Daily Tech Digest - January 16, 2025

How DPUs Make Collaboration Between AppDev and NetOps Essential

While GPUs have gotten much of the limelight due to AI, DPUs in the cloud are having an equally profound impact on how applications are delivered and network functions are designed. The rise of DPU-as-a-Service is breaking down traditional silos between AppDev and NetOps teams, making collaboration essential to fully unlock DPU capabilities. DPUs offload network, security, and data processing tasks, transforming how applications interact with network infrastructure. AppDev teams must now design applications with these offloading capabilities in mind, identifying which tasks can benefit most from DPUs—such as real-time data encryption or intensive packet processing. ... AppDev teams must explicitly design applications to leverage DPU-accelerated encryption, while NetOps teams need to configure DPUs to handle these workloads efficiently. This intersection of concerns creates a natural collaboration point. The benefits of this collaboration extend beyond security. DPUs excel at packet processing, data compression, and storage operations. When AppDev and NetOps teams work together, they can identify opportunities to offload compute-intensive tasks to DPUs, dramatically improving application performance. 


The CFO may be the CISO’s most important business ally

“Cybersecurity is an existential threat to every company. Gone are the days where CFOs could only be fired if they ran out of money, cooked the books, or had a major controls outage,” he said. “Lack of adequate resourcing of cybersecurity is an emerging threat to their very existence.” This sentiment reflects the reality that for most organizations cyber threat is the No. 1 business risk today, and this has significant implications for the strategic survival of the enterprise. It’s time for CISOs and CFOs to address the natural barriers to their relationship and develop a strategic partnership for the good of the company. ... CISOs should be aware of a few key strategies for improving collaboration with their CFO counterparts. The first is reverse mentoring. Because CFOs and CISOs come from differing perspectives and lead domains rife with terminology and details that can be quite foreign to the other, reverse mentoring can be important for building a bridge between the two. In such a relationship, the CISO can offer insights into cybersecurity, while simultaneously learning to communicate in the CFO’s financial language. This mutual learning creates a more aligned approach to organizational risk. Second, CISOs must also develop their commercial perspective.


Establishing a Software-Based, High-Availability Failover Strategy for Disaster Mitigation and Recovery

No one should be surprised that cloud services occasionally go offline. If you think of the cloud as “someone else’s computer,” then you recognize there are servers and software behind it all. Someone else is doing their best to keep the lights on in the face of events like human error, natural disasters, and DDoS and other types of cyberattacks. Someone else is executing their disaster response and recovery plan. While the cloud may well be someone else’s computer, when there is a cloud outage that affects your operations, it is your problem. You are at the mercy of someone else to restore services so you can get back online. It doesn’t have to be that way. Cloud-dependent organizations can adopt strategies that allow them to minimize the risk someone else’s outage will knock them offline. One such strategy is to take advantage of hybrid or multi-cloud architecture to achieve operational resiliency and high availability through service redundancy through SANless clustering. Normally a storage area network (SAN) uses local storage to configure clustered nodes on-premises, in the cloud, and to a disaster recovery site. It’s a proven approach, but because it is hardware dependent, it is costly in terms of dollars and computing resources, and comes with additional management demands.


Trusted Apps Sneak a Bug Into the UEFI Boot Process

UEFI is a kind of sacred space — a bridge between firmware and operating system, allowing a machine to boot up in the first place. Any malware that invades this space will earn a dogged persistence through reboots, by reserving its own spot in the startup process. Security programs have a harder time detecting malware at such a low level of the system. Even more importantly, by loading first, UEFI malware will simply have a head start over those security checks that it aims to avoid. Malware authors take advantage of this order of operations by designing UEFI bootkits that can hook into security protocols, and undermine critical security mechanisms like UEFI Secure Boot or HVCI, Windows' technology for blocking unsigned code in the kernel. To ensure that none of this can happen, the UEFI Boot Manager verifies every boot application binary against two lists: "db," which includes all signed and trusted programs, and "dbx," including all forbidden programs. But when a vulnerable binary is signed by Microsoft, the matter is moot. Microsoft maintains a list of requirements for signing UEFI binaries, but the process is a bit obscure, Smolár says. "I don't know if it involves only running through this list of requirements, or if there are some other activities involved, like manual binary reviews where they look for not necessarily malicious, but insecure behavior," he says.


How CISOs Can Build a Disaster Recovery Skillset

In a world of third-party risk, human error, and motivated threat actors, even the best prepared CISOs cannot always shield their enterprises from all cybersecurity incidents. When disaster strikes, how can they put their skills to work? “It is an opportunity for the CISO to step in and lead,” says Erwin. “That's the most critical thing a CISO is going to do in those incidents, and if the CISO isn't capable doing that or doesn't show up and shape the response, well, that's an indication of a problem.” CISOs, naturally, want to guide their enterprises through a cybersecurity incident. But disaster recovery skills also apply to their own careers. “I don't see a world where CISOs don't get some blame when an incident happens,” says Young. There is plenty of concern over personal liability in this role. CISOs must consider the possibility of being replaced in the wake of an incident and potentially being held personally responsible. “Do you have parachute packages like CEOs do in their corporate agreements for employability when they're hired?” Young asks. “I also see this big push of not only … CISOs on the D&O insurance, but they're also starting to acquire private liability insurance for themselves directly.”


