Will the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill actually cut red tape?

Posted: June 2, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: cybersecurity | Tags: , , , , | Leave a comment
Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

The government’s much-vaunted successor to the GDPR is still working its way through parliament. The Tories are hoping for obvious reasons that it shows how nimble the UK can be in post-Brexit regulation. But will the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (DPDI) actually achieve the operational compliance benefits for UK PLC that the government is claiming?

Legal experts I spoke to for a new feature are sceptical.

To cut or not to cut?

Cutting red tape is one of the government’s biggest claims for the legislation, which it says will end up saving UK organisations billions over the coming decade. The government claims it will reduce “pointless paperwork” without impacting data adequacy with the EU, which is essential to seamless cross-border data flows.

Antonis Patrikios, global co-chair of global privacy and cybersecurity at Dentons, argues that it could make life easier for some firms.

“It could do so by significantly reducing the instances in which documented assessments or records of processing are required or replacing the requirement for the statutory role of the Data Protection Officer (DPO) with a requirement to appoint a Senior Responsible Individual, a member of senior management,” he tells me.

However, Edward Machin, a senior lawyer in Ropes & Gray’s data, privacy & cybersecurity practice, says that these benefits will only be felt by organisations that are subject solely to the UK GDPR. In other words, those with operations in the EU must either choose to maintain two separate compliance regimes, or else make life easier by sticking to the EU GDPR regime—which they’re allowed to under the new DPDI. If they do the latter, they’ll miss out on those much-touted red tape-cutting benefits.

“Businesses that have an existing compliance programme in place which meets the requirements of the EU GDPR may choose to maintain the status quo in certain respects even where not legally required (e.g., DPOs), given the benefits that doing so could have both for their internal processes and the external trust which will be gained by maintaining what are seen to be higher data protection standards,” Machin tells me. 

“But UK companies that are also subject to the EU GDPR—or vice versa—will still have to comply with the more restrictive EU standard. Given that most of these organisations are unlikely to operate dual compliance programmes, particularly where they have spent significant time and money building an EU GDPR compliance framework, the benefits of being subject to a lighter-touch UK regime will probably be limited.”

Bad timing

What’s more, the new bill couldn’t come at a worse time for compliance teams already facing new GDPR-like legislation in several US states. The good news is that there will be some crossover, according to Machin.

“Compliance teams tend to be overwhelmed at the best of times, and the flurry of new data laws in the UK, EU and US isn’t going to lessen their workloads. That said, the good(ish) news is that many of these laws are underpinned by the same, or very similar, core principles and obligations—particularly those around transparency, accountability, security and individual rights,” he concludes. 

“This means that existing compliance programmes can be tweaked to meet the new or differing requirements of these laws, rather than starting from scratch each time.” 

How scammers are capitalising on the SVB collapse

Posted: April 4, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: cybersecurity, Uncategorized | Tags: , | Leave a comment

This piece was first published on ESET’s We Live Security site.

cyber attack

Big news events and major crises usually trigger an avalanche of follow-on phishing attempts. The COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are perhaps the most obvious examples, but the most recent one is the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB). The mid-sized US lender and a key financer of tech start-ups held tens of billions of dollars’ worth of assets when it went bust last week after succumbing to a bank run.

Although the US government stepped in days later to guarantee customers would be able to access their money, the damage was done – and even if you or your business wasn’t affected by the bank’s meltdown, you could still be at risk of cybercrime that exploits such events for nefarious gains.

Ambulance-chasing phishing and business email compromise (BEC) attempts are already hitting inboxes across the globe. Once you’ve weathered the storm, there’s plenty of takeaways that can be used to build a more resilient security awareness program going forward.

The story so far

There’s nothing new in scammers piggy-backing on news events to improve their success rates. But the SVB case has several ingredients that make it arguably a more attractive lure than the norm. These include:

  • The fact that there’s lots of money at stake: SVB had an estimated US$200 billion in assets when it went bust.
  • Extreme anxiety from corporate customers worried about how to pay the bills if they can’t access their assets, and of individuals concerned about whether they’d get paid.
  • Confusion over exactly how customers can get in touch with the failed lender.
  • The fact that the collapse came after the fall of Signature Bank, sparking even more anxiety about the whereabouts of funds and the health of the financial system.
  • SVB’s global reach – including a UK arm and various affiliated businesses and offices across Europe. This expands the pool of potential scam victims.
  • The BEC angle: as many SVB corporate customers will be informing their partners of bank account changes, it offers the perfect opportunity for fraudsters to step in first with their own details.

When something like this happens, it’s not unusual to see multiple domains registered by firms looking to offer legitimate loans or legal services to the ailing bank’s customers. It can be difficult to discern the authentic from those registered for nefarious ends.

There’s a long list of newly-registered lookalike domains that may try to deceive people in the future.

SVB phishing attempts

As always, phishing attempts focus on classic social engineering techniques such as:

  • Using a breaking news story to lure the recipient in
  • Spoofing SVB or other brands to gain recipient trust
  • Creating a sense of urgency to force recipients to act without thinking – not hard given the circumstances surrounding the collapse
  • Including malicious links/attachments to harvest information or steal funds

Some phishing attempts have focused on stealing the details of SVB customers – possibly to either sell on the dark web or to create a phishing list of targets to hit with future scams. Others have embedded more sophisticated methods of stealing cash from victims.

