Close Menu
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
  • Home
  • Articles
    • Attacks
      • BEC
      • Data Breach
      • DDoS
      • Evasion Attacks
      • Injection
      • Malware
      • MITM
      • Phishing
      • Ransomware
      • RCE
      • Social Engineering
      • Spoofing
      • Spyware
    • Business and Policy
      • BCP and DRP
      • GRC
      • Regulations
    • Data Protection
      • DLP
      • DRM
      • Encryption
      • IAM
    • Future, Trends and Insight
      • AI
      • Events & Community
      • Emerging Tech
      • Expert Panel
      • Interviews With Experts
      • Insights
      • Study & Research
    • Resources
      • Guides
      • Tools
      • Training & Education
    • Security
      • API
      • Apps
      • Cloud
      • Critical Infrastructure
      • Endpoint
      • Hardware
      • IoT
      • Mobile
      • Network
      • OT
      • Port Security
      • Security Architecture
      • Software Development
      • Supply Chain
      • Zero Trust
    • Threats and Vulnerabilities
      • Emerging Threats
      • Insider Threats
      • Risk Management
      • Threat Intelligence
      • Zero Day
  • News and Exclusives
    • Latest News
    • ISB Exclusive
    • Positive News
  • Who We Are
    • About Us
    • Information Security Buzz Expert Panel​
    • Write for Us
    • Media Pack
  • Contact Us
  • Newsletter
Subscribe
Information Security BuzzInformation Security Buzz
Home - Articles - Balancing Simplicity in Security
Articles

Balancing Simplicity in Security

Brian A. McHenryBy Brian A. McHenryMay 16, 2017Updated:June 30, 20213 Mins Read
Share LinkedIn Twitter Facebook Copy Link Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link
Quick AI Summary
ChatGPTClaudeGeminiGrokPerplexityDeepSeekCopilot

Complexity is the enemy of security. I first heard this truism from an interview with Bruce Schneier way back in 2001. In the years since, infrastructures have only grown more complex. Virtualization in its many forms is a chief contributor to complexity. Containers within hypervisors within clouds within data centers. As we’ve seen the barriers to rapid deployment fall, complexity and sprawl of infrastructures has grown. Application-layer technologies continue to advance, creating vulnerabilities ripe for exploitation. In attempting to combat attacks on these complexity-related vulnerabilities, the complexity problem is worsened by adding one point security solution after another in the data path.

In general, we infosec practitioners have gotten very proficient at network security. The complexity is largely at the application layer, and successful attacks for everything from data breaches to account compromise to DDoS are most often attributed to application layer exploit. Organizations like OWASP and ISSA have done great work in raising visibility around application security. Technologies like web app firewall (WAF), runtime application self protection (RASP), bot detection, and fraud protection have become much more common as a means of enriching and enhancing the security posture of the application code.

Recently, with many cloud platforms (IaaS, PaaS, etc.) providing a great deal of built-in security, and the rise of container-based deployment models, it’s become fashionable to over-simplify the network infrastructure. Network-level security controls such as segmentation and firewalls are taken for granted as adding obstacles to the flexibility of the cloud. While complexity may be the enemy of security, over-simplifying removes security controls that are the foundation of our proficiency at that layer.

Public cloud providers offering infrastructure or platform services are forced to make network architecture decisions due to the scale of their operations. However, the shared security responsibility model clearly leaves network-level security in the scope of the cloud customer. It’s tempting to leave all traffic segmentation to the hypervisors and containers, but such an architecture leaves blindspots at the boundaries which makes early detection of any intrusion or attack difficult, if not impossible until the application itself has been attacked.

As is often the case, the goal must be a balance between effective security controls and a simplified, streamlined architecture. Finding this balance means re-evaluating the security value of different components in the architecture, especially when considering the specific threat model. For example, is a multi-protocol intrusion prevention system (IPS) or next-gen firewall (NGFW) truly necessary if the only protocols in use are HTTPS and DNS? In this scenario, a simpler network firewall in tandem with web app firewall is a simpler and more effective security control.

A good threat model will consider cloud and/or data center entry and exit points, and what protocols and applications need to be allowed. These essential facts will define the data path and enable simpler, streamlined security controls. Leveraging network function virtualization (NFV) and other dynamic traffic management solutions will also enable directing traffic down data paths with only the security inspection dictated by source, destination, and protocol. The threat model will also account for the differences in security responsibility in cloud and traditional data center models.

In some cases, as with various firewalls and other security sensors, simpler and fewer point solutions is usually better. In other cases, such as network segmentation, simpler is not always better. Segmentation enables us to contain or redirect a threat, as needed. In the rush toward more scalable data center models such as SaaS and PaaS in the cloud, it is vital not to abandon some of the most basic tools in the name of simplification and easier automation.

Brian_McHenry
Brian A. McHenry

As a Senior Security Solutions Architect at F5 Networks, Brian McHenry focuses on web application and network security. McHenry acts as a liaison between customers and F5 product teams, providing a hands-on, real-world perspective. He is a regular contributor on InformationSecurityBuzz.com, a co-founder of BSidesNYC, and a speaker at AppSecUSA, BC Aware Day, GoSec Montreal, and the Central Ohio Infosec Summit, among others. Prior to joining F5 in 2008, McHenry, a self-described IT generalist, held leadership positions within a variety of technology organizations, ranging from startups to major financial services firms.

  • Brian A. McHenry
    The WAF Is Not Enough
  • Brian A. McHenry
    Access Management, With A Side Order Of Identity
  • Brian A. McHenry
    The Internet of Thingbots
  • Brian A. McHenry
    Black Hat USA 2017: Bigger and Better (?)

The opinions expressed in this post belong to the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Information Security Buzz.

Share. Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Email Copy Link

Related Posts

AppSec is dead, long live AI security

April 29, 20265 Mins Read

Managing App Access on Frontline Devices in an Always-On World

March 9, 20264 Mins Read

OWASP Top 10 2025: New Enemies, Old Foes, and an Approach to Vulnerability Remediation That Must Evolve

January 22, 20265 Mins Read
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar

No se ha podido establecer conexión. Error 429

 
ISB-Bora-Side-Bar
Black ISB Logo

Information Security Buzz is an independent resource that provides the experts’ comments, analysis, and opinion on the latest Cybersecurity news and topics

X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook RSS

Working With Us

  • About Us
  • Advertise With Us
  • Contact Us

Write For Us

  • How To Contribute

The Pages

  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • AI Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Copyright Notice

Information Security Buzz and all its contents are copyright © 2014-2025. All rights reserved. All third-party trademarks are recognized.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}