end security to establish a consistent policy enforcement layer spanning container, serverless containers (such as AWS Fargate) and serverless functions (such as AWS Lambda).

Aqua CSP v3.5

In addition, driven by continued enterprise adoption of the Aqua platform in some of the largest global enterprises, Aqua CSP v3.5 raises the bar in terms of ease of management of complex, multi-application and multi-team enterprise environments by enabling flexible policy scopes and highly granular user role definitions, and adds container encryption for protection of intellectual property.

Moving to a serverless model allows developers to prioritize simplicity and agility by abstracting infrastructure concerns to provide a straightforward execution environment for applications and microservices. However, serverless architectures also introduce new security risks. Attackers may leverage a weakness or vulnerability in the serverless function code itself or outsourced libraries; or attempt to take advantage of the complexity of cloud infrastructure permissions to reach services or networks that contain sensitive information. Building on Aqua’s experience in securing containers, Aqua CSP v3.5 addresses these serverless threat vectors and minimizes their potential impact.

Security For Hybrid Cloud Deployments There is a growing need for scalable security that is easy-to-manage across multi-cloud and hybrid cloud deployments, covering both containers and serverless functions"

As the adoption of containers and serverless continues to expand within a greater number of enterprises, and to greater numbers of applications within those enterprises, there is a growing need for scalable security that is easy-to-manage across multi-cloud and hybrid cloud deployments, covering both containers and serverless functions,” said Amir Jerbi, CTO and co-founder of Aqua Security.\

Our customers now run multiple cloud native applications and require a unified platform to manage security across teams, while providing security and DevOps teams segregation of duties coupled with the control they require.

Features And Capabilities

  • Risk Assessment for Serverless functions: Checks functions for known vulnerabilities, embedded secrets (keys and tokens), and cloud permissions, to ensure that function privileges are secure and minimized. Serverless support is fully integrated with Aqua’s extensive controls for container runtime deployments and is managed via the same console.
  • Container Encryption: Aqua now makes it possible to encrypt the entire contents of a container image, decrypting it with a key when it is instantiated as a container. This feature enables companies with sensitive intellectual property embedded in their container images to protect them against unauthorized use and prevents unauthorized access to code in case of a registry breach or when code is given under license to partners and customers.
  • Greater Visibility through Workload Explorer: With a tabular and visual view of running workloads on Kubernetes and Docker environments, Workload Explorer provides visibility into large, distributed runtime environments, highlighting vulnerable or risky components (i.e., namespaces, deployments, pods, containers). Operations and security staff can easily filter the data and drill down to view detailed information quickly to ensure compliance.
  • Contextual Runtime Policies: Based on feedback from some of Aqua’s largest customer implementations, Aqua runtime security policy models now allow the definition of a highly specific scope for each policy, to be applied to an application context. The scope can be defined according to dozens of parameters, including Kubernetes deployment and namespace, image registry prefix, environment variables, and many more. This flexibility allows customers to easily differentiate between multiple applications, for example by applying stricter policy to applications with higher trust requirements, such as mission critical applications, even if they use the same images as other applications.
  • Fine-Grained Administrative Access Control: An enhanced RBAC engine enables fine-grained permissions for DevOps, security and compliance teams on the Aqua platform, enabling true segregation of duties between teams and roles. For example, different teams may be granted access to different sets of images or registries, while their ability to view or change Aqua policies for images, serverless functions, runtime, secrets, and compliance will vary according to their specific role.
Share with LinkedIn Share with Twitter Share with Facebook Share with Facebook
Download PDF version Download PDF version

In case you missed it

What Is The Impact Of Remote Working On Security?
What Is The Impact Of Remote Working On Security?

During the coronavirus lockdown, employees worked from home in record numbers. But the growing trend came with a new set of security challenges. We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: What is the impact of the transition to remote working/home offices on the security market?