One effort uses a fake reward program from SVB claiming all holders of stablecoin USDC will get their money back if they click through. However, the QR code the victim is taken to will compromise their cryptocurrency wallet account.

A separate lure with the same QR-related crypto-stealing end goal used an announcement by USDC issuer Circle as its starting point. The firm said USDC would be redeemable 1:1 with the dollar, prompting the creation of new phishing sites with a Circle USDC claims page.

SVB BEC threats

As mentioned, this news event is also slightly unusual in providing the perfect conditions for BEC attacks to flourish. Finance teams are going to be legitimately approached by suppliers that previously banked with SVB and that have now switched financial institutions. As a result, they’ll need to update their account details. Attackers could use this confusion to do the same, impersonating suppliers with modified account payee details.

Some of these attacks may be sent from spoofed domains, but others may be more convincing, with emails that have been sent from legitimate but hijacked supplier email accounts. Organizations without sufficient fraud checks in place could end up mistakenly sending money to scammers.

How to avoid SVB and similar scams

Phishing and BEC are increasingly common. The FBI Internet Crime Report 2022 details over 300,000 phishing victims last year, cementing its status as the most popular cybercrime type of all. And BEC made scammers over US$2.7bn in 2022, making it the second highest-grossing category. Consider the following to stay safe from the scammers:

  • Be cautious about unsolicited messages received by email, SMS, social media etc. Try to independently verify them with the sender before deciding whether to reply.
  • Don’t download anything from an unsolicited message, click on any links or hand over any sensitive personal information.
  • Look for grammatical mistakes, typos etc. that can indicate a spoofed message.
  • Hover over the email sender’s display name – does it look authentic?
  • Switch on two-factor authentication (2FA) for all online accounts.
  • Use strong and unique passwords for all accounts, ideally stored in a password manager.
  • Regularly patch or switch on automatic updates for all devices.
  • Report anything suspicious to the corporate security team.
  • Importantly, ensure you have up-to-date security software on all your devices from a reputable provider.

For BEC specifically:

  • Check with a colleague before changing account details/approving payments for new accounts
  • Double check any requests for account updates with the requesting organization: don’t reply to their email, verify independently from your records

From a corporate IT security perspective:

  • Run continuous, regular phishing training exercises for all staff, including simulations of currently trending attacks
  • Consider gamification techniques which may help reinforce good behaviors
  • Build BEC into staff security awareness training
  • Invest in advanced email security solutions that include anti-spam, anti-phishing and host server protection and protect threats from even reaching their targets
  • Update payment processes so that large wire transfers must be signed off by multiple employees

We all need to be on the lookout for unexpected emails or calls – mainly those coming from a bank and requiring urgent action. Never click a link and input your banking login credentials nor give them over the phone at any time. To access your banking information, use your bank’s official website.

Factory 4.0 and beyond: the challenges of operational technology security

Posted: November 3, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , | Leave a comment

This article was first published on ISMSonline.

When a report revealed 56 new vulnerabilities in 10 operational technology (OT) vendors’ products last year, experts hailed it as a wake-up call for the industry. The study highlighted an endemic problem with OT equipment: a need for more basic security-by-design best practices. The fact that three-quarters of those products assessed to contain vulnerabilities had valid security certifications should cause further nervousness among IT/OT managers.

The bottom line is that the issues highlighted in the report run so deep they’re unlikely to be resolved industry-wide anytime soon. That puts the onus on enterprise security programmes to ensure OT risk is managed with the same attention to detail as IT.

The What and Why of OT

Whereas IT systems manage information and applications, OT covers the hardware and software used to monitor and control the physical world. It could be anything from an ATM to an industrial control system (ICS), a factory robot to a programmable logic controller (PLC). The technology can be found most obviously on the factory floor. But it spans a huge range of industries beyond manufacturing, including healthcare, oil & gas, utilities, and transportation.

Historically, OT systems were not internet-connected, and devices tended to be purpose-built, running specialised software. That meant security was treated as an afterthought. However, most equipment has connectivity today, meaning remote attackers can probe it for vulnerabilities. At the same time, it often runs Windows or other commercial software. That makes it an attractive target.

Because OT controls physical processes, security breaches could enable attackers to sabotage or disrupt critical operations. Vulnerable endpoints may even be used as a stepping stone into IT networks for sensitive data theft. One 2022 report claims 83% of organisations suffered an OT breach in the previous 36 months. According to figures cited by McKinsey, the cost per incident of severe attacks can be as much as $140m. It’s not just financial risk organisations must consider. OT is also regulated by the NIS 2 Directive and its UK equivalent.

What Are The Risks?

