What are the most effective DBMS security measures against insider threats?

RBAC aligns with the principle of least privilege, by granting users permissions based on their roles and responsibilities. Administrators can define specific roles and the corresponding permissions associated with each role, instead of managing permissions for each user individually. RBAC supports the concept of segregation of duties, as a DBA may have different responsibilities and privileges compared to a data analyst. RBAC can enhance audit trails and monitoring. RBAC systems can adapt to changes in an organization's structure or requirements. When new roles are introduced or existing ones evolve, or a employee role changes orthe employee leaves the company. It's straightforward to revoke their access by removing their associated role.

RBAC is like a club bouncer for your database, ensuring only VIPs (authorized users) get access to the exclusive data party. By assigning roles, you're not only simplifying access management but also minimizing the 'attack surface' that insiders can exploit. It's a foundational security measure that acts as a first line of defense, ensuring that even if credentials are compromised, the damage an insider can do is limited by their role's permissions.

1) Least privileged access model 2) Chain of command process to approve access requests 3) Auditing/logging/alerting of account creation and permissions changes 4) encrypted laptops for users with remote wipe capabilities 5) encrypted backups with limited access to keys/certificates 6) encryption at rest (storage) 7) Policy for management review of all the above quarterly

An organization assigns a role-based access control role to every employee; the role determines which permissions the system grants to the user. For example, you can designate whether a user is an administrator, a specialist, or an end-user, and limit access to specific resources or tasks. An organization may let some individuals create or modify files while providing others with viewing permission only. One role-based access control example is a set of permissions that allow users to read, edit, or delete articles in a writing application. There are two roles, a Writer and a Reader, and their respective permission levels are presented in this truth table. Using this table, you can assign permissions to each user.

To enhance security against insider threats, it is crucial to establish stringent access controls within the database management system (DBMS). This involves implementing measures that limit user privileges and ensure that only authorized individuals can gain access. One effective approach is to adopt role-based access control (RBAC), which allows specific permissions to be assigned based on an individual's job role and responsibilities. By employing RBAC, organizations can ensure that users are granted access only to the data and functionalities that are necessary for their designated tasks, minimizing the risk of unauthorized access or misuse.

I totally agree. This does not only help with logging and monitoring access but it also helps protect privileged users in case of breach. It’s always important to operate a zero trust model whenever dealing with data security.

Ensure that you have a solution like audit vault installed as well to maximise security of the audit logs. This ensures that no one manipulates the captured data and you can use that information for future analytic purposes as well to better understand your users behaviour

Audit logging is critical to the success of our systems. We must be able to challenge our notion of "everything is OK" and be able to prove it. For our GDPR, PCI and HIPAA audits, we have various requirements formed around "prove to me that..." or "show me what so-and-so accessed". Without audit logs this is not possible. Along with these audit logs is full transparency to our workforce. Rather than "entrapping" them by letting them think they can get away with something, deter the behavior with training that "everything is recorded".

Audit logging is the CCTV of the database world. It keeps a watchful eye on all transactions, providing a trail that can be followed in the event of suspicious activity. This not only deters potential insider threats by increasing the likelihood of detection but also aids in rapid incident response. It's a critical component for regulatory compliance, ensuring that you can account for who did what, when, and how in your database.

I would propose that as far as possible, the end users are not made aware of the installation of database auditing. Whilst capture and reporting of database and object access is relevant, it is the before and after auditing which is going to reap the most benefits. By tracking the activities of employees, particularly where value is being moved, it soon will become obvious if the same user is making the same transaction on a regular basis. I refer to value because it may not be purely monetary; it could just as easily be raw materials or finished products

Rather than allowing third parties to have direct access to their data, why not consider hosting an RDS on your network, and give their users access to remote desktops. That keeps the data within your security realm and satisfies the needs of the customer. Many customers, particularly in the financial space, will dictate where their data can be accessed and by who. Some will enforce registers of users, and demand all users participate in their training programmes. Offshore call centres for example could use the remote desktop model to minimize the risk of data leaking.