Water Plant Attack Emphasizes Cyber’s Impact On Physical Security
Water Plant Attack Emphasizes Cyber’s Impact On Physical Security

At an Oldsmar, Fla., water treatment facility on Feb. 5, an operator watched a computer screen as someone remotely accessed the system monitoring the water supply and increased the amount of sodium hydroxide from 100 parts per million to 11,100 parts per million. The chemical, also known as lye, is used in small concentrations to control acidity in the water. In larger concentrations, the compound is poisonous – the same corrosive chemical used to eat away at clogged drains. The impact of cybersecurity attacks The incident is the latest example of how cybersecurity attacks can translate into real-world, physical security consequences – even deadly ones.Cybersecurity attacks on small municipal water systems have been a concern among security professionals for years. The computer system was set up to allow remote access only to authorized users. The source of the unauthorized access is unknown. However, the attacker was only in the system for 3 to 5 minutes, and an operator corrected the concentration back to 100 parts per million soon after. It would have taken a day or more for contaminated water to enter the system. In the end, the city’s water supply was not affected. There were other safeguards in place that would have prevented contaminated water from entering the city’s water supply, which serves around 15,000 residents. The remote access used for the attack was disabled pending an investigation by the FBI, Secret Service and Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office. On Feb. 2, a compilation of breached usernames and passwords, known as COMB for “Compilation of Many Breaches,” was leaked online. COMB contains 3.2 billion unique email/password pairs. It was later discovered that the breach included the credentials for the Oldsmar water plant. Water plant attacks feared for years Cybersecurity attacks on small municipal water systems have been a concern among security professionals for years. Florida’s Sen. Marco Rubio tweeted that the attempt to poison the water supply should be treated as a “matter of national security.” “The incident at the Oldsmar water treatment plant is a reminder that our nation’s critical infrastructure is continually at risk; not only from nation-state attackers, but also from malicious actors with unknown motives and goals,” comments Mieng Lim, VP of Product Management at Digital Defense Inc., a provider of vulnerability management and threat assessment solutions.The attack on Oldsmar’s water treatment system shows how critical national infrastructure is increasingly becoming a target for hackers as organizations bring systems online “Our dependency on critical infrastructure – power grids, utilities, water supplies, communications, financial services, emergency services, etc. – on a daily basis emphasizes the need to ensure the systems are defended against any adversary,” Mieng Lim adds. “Proactive security measures are crucial to safeguard critical infrastructure systems when perimeter defenses have been compromised or circumvented. We have to get back to the basics – re-evaluate and rebuild security protections from the ground up.” "This event reinforces the increasing need to authenticate not only users, but the devices and machine identities that are authorized to connect to an organization's network,” adds Chris Hickman, Chief Security Officer at digital identity security vendor Keyfactor. “If your only line of protection is user authentication, it will be compromised. It's not necessarily about who connects to the system, but what that user can access once they're inside. "If the network could have authenticated the validity of the device connecting to the network, the connection would have failed because hackers rarely have possession of authorized devices. This and other cases of hijacked user credentials can be limited or mitigated if devices are issued strong, crypto-derived, unique credentials like a digital certificate. In this case, it looks like the network had trust in the user credential but not in the validity of the device itself. Unfortunately, this kind of scenario is what can happen when zero trust is your end state, not your beginning point." “The attack on Oldsmar’s water treatment system shows how critical national infrastructure is increasingly becoming a target for hackers as organizations bring systems online for the first time as part of digital transformation projects,” says Gareth Williams, Vice President - Secure Communications & Information Systems, Thales UK. “While the move towards greater automation and connected switches and control systems brings unprecedented opportunities, it is not without risk, as anything that is brought online immediately becomes a target to be hacked.” Operational technology to mitigate attacks Williams advises organizations to approach Operational Technology as its own entity and put in place procedures that mitigate against the impact of an attack that could ultimately cost lives. This means understanding what is connected, who has access to it and what else might be at risk should that system be compromised, he says. “Once that is established, they can secure access through protocols like access management and fail-safe systems.”  “The cyberattack against the water supply in Oldsmar should come as a wakeup call,” says Saryu Nayyar, CEO, Gurucul.  “Cybersecurity professionals have been talking about infrastructure vulnerabilities for years, detailing the potential for attacks like this, and this is a near perfect example of what we have been warning about,” she says.  Although this attack was not successful, there is little doubt a skilled attacker could execute a similar infrastructure attack with more destructive results, says Nayyar. Organizations tasked with operating and protecting critical public infrastructure must assume the worst and take more serious measures to protect their environments, she advises. Fortunately, there were backup systems in place in Oldsmar. What could have been a tragedy instead became a cautionary tale. Both physical security and cybersecurity professionals should pay attention.

How Have Security Solutions Failed Our Schools?
How Have Security Solutions Failed Our Schools?

School shootings are a high-profile reminder of the need for the highest levels of security at our schools and education facilities. Increasingly, a remedy to boost the security at schools is to use more technology. However, no technology is a panacea, and ongoing violence and other threats at our schools suggest some level of failure. We asked this week’s Expert Panel Roundtable: How have security solutions failed our schools and what is the solution?