The specialised nature of OT means that systems are exposed to certain cyber risks that may not apply to IT environments. They include:

  • Use of legacy, insecure communications protocols
  • Vendors that don’t pay enough heed to vulnerability management
  • Hardware lifecycles of 10+ years, meaning admins are forced to run outdated OSes/software
  • Patching challenges, as equipment often can’t be taken offline to test updates (even if they are available)
  • Equipment that’s too old to deploy modern security solutions to
  • Security certifications which don’t recognise severe defects, giving admins a false sense of security
  • Security-by-design issues that aren’t reported/assigned CVEs, meaning they fly under the radar
  • Siloed IT/OT teams, which can create gaps in visibility, protection and detection
  • Insecure passwords and misconfigurations (although this is also common in IT environments)

From a technical perspective, the Forescout report cited earlier highlights several categories of vulnerability in many OT products:

  • Insecure engineering protocols
  • Weak cryptography or broken authentication schemes
  • Insecure firmware updates
  • Remote code execution (RCE) via native functionality
  • How To Mitigate Risk From OT Systems

How To Mitigate Risk From OT Systems

As per IT security, defence in depth is the best way to mitigate OT cyber risk. According to Carlos Buenano, Principal Solutions Architect for Operational Technology (OT) at Armis, it starts with visibility of OT assets and then prompt patching.

Since it is very common for OT environments to have vulnerable assets, organisations need to create a comprehensive asset inventory of their network and have additional intelligence on what those assets are and what they are actually doing,” he tells ISMS.online. “Contextual data enables teams to define what risk each device poses to the OT environment and assess their business impact so that they can prioritise remediation of critical and/or weaponised vulnerabilities to reduce the attack surface quickly.

Here’s a quick checklist for organisations:

Asset discovery/management: You can’t protect what you can’t see. So, understand the full extent of OT in the enterprise.

Prompt patching and continuous scanning: OT assets should be continuously scanned for vulnerabilities once discovered. And a risk-based patching programme will ensure CVEs are prioritised effectively. Consider building a non-critical testing environment for patches. And if certain assets can’t be patched, consider alternatives, like virtual patching, network segmentation, SIEM and integrity monitoring.

Identity and access management: Deploy role-based access controls, follow the principle of least privilege and support multi-factor authentication (MFA).

Segmentation: Separate corporate from OT networks, and segment OT networks, to contain the spread of malware.

Threat prevention: Deploy controls such as intrusion detection (IDS), AV software and file integrity-checking tools to prevent and detect malware.

Encryption and backup: Protect OT data at rest and in transit and have backups to mitigate the impact of ransomware.

Breaking Down IT-OT Silos

As OT and IT systems converge in many organisations, threats once confined to IT, such as remote compromise, become more commonplace for industrial systems. Therefore, preventing, detecting and responding to such threats will require more interaction between IT and OT teams. OT teams can learn much from the experience IT has built up over the years regarding security controls, and both have a vested interest in business continuity.

“By working together, IT and OT teams can identify and mitigate cybersecurity risks that affect both IT and OT environments, thus protecting the organisation from cyber-attack,” Trend Micro UK & Ireland technical director, Bharat Mistry, tells ISMS.online. “Additionally, collaboration between the teams will improve the efficiency of security operations teams and ultimately help to reduce costs.”

From a compliance perspective, this may require the organisation to go beyond the limits of ISO 27001 and seek out complementary certifications in the OT space.

“We see frameworks like ISO 27001 used in enterprise IT and bespoke or tailored frameworks like IEC 62443 for OT,” Mistry explains. “On paper, there is some overlap between these, but in reality, these frameworks are start points and are often customised to suit the organisation’s environment.”

Ultimately, it’s in everyone’s best interests to work together, says Armis’s Buenano.

“From an organisational perspective, having a risk-based approach to vulnerability management must go hand in hand with OT and IT departments working together to help coordinate mitigation efforts,” he concludes. “Cross-departmental projects will help streamline process and resource management and achieve greater compliance and data security.”

The government’s new risk register is heavy on cyber. Is that a good or bad thing?

Posted: September 8, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

What are the chances of a catastrophic cyber incident occurring in the UK in the next two years? How many might die, or be maimed in such an incident? And how much might it cost the country? These are the kinds of unpleasant questions the government seeks to answer in its latest National Risk Register  (NRR).

Since 2008, the report has been published to help businesses running critical national infrastructure (CNI), and other organisations, to enhance their resilience to potential risks. The big difference between now and then is that cyber is now one of nine key “themes” examined in the report.  

I recently spoke to some experts to write an upcoming feature for Assured Intelligence.

What the NRR says

For the first time, the NRR was compiled from information in the National Security Risk Assessment (NSRA), a classified document written with help from government experts. It highlights potential cyber risk across multiple scenarios. These involve data theft and/or disruption to:  

  • Gas infrastructure
  • Electricity infrastructure
  • Civil nuclear facilities
  • Fuel supply infrastructure
  • Government
  • The health and social care system
  • The transport sector
  • Telecommunications systems
  • UK financial infrastructure
  • A UK retail bank

The NRR ranks the likelihood of such attacks happening in the next two years as a “4” on a scale of 1–5, with 5 being the most likely (>25%). That equates to a “highly unlikely” risk with a “moderate” impact. However, as mild as this sounds, even a moderate incident could lead to up to 1000 fatalities and casualties of up to 2000, with losses in the billions of pounds. By contrast, the estimated economic damage from cyber incidents in 2000 was pegged at £10-100m.

That’s a reflection of the digital world we live in, as is the mention of AI as a potential chronic risk (as opposed to the acute risks highlighted above). Chronic risks, the NRR says, are manifest over a longer period of time and can make acute risks “more likely and serious”.

Should we be concerned?

Egress VP of threat intelligence, Jack Chapman, believes the government has it about right.

“I agree with the government’s risk assessment and its accuracy based on historic threats. Obviously this strongly depends on the geo-political landscape and how it evolves,” he told me.