Encryption is the database equivalent of a safe, and masking is its disguise. Together, they ensure that sensitive data is both secure and obscured, reducing the risk of exposure even if other defenses are breached. This dual approach is particularly effective against insiders, who might have legitimate access to the system but should not view sensitive data. It's a security measure that protects the core of your data's confidentiality and integrity.

Data loss prevention perimeter should be configured around database whenever possible, while it is also form of masking, it happens to the data in transit, leaving data in original form during storage

Encryption and data masking is a key to prevent you sensitive data in online transactions and in your database backup . Encrypted backup also highly recommended action .

There are 4 user tiers (tied to RBAC) that you consider in encryption / masking scenarios. 1. Users who have no need for the data. Solution: don't even show them the column/attribute name in reports or screens. 2. Users who don't need the exact data, but need something that is distinct. Solution: give them either encrypted or tokenized data. This is good for "I need a count of distinct patients, not patient IDs." 3. Users who periodically need access to specific privileged data. Solution: give them an auditable method to "change role" to gain access to unmasked privileged data. 4. Users who need direct access to the privileged data as their job. Solution: Assign a role that gives them ONLY the specific privileged data they need.

Although these are effective, their effectivity is directly related to (1) impacts on database performance for the end users (2) increased compute costs (3) increased storage costs and (4) maintaining the staff who understand and can maintain such a system. These 4 requirements raise a pretty high barrier to entry that most organizations are not willing to overcome.

Database firewalls serve as the gatekeepers, while anomaly detection systems are the vigilant guards, constantly scanning for unusual behavior. These tools create a dynamic shield around your database, adapting to new threats and stopping insiders in their tracks. They are essential for maintaining a proactive security posture, ensuring that even the most subtle signs of insider threat are caught and addressed.

Security and awareness training is critical to ensure that your organization understands "minimum standards". Unfortunately, most security and awareness training is driven by "compliance" and "risk management". As such they are "checkboxes" and are sorely ineffective.

Security awareness training is like immunizing your organization against the human element of security breaches. By educating your staff, you're building a human firewall, empowering them to spot and prevent security threats. Regular training updates are crucial to keep up with evolving threats and to maintain a strong culture of security awareness within your organization.

Remote working brings a number of different challenges, but if your call centre staff are attending an office, then strict adherence to policies like no mobile phones allowed will reduce exposure to fraudulent activity. Similarly, enforcement of security on the user hardware such as disabling all local printing (unless authorized) and strict controls on USB devices will help. BYOD (bring your own device) opens up a whole range of risk factors, so it is simpler not to allow it. One other point is that employees should not access company email and messaging applications on their personal devices. If they do, the employer has a right to examine all of their device content.

Having a solid incident response and recovery plan is like having a well-rehearsed fire drill; it ensures that when an incident occurs, everyone knows their role, and the organization can recover swiftly. This measure is not just about damage control; it's about resilience and the ability to bounce back, preserving the trust of stakeholders and minimizing operational disruption.

I disagree that incident response and recovery is in any way an effective security measure against insider threats. Response and recovery are actions which are the result of such activities. Obviously there are a lot of factors here, such as being regulated, the duration of the leak/damage, the data included, the actions of the bad actors, and the volumes involved.

Direct access of human to the database should be gated by "break glass" procedure, and investigated as security incident every time it happens. Instead of direct database access, "migration management system" should be upset to mutate both schema and data fixes in process gated by pull request review and management process. That way, responding to past incidents will lead to migration management to better adopt needs of all kinds of database changes, and leave less cases for data leaks through unrestricted access without review.

- Row level security, if enabled will ensure that each role from RBAC can only see data they are supposed to see. - it is possible to setup tables with attractive and interesting names, which in reality are decoy and will sound the alarm if actor attempts to select data from such table. For example, in PostgreSQL one can use foreign data wrapper to accomplish this.