Site Reliability Engineering Teams Face Rising Challenges

While AI adoption continues to grow, it hasn't reduced operational burdens as expected. Performance issues are now considered as critical as complete outages. Organizations are also grappling with balancing release velocity against reliability requirements. ... Daoudi suspects that there are a series of contributing factors that have led to the unexpected rise in toil levels. The first is AI systems maintenance: AI systems themselves require significant maintenance, including updating models and managing GPU clusters. AI systems also often need manual supervision due to subtle and hard-to-predict errors, which can increase the operational load. Additionally, the free time created by expediting valuable activities through AI may end up being filled with toilsome tasks, he said. "This trend could impact the future of SRE practices by necessitating a more nuanced approach to AI integration, focusing on balancing automation with the need for human oversight and continuous improvement," Daoudi said. Beyond AI, Daoudi also suspects that organizations are incorrectly evaluating toolchain investments. In his view, despite all the investments in inward-focused application performance management (APM) tools, there are still too many incidents, and the report shows a sentiment for insufficient observability instrumentation.


The Hidden Cost of Open Source Waste

Open source inefficiencies impact organizations in ways that go well beyond technical concerns. First, they drain productivity. Developers spend as much as 35% of their time untangling dependency issues or managing vulnerabilities — time that could be far better spent building new products, paying down technical debt, or introducing automation to drive cost efficiencies. ... Outdated dependencies compound the challenge. According to the report, 80% of application dependencies remain un-upgraded for over a year. While not all of these components introduce critical vulnerabilities, failing to address them increases the risk of undetected security gaps and adds unnecessary complexity to the software supply chain. This lack of timely updates leaves development teams with mounting technical debt and a higher likelihood of encountering issues that could have been avoided. The rapid pace of software evolution adds another layer of difficulty. Dependencies can become outdated in weeks, creating a moving target that’s hard to manage without automation and actionable insights. Teams often play catch-up, deepening inefficiencies and increasing the time spent on reactive maintenance. Automation helps bridge this gap by scanning for risks and prioritizing high-impact fixes, ensuring teams focus on the areas that matter most.


The Virtualization Era: Opportunities, Challenges, and the Role of Hypervisors

Choosing the most appropriate hypervisor requires thoughtful consideration of an organization’s immediate needs and long-term goals. Scalability is a crucial factor, as the selected solution must address current workloads and seamlessly adapt to future demands. A hypervisor that integrates smoothly with an organization’s existing IT infrastructure reduces the risks of operational disruptions and ensures a cost-effective transition. Equally important is the financial aspect, where businesses must look beyond the initial licensing fees to account for potential hidden costs, such as staff training, ongoing support, and any necessary adjustments to workflows. The quality of support the vendor provides, coupled with the strength of the user community, can significantly influence the overall experience, offering critical assistance during implementation and beyond. For many businesses, partnering with Managed Service Providers (MSPs) brings an added layer of expertise, ensuring that the chosen solution delivers maximum value while minimizing risk. The ongoing evolution and transformation of the virtualization market presents both challenges and opportunities. As the foundation for IT efficiency and flexibility, hypervisors remain central to these changes.

 

DORA’s Deadline Looms: Navigating the EU’s Mandate for Threat Led Penetration Testing

It’s hard to defend yourself, if you have no idea what you’re up against, and history and countless news stories are evidence that trying to defend against all manner of digital threat is a fool’s errand. As such, the first step to approaching DORA compliance is profiling not only the threat actors that target the financial services sector, but specifically which actors, and by what Tactics Techniques and Procedures (TTPs), you are likely to be attacked. However, first before you can determine how an actor may view and approach you, you need to know who you are. So, the first profile that must be built is of your own business. Not just financial services, but what sector/aspect, what region, and finally what is the specific risk profile based on the critical assets in organizational, and even partner, infrastructures. The second profile begins with the current population of known actors that target the financial services industry. It then moves to narrowing to the actors known to be aligned with the specific targeting profile. From there, leveraging industry standard models such as the MITRE ATT&CK framework, a graph is created of each actor/group’s understood goals and TTPs, including their traditional and preferred methods of access and exploitation, as well as their capabilities for evasion, persistence and command and control.


With AGI looming, CIOs stay the course on AI partnerships

“The immediate path for CIOs is to leverage gen AI for augmentation rather than replacement — creating tools that help human teams make smarter, faster decisions,” Nardecchia says. “There are very promising results with causal AI and AI agents that give an autonomous-like capability and most solutions still have a human in the loop.” Matthew Gunkel, CIO of IT Solutions at the University of California at Riverside, agrees that IT organizations should keep moving forward regardless of the growing delta between AI technology milestones and actual AI implementations. ... “The rapid advancements in AI technology, including projections for AGI and ACI, present a paradox: While the technology races ahead, enterprise adoption remains in its infancy. This divergence creates both challenges and opportunities for CIOs, employees, and AI vendors,” Priest says. “Rather than speculating on when AGI/ACI will materialize, CIOs would be best served to focus on what preparation is required to be ready for it and to maximize the value from it.” Sid Nag, vice president at Gartner, agrees that CIOs should train their attention on laying the foundation for AI and addressing important matters such as privacy, ethics, legal issues, and copyright issues, rather than focus on AGI advances.



Quote for the day:

"When you practice leadership,The evidence of quality of your leadership, is known from the type of leaders that emerge out of your leadership" -- Sujit Lalwani

No comments:

Post a Comment