“However, there’s been an increase in digitalisation in this space, meaning the risks and impact are increasing. There’s also a far higher level of uncertainty with the government’s assessment in comparison to previous reports.”

However, it’s not all doom and gloom, as steps are being taken to mitigate these acute cyber risks and build resilience into CNI, he added.

“It’s important to note that more active work is being done around cybersecurity than ever before; from putting security-by-design at the heart of new projects, to the impact the NCSC is having in the sector to help mitigate this risk,” Chapman said.

How can CNI hit back?

The big question is how exactly can CNI providers enhance resilience? Arun Kumar, regional director at ManageEngine, believes AI may hold the key, in helping to identity threats “faster and more accurately” than humans. But he goes further.

“Regulation will also play a vital role in carefully managing the negative impact of AI. It’s important to maintain strong security practices such as compliance with NIST and GDPR regulations,” he told me.

“Change needs to be foreseen and carefully managed—striking a balance between utilising the benefits of AI and limiting the negative side. To this end, collaboration is also paramount, both internally and externally within the cybersecurity community, encompassing researchers, professionals, enterprises and policymakers.”

Other best practices could include enhanced password management, vulnerability scanning and prompt patching, and user education to ward off the threat of phishing. To that we could add several other best practices, outlined by the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) here. It’s a tall job for CNI firms on an increasingly tight budget. But the alternative is undoubtedly worse.

Plugging the gaps to improve healthcare cybersecurity

Posted: July 20, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

The UK’s health service turned 75 recently, and its IT infrastructure is starting to show its age. The challenge for cybersecurity professionals working in the sector is one felt by those across many verticals. It’s about mitigating risk even as digital transformation expands the cyber-attack surface. And doing so in an industry where the stakes for failure couldn’t be higher.

I spoke to some experts for a recent ISMSonline feature to find out more.

Raising the stakes

Ransomware represents probably the biggest single cyber threat to healthcare organisations (HCOs) today, whatever country they operate in. A recent report from EU agency ENISA revealed that ransomware accounts for over half (54%) of all cyber-threats targeting the sector, with 46% of all incidents aimed at stealing or leaking data. HCOs don’t just store lucrative personal, medical and financial data in prodigious amounts, they also have a low tolerance for ransomware-related outages.

“When another critical industry is attacked such as the electrical grid for example, power outages ensue, offices and factories shut down during the outage unless they have backup generators and an hour or two, or a day or two later in most cases power is restored, and business and daily life continues as normal,” Richard Staynings, Chief Security Strategist for UK healthcare security specialist Cylera, tells me.

“When healthcare is attacked, clinicians can no longer optimally care for the sick and dying. The industry has changed a lot since the days of Florence Nightingale and today our doctors and nurses are heavily reliant upon health IT and IoT systems such as medical devices to diagnose, monitor, and treat patients.”

In fact, a link between cyber-attacks and patient outcomes has already been established. Studies have shown that a correlation between mortality rates and cyber-attacks, with one report claiming a link between data breaches and heart attack fatalities.

Where are the biggest gaps?

There are so many security gaps that it’s difficult knowing where to start, Staynings says.

“Hospital networks were never designed with cybersecurity in mind so are flat and open access to anyone with credentials. Compare that to a bank or the MoD which have highly compartmentalised access and segmented networks. We are essentially trying to retrofit cybersecurity into healthcare but with limited resources and many other competing projects,” he adds.

“Another area of concern is third party risk. Healthcare uses thousands of vendors, suppliers and outsourcers who provide a wide variety of services necessary for hospitals and clinics to function. Yet Trusts do not adequately vet the security of these vendors or require ISO27001 certification or a SOC2 type attestation of security effectiveness. We have seen the impacts of vendor lapses in security with the 111 attack last year and many others.”

Staynings also points to insufficient staff training on security awareness – unforgivable at a time when most attacks still begin with phishing.

“Insisting on a year-round security awareness programme makes immense sense and probably represents ‘the biggest bang for the buck’ as far as spending on cybersecurity is concerned,” he argues. “Every NHS employee, consultant, contractor, and vendor should be trained, armed and ready to defend against cyberattacks. Currently however, they are not.”

Mohammad Waqas, CTO for Healthcare at Armis, tells me that IoT medical devices (IoMT) represent a critical risk, especially as security teams often don’t have sufficient visibility. A recent survey conducted by the vendor found that a third of NHS Trusts have no method of tracking IoT devices and 10% use manual processes or spreadsheets to do so.

“It’s a common saying within the cybersecurity community that you cannot protect what you cannot see. Complete visibility allows hospital security teams to better understand what devices are connected to their network, when and how they are being used and what are the risks associated with said devices,” he tells me.

“Understanding that context will allow the healthcare organisation to take action and remediate any security need.”

While HCOs might have their PCs locked down, that’s not usually the case with IoMT, Waqas argues.

“The proliferation of IoMT is driving innovation and ultimately improving delivery of care, however its adoption has rapidly enlarged the attack surface. What increases the risk is that existing medical devices on networks are generally running legacy operating systems that no longer receive security patches. These are prime targets for attackers and can be impacted during ransomware attacks,” he explains.

