Attacks/Breaches
10/23/2008
04:45 PM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Data Breach? Who Ya Gonna Call?

Our latest CSI survey shows few organizations bring in law enforcement after an attack. That's bad policy.

Whether a data breach is accidental or the result of a targeted malicious attack, the results can be devastating to a company's financial stability and reputation. To compound the problem, many CIOs fear that reporting the incident will only make matters worse. In the 2008 CSI Computer Crime & Security Survey, only about one in four respondents said that they contacted a law enforcement agency in the wake of a breach. Most said they worry about negative publicity and that the authorities can do little to help deal with cybercrime.

It's reasonable to fear negative press. Sales may be adversely affected, and the public's confidence can be shaken. Furthermore, many states have enacted data breach notification laws that can cause a company's legal fees to mount. On the other hand, a decision not to come forward could work against you in court later, and law enforcement has sophisticated forensic and legal tools not available to private industry. However, reporting isn't as simple as it sounds. The President's Identity Theft Task Force has recommended the creation of national standards for data protection and data breach notification requirements that would pre-empt the multitude of existing state laws. The Task Force also recommended the establishment of a national identity theft law enforcement center to harmonize identity theft and data breach reporting. But as of this writing, neither of these recommendations has been acted on. Unfortunately, this makes reporting to law enforcement confusing, as there's no clear-cut hierarchy. In our report, we describe a methodology for reporting to law enforcement agencies that deal with cybercrime.

Return to the main story:
Forensic Teams Take On Hackers

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Flash Poll
Current Issue
Cartoon
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-7392
Published: 2014-07-22
Gitlist allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via shell metacharacters in a file name to Source/.

CVE-2014-2385
Published: 2014-07-22
Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in the web UI in Sophos Anti-Virus for Linux before 9.6.1 allow local users to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) newListList:ExcludeFileOnExpression, (2) newListList:ExcludeFilesystems, or (3) newListList:ExcludeMountPaths parameter t...

CVE-2014-3518
Published: 2014-07-22
jmx-remoting.sar in JBoss Remoting, as used in Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (JEAP) 5.2.0, Red Hat JBoss BRMS 5.3.1, Red Hat JBoss Portal Platform 5.2.2, and Red Hat JBoss SOA Platform 5.3.1, does not properly implement the JSR 160 specification, which allows remote attackers to exec...

CVE-2014-3530
Published: 2014-07-22
The org.picketlink.common.util.DocumentUtil.getDocumentBuilderFactory method in PicketLink, as used in Red Hat JBoss Enterprise Application Platform (JBEAP) 5.2.0 and 6.2.4, expands entity references, which allows remote attackers to read arbitrary code and possibly have other unspecified impact via...

CVE-2014-4326
Published: 2014-07-22
Elasticsearch Logstash 1.0.14 through 1.4.x before 1.4.2 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary commands via a crafted event in (1) zabbix.rb or (2) nagios_nsca.rb in outputs/.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Where do information security startups come from? More important, how can I tell a good one from a flash in the pan? Learn how to separate ITSec wheat from chaff in this episode.