“It’s important to appropriately segment these devices to limit communication as much as possible. Without this, medical devices can very well become non-functional and thereby greatly disrupt patient care—sometimes for weeks. Encouragingly, more than two-thirds of NHS trusts mentioned cybersecurity of medical devices is currently a project on their roadmaps for the upcoming year.”

What’s the government doing?

The good news is that the government’s strategy for a more cyber resilient healthcare sector appears well thought out and fairly comprehensive. The challenge, though, will be implementing all of its recommendations. Staynings argues that a greying population, above-inflation price rises for drugs and equipment, and employee wages will all stretch the budget like never before.

“I would like to believe that this policy document is different from all the others which have come before it, but I can’t help thinking it’s just another excuse to rearrange the deckchairs on the Titanic. It all comes down to funding and the NHS continues to be chronically underfunded, perhaps more-so now that at any time in its history,” he concludes.

“So, while the government’s intent to build-up and expand the healthcare cybersecurity workforce is great in principle, in practice unless the NHS is prepared to adjust salary bands and pay market rates to attract and retain its cybersecurity staff, this initiative will likely fall flat on its face. It all comes down to funding and the will of the government to follow through and deliver on its promises—something that all British governments have a lousy record of.”

End-to-end encryption: What happens next?

Posted: May 3, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

The Online Safety Bill (OSB) is still winding its way through parliament. But while much of the analysis so far has been on its provisions to force social media companies to remove “harmful” content, there’s an elephant lurking in the corner of the room. Clause 110 compels not only social media firms but also messaging app providers to identify and take down child sexual exploitation and abuse (CSEA) content.

There’s one big problem here. End-to-end encryption (E2EE), which makes message content impenetrable to providers like WhatsApp. It appears as if the government might be looking at client-side scanning as a solution. Experts I spoke to for an upcoming feature are unconvinced.

What’s client-side scanning?

Put simply, this “accredited technology” would require individuals to download software to their devices. It would run locally, scanning potentially for suspicious keywords and image content that matches a CSEA database, before a message is encrypted and sent. On paper, this preserves E2EE while allowing the authorities to police child abusers. In reality, it will fail on both counts for several reasons.

  • Researchers have already worked out it could generate too many false positives to be useful, and could be hacked in other ways
  • If client-side scanning were targeted by foreign governments or cyber-criminals, it would put private data potentially at risk
  • The bosses of several big-name messaging apps say they’d rather exit the UK than comply with the OSB, which would also make UK firms and consumers less secure
  • If client-side encryption comes into force, child abusers will simply gravitate to unpoliced apps, as criminals have in the past with services like EncroChat
  • There’s a concern that the technology could be used in the future to police other content types – government mission creep

Matthew Hodgson, CEO of secure messaging app Element, argued that the new provisions directly contradict the GDPR in undermining encryption.

“It undermines privacy and security for everyone because every secure communication app which happens to have abusive users could be obligated to incorporate a third-party scanning solution, which then means every single user is at risk of that scanning solution being exploited by an attacker to break their privacy,” he told me.

“Any business depending on E2EE for privacy may find themselves at a loss, given encryption vendors would be forced to stop providing their services in the UK, as it is literally impossible to preserve privacy whilst also adding a mechanism to let third parties exfiltrate user data.”

Corelight cyber security specialist, Matt Ellison, cautioned against government putting its faith in a “magic technical solution” that doesn’t exist – adding that Apple abandoned similar plans for client-side scanning after a privacy uproar.

“Ultimately the government is proposing to significantly weaken the security of almost the entire nation, for the ability to perform a lawful intercept of an individual suspected of a crime,” he told me.

“Should all vehicles be fitted with a remote kill switch, in case you are deemed to be committing a crime in your vehicle? Should all houses have the same door key type, with authorities maintaining a master key that could get into everyone’s house to gather evidence without you knowing, again, if you are under suspicion?”

Ellison argued that smartphones are much more than just a technically advanced mobile phone.

“The reality is that they are an intimate and highly integrated aspect of our lives and mass surveillance approaches such as this are a gross invasion of privacy and civil liberties.”

What should happen?

According to Hodgson, there are plenty of ways law enforcers could hunt down child abusers.

“These include investigation/infiltration of forums where abusers recruit or advertise, or by analysing communication metadata, or by educating users within apps, and in general, to be mindful of abuse,” he added.

“Blanket surveillance which undermines the privacy of everybody is not the answer.”

Ross Anderson, who wrote a paper on this challenging the conclusions of the NCSC technical director Ian levy, agreed that old-fashioned policing techniques are the answer, rather than technology solutions which promise much but deliver little. The debate between law enforcement/government on one side and encryption specialists/tech vendors on the other has been raging for years. Throughout, the former have argued that tech wizards simply need to apply themselves more diligently to the task in order to find an answer. The latter retort that E2EE can’t be broken without undermining security for everyone.

So where does that leave us? With Labour backing the bill, it will undoubtedly become law. But what of Clause 110? If it remains unchanged, it’s unlikely the government will enforce it. The best privacy and security advocates can hope for is that its most controversial provisions are never enforced. That’s what happened with the Investigatory Powers Act – which incidentally already gives the British government theoretical powers to force tech firms to break encryption. It will probably happen again.

Are we paying enough attention to API security?

Posted: April 5, 2023 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment
code

Is API security on the radar of most IT teams? It’s arguably still not as high on the priority list as it should be. Consider this: an Imperva/Marsh McLennan study from 2022 claimed that vulnerable and unsecured APIs cause up to 7.5% of global “cyber events and losses”, and cost businesses an estimated $75bn annually.

The experts I spoke to for an upcoming feature highlighteed complexity, visibility gaps and skills shortages as key barriers to enhanced API security. As digital transformation initiatives push on across the globe, the need to fill these gaps will only increase.

Out of control

APIs are essential to digital projects, connecting as they do applications to backend databases. But by the same token, if compromised, they could be used to provide a neat pathway to exfiltrate corporate and customer data.

“APIs that aren’t closely monitored can easily fall victim to high-volume attacks such as brute force login attempts and enumeration techniques. They are also often easily identified, are web accessible, and each of their methods documented,” Bridewell Consulting senior pen tester, Andy Tyler, told me.

“Once an attacker knows how to interact with your API they can quickly hunt for vulnerabilities; from authentication issues, to injection attacks, or access control misconfigurations. All of these can lead to sudden data theft on a large scale.”

In fact, that happened to T-Mobile USA last year. Although full details of the incident are yet to be released, the firm admitted in January that an attacker took data on 37 million customers via an API.

For Forrester analyst, Sandy Carielli, security teams and tools have been slow to catch up, even as the number of APIs has exploded.

“A lot of the traditional web app security tools didn’t support APIs, leaving holes in the protection – even as API security has evolved and more solutions are available, organisations struggle to understand what combination of tools and processes are needed,” she told me.

“The tools and processes exist to counter this threat, but many organizations struggle due to the newness of the technology and the number of APIs in their organization. It’s not uncommon for enterprises to have tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of customer and partner facing APIs – and they may not have a good grasp of what those APIs are and what they do.”

Bridewell’s Tyler agrees, but thinks things are improving.

“The tools and testing techniques needed for assessing APIs have only more recently reached maturity. Automated scanners in particular are still very poor at identifying API security issues, which can lead to false negative results for those organisations running their own checks,” he said.

“Many of us in this industry are working to demystify many of the API-specific issues for the organisations we work with and we have seen great improvements in their overall API security approaches.”

Out of the loop

As is so often the case, API risk seems to have been allowed to snowball because security isn’t brought in early enough in the software development lifecycle.

“Unfortunately, many organisations have little to no oversight over their APIs given the pace of application development and the lack of visibility security teams have into development practices,” Imperva director of technology, Peter Klimek, told me.

“For example, APIs are often released into production before security teams can review and catalogue them. Such inadequate security practices lead to both ‘shadow’ APIs – an API that isn’t cataloged and is therefore invisible to the security team – and  “zombie” APIs, which haven’t been  properly disabled and are still accessible. Both of these can be a potential breeding ground for cyber-criminal activity.”

There’s no silver bullet to the challenge of escalating, API-driven cyber risk. But shifting security left, and protecting right through layered measures including encryption, API gateways, web app firewalls and zero trust approaches would seem like a good place to start.

How to repel cyber-attacks on the COVID-19 vaccine supply chain

Posted: December 23, 2020 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

microscopic image of COVID19 cellWith COVID-19 vaccines finally being rolled out to a relieved world, the focus for cybersecurity experts has evolved from attacks on pharma companies that make the stuff to the companies that distribute it. Already, IBM has observed a major nation state phishing campaign targeting various supply chain organisations.

I recently spoke to a few experts for an upcoming Infosecurity Magazine feature to better understand the threats facing these organisations, and what they can do about the situation.

It’s a sabotage

The main threats they highlighted revolved around potential sabotage of distribution pipelines and/or misinformation campaigns designed to discourage users from getting inoculated. Both could be the result of hostile nations like Russia calculating they could gain an economic and geopolitical advantage by getting back to “business as usual” and economic stability before their rivals. There are also opportunities here for more financially minded cyber-criminals.

“It is clear that cyber-criminals will stop at nothing. Whether the motivation is financial gain, disruption, or because they’re on the payroll of a nation-state; not even a pandemic is beyond cyber exploitation,” Nominet’s government cybersecurity expert, Steve Forbes, told me. “Now as the vaccine moves to the transportation phase, there have been more attacks on the vaccine cold chain, the temperature-controlled environment needed to transport and store the vaccine, and the manufacturers of cold chain equipment.”

Unfortunately, there are many points of weakness in supply chains which could be exploited to devastating effect, according to Lux Research senior research associated, Lewie Roberts.

“Attackers are going to look for the easiest way in to a network, which is typically some kind of human error. People are statistically bound to make mistakes sometimes, especially as you increase the number of targets,” he told me. “Stuff like confidential customer information or trade secrets are the types of items that get more focus in the IT world. But as you get closer to physical industries, you’re protecting different types of things. False data on cold chains can result in tons of spoiled products. Attacks on operational tech can pose real safety threats to workers.”

Spreading confusion

Two former UK intelligence experts had some interesting things to say about the threat of misinformation.

“The overwhelming majority of activity will be criminal attacks for money. However, we have also seen nation states spreading confusion and undermining confidence, as well as stealing vaccine IP,” former GCHQ boss, Robert Hannigan told me. “Hacktivists and hostile nation states will amplify anti-vax messages for the same reasons: to sow division and polarise societies in the West.”

Former British army electronic warfare operator, Martyn Gill, who is now global managing partner at Wembley Partners, had more.

“Political hacktivists look to spread disinformation and noise through such channels as social media, as per the state-sponsored aim of increasing the lack of confidence in what the broad message may be around the vaccine. In many cases these actors are driven by their ideological and political beliefs, however, there remains a subset of actors who seek to cause disruption primarily as a means of entertainment,” he told me.

“Since the UK announced it was rolling out a COVID-19 vaccine, we have seen an increase in related phishing domains set up looking to target this new opportunity, as the general populace looks to understand what this means for them.”

Taking action

So what happens next? For Gill, information sharing is crucial.

“Strong communication and agreed intelligence sharing around trusted eco-systems will support a broad range of businesses to help them understand new threats whilst being able to share indicators of ongoing campaigns,” he explained. “Micro, small and medium businesses who don’t have big security budgets or security teams to monitor networks, implement vulnerability management and threat intelligence programs can look open source platforms like IBM X-Force, Alien Vault OTX but also trusted individuals who deliver awesome advice through social media.”

According to Lux Research’s Roberts, the right response should focus on people as much as technology.  

“Mapping data flows and endpoints, evaluating vendors, and having plans for breaches are all important and deep topics,” he argued.

“But moving away from the technology and towards the organization side, businesses need to hire experts and give them the influence and resources necessary to do the job. Safety and security aren’t often glamorous, but winning players recognise their importance before a problem arises.”

Asia tech in 2021: this way to the next normal

Posted: December 23, 2020 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , | Leave a comment

singapore at night These are perilous times to be making predictions about the future. The bolt-out-of-the-blue that was COVID-19 rendered many forecasts this time last year almost immediately worthless by March. Governments and businesses in APAC, as in the rest of the world, have spent most of 2020 first in fire-fighting mode, reacting to stem the immediate public health and economic damage from the pandemic. More recently, there’s been a concerted attempt by larger organisations to adapt, and even thrive in the new conditions. This will continue into 2021.

In many ways, APAC is one of the regions best equipped to do so. Many countries such as China, Vietnam and South Korea have seen their public policies pay dividends through declining infection rates and a recovering economy. However, there are two important caveats: Asia Pacific is a huge region with much diversity, making it difficult to draw simple conclusions. There’s also the small matter of US-China relations, which are more than likely to continue in a downward trajectory, even with Joe Biden in the White House.

US-Sino tensions set to continue

There are many officials in both governments who may hope that the Biden era will signify a new thawing of relations with China. After all, as Veep under Barack Obama, Biden pursued a far more conciliatory approach to the Middle Kingdom. However, things have changed a lot since then, with strong bipartisan opposition to China hardening in Congress and among most Americans.

In fact, Biden has already pledged to restrict imports from China deemed a national security threat, and to hit back at any countries that try to undercut US manufacturing using state subsidies, according to The Economist. This would seem to suggest his first term could pick up from where 2020 left off, although with more clarity of messaging and unity of purpose than we’ve seen in the past four years. Expect the US to engage internationally to form a coalition of nations pushing back against Chinese geopolitical bullying, state subsidised tech exports and cyber-espionage.

For those businesses stuck in the middle of the escalating trade war, including many technology firms, this could make for another challenging year ahead. Those with manufacturing plants and suppliers in China may want to continue moving operations out to nearby countries such as Vietnam and Malaysia, that can offer what they’re looking for at the right price. An additional factor is the growing disquiet over China’s treatment of Uyghurs: as Apple found out this year, suppliers may be blacklisted by the US over alleged forced labour abuses.

It’s not just the impact of the trade war, Uyghur oppression and US national security concerns that are forcing the hand of business leaders here, it’s also the lessons learned by COVID-19 and the huge impact it had on supply chains. Diversity of suppliers and geographies will be key to spreading risk in 2021 and beyond.

China goes it alone

In response, China will increasingly look to drive self-sufficiency in tech via massive state subsidies, global espionage and huge R&D spending. It’s unlikely that it will produce a domestic operating system to rival Windows, Android or iOS in 2021, but don’t rule it out happening in the next few years. Other areas China will be looking to reduce its reliance on the US include chip-making, where Huawei’s HiSilicon has already broken into the global top 10, and artificial intelligence. In fact, China is so fixed on becoming the world leader in AI that it recently labelled it a matter of “national economic security”. The missive was intended to signal in no uncertain terms that ByteDance would not be able to sell its prized “recommends” algorithm to a US firm.

As China’s global tech swagger grows it’s also likely to be more brazen in efforts to punish US firms operating in the country, and to institute strict controls over private business. Xi Jinping has already signalled his intent to tighten the Communist Party’s grip over domestic enterprises, which could make it harder for firms like ByteDance and Huawei to claim autonomy from government and geopolitical matters in the face of US hostility. The last minute suspension of fintech giant Ant Group’s $37 billion IPO is a clear signal that no company can be above the Party.

Digital growth will help APAC bounce back

Away from China, the big story in APAC as a whole next year will be increased spending on digital transformation to drive post-pandemic growth. As we revealed earlier in the year, IDC estimates that APAC spending in public cloud will reach $34.5bn in 2020 — up from $26bn in 2019. Forrester reckons it will grow another 35% in 2021 as businesses double down on the computing model that helped to save operations during the darker days of the pandemic. This will be good news for US tech giants AWS and Microsoft Azure, although the analysts predicted Alibaba will take the number three spot revenue-wise globally thanks to its anticipated gains in 2021, pushing Google Cloud out.

However, Google will be making some notable gains in specific geographies like Indonesia, where it beat its US and Chinese rivals by launching a cloud datacentre last year. Expect these investments in various APAC countries to support a new wave of digital disruption as businesses look to meet customer and employee demand for seamless app-driven experiences. 

In migrating to these new environments, the region’s businesses must ensure that cybersecurity and data protection are designed into new technologies from the outset. In fact, cybersecurity was highlighted by over half of respondents to 2020 IDG Connect poll as the biggest IT challenge of the pandemic. Local organisations must tackle not only cybercrime attacks but also the increasingly aggressive behaviour of state-backed operatives in China and elsewhere. A recent report revealed yet another Beijing-backed APT has been targeting multiple southeast Asian governments over the past two years.

Ultimately, APAC will thrive in 2021. The World Bank predicts that growth will soar from -0.5% in 2020 to hit 6.9% as economic activity normalises once again. The trends for digital transformation present before the pandemic will gain extra urgency, and budget, over the year ahead, expanding corporate attack surfaces but also driving profits—especially those of Western tech firms. However, deteriorating China-US relations could result in a few surprises along the way: perhaps not the fireworks of previous years, but enough to make boardrooms continue to rethink their options in APAC.

This was my latest for IDG Connect, published here earlier this month.

Covid-19: the delicate balance between security and productivity

Posted: May 6, 2020 | Author: | Filed under: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

cyber attackAs many countries enter their second full month of Covid-19 lockdown, its impact on the threat landscape and enterprise cybersecurity is starting to become clear. I spoke to several experts a few weeks back for an Infosecurity Magazine news feature on the topic.

Some of the key challenges facing organisations are in enabling secure remote working en masse without impacting productivity.

“The fact that employees are transitioning to working from home is the key risk. All these employees are now working in new environments using technology and processes they are not used to, something bad guys will take advantage of,” SANS Institute director of security awareness, Lance Spitzner told me.

“All of this change creates an environment where it is very simple for bad guys to take advantage of and trick people working from home for the first time. They don’t have all the security technology protecting them at home that they normally would at work.”

The SANS guide to secure home working advises users to: be suspicious of any emails trying to create a sense of urgency to click through or enter info; take steps to protect home Wi-Fi (change default passwords and restrict access); create strong passwords on any websites; ensure all devices are running the latest software; and don’t let family and friends use work devices.

Proofpoint’s senior director of threat research and detection, Sherrod DeGrippo, agreed that users are at the frontline when it comes to tackling Covid-19 cyber-threats.

“We recommend that organisations prioritise a people-centric approach to security that protects all parties (their employees, customers, and business partners) against these threats, including layered defences at the network edge, email gateway, in the cloud, and at the endpoint, along with strong user education,” he told me.

“Users should be encouraged to approach all unsolicited emails with caution, especially ones that request the user to act, like downloading/opening an attachment, clicking a link, or entering credentials.”

Restricting users according to least privilege policies is also a must-follow best practice, as hackers go after VPN log-ins to directly access data and applications, DeGrippo added. In fact, there have been widespread reports of cyber-criminals targeting remote access infrastructure; not only via phishing emails and brute forcing but also exploiting unpatched vulnerabilities. Microsoft has warned of APT-like behaviour from many well-known ransomware groups, which are targeting hospitals.

Time to automate?

However, aside from the uptick in Covid-themed phishing, which is delivering crypto-jacking malware, ransomware, info-stealers and more, the pandemic has forced IT security teams to work in different ways. Michael Armistead, co-founder and CEO of Respond Software, argued that SOCs and security departments are faced with both minor and meta challenges.

“Making sure practitioners can perform their jobs remotely with adequate bandwidth and communication platforms, and have the ability to act on security incidents will be a challenging undertaking for many firms,” he told me.

“I believe many of those tools and platforms are in place … but you just never know how well they will work in practice if an organisation is now distributed for the first time. Still, I’d count these very real and very practical issues as minor because they can be solved in relatively short order.”

In fact, research emerging suggests that security teams are struggling. A global poll by industry body ISACA found that only around half (59%) of members feel their cybersecurity team has the right tools and resources at home to perform their job effectively. Tellingly, just 51% are highly confident that these teams are ready and able to detect and respond to rising volumes of threats. A separate study from (ISC)² revealed that nearly half (47%) of global security professionals have been taken off some or all of their typical tasks to support other IT-related jobs, like WFH. A third report, from Barracuda Networks, ominously suggested that 41% of firms have actually cut IT security budgets to save money during the crisis.

In fact, investments in specific technologies could be a smarter way of reducing costs and improving security outcomes during the crisis, according to Armistead.

“The situation screams out for automation to relieve the pressure on people to sift through mountains of data and to act quickly,” he said. “SOCs and IT security teams need to look at their processes and procedures in light of the distributed workforce. Do they make sense and how quickly can issues be resolved?”

The immediate future remains uncertain, but if remote working is to become more widespread as the pandemic recedes, IT and security leaders better adapt to the new reality fast.

← Older Entries