Attacks/Breaches

Target Breach Widens: 70 Million Warned

Target discovers that personal information -- including names and contact information -- for 70 million customers was compromised in recent data breach.
2 of 2

2 of 2
Comment  | 
Print  | 
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Ariella
50%
50%
Ariella,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/13/2014 | 9:15:02 AM
Re: Would smart cards have prevented the Target breach?
@Marilyn IBM predicts that in 5 years it will have the problem licked with what it calls a digital guardian. It explains it like this:

Protecting your patterns

Hopefully, it won't come to the point of a breach in the first place. IBM and its partners are layering in "always aware" intelligence. You can't be in two places at once. So, if the smartphone you accidentally left at a restaurant is being fondled by fraudulent fingers, the pervasive system will recognize the offender's different touch pattern (even if your phone is unlocked) and lock your account.

In another example, imagine two purchases: $40 at a gas station, and $4,000 at Tiffany & Co. Today's fraud monitoring might see the diamond purchase as highly suspicious, and ignore the charge at the pump. But your digital guardian will know that your car has a near-full tank of fuel; that you don't usually re-fuel until you're down to about one quarter tank; not to mention that you're at the office when this charge appears. It will also know that you've been shopping for an engagement ring and have been spending your lunch hour window shopping outside the store.

This and other emerging learning systems will know you, help you, and protect you as we continue to generate more and more data, and put more and more of our lives online.

Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
1/13/2014 | 7:59:03 AM
Would smart cards have prevented the Target breach?
Although Target is offering a year of free credit monitoring and identity theft protection in the wake of the breach, The Wall Street Journal reported this morning that the  incident  (along with another consumer credit card theft at Neiman Marcus)  the Senate banking committee will be holding hearings in the coming weeks about the larger issue of who should bear responsibility for the costs of a cybersecurity breach. The Journal wrote: 

Banks and credit unions have been pushing for years for legislation that would explicitly require the company responsible for a breach to cover its costs, but they have run into resistance from the retail industry, which argues that card issuers should improve their technology so cards can't be compromised.

Shout out to readers -- If credit card technology was more secure  (e.g. smart cards), would identify theft decrease? Lets chat about it in the comments.

mak63
50%
50%
mak63,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/11/2014 | 4:31:52 PM
Re: 100% Proof of who and what caused the Target breach
@IT-security-gladiator

Double post.
Anyway, I believe you're deluded if you think that a particular OS has anything to do with the breach. No server is immune to hacking

 

 
danielcawrey
50%
50%
danielcawrey,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/11/2014 | 11:46:50 AM
Re: 100% Proof of who and what caused the Target breach
This sounds very much like a cautionary tale for other retailers to pay attention to.

I just read that Nieman Marcus is now dealing an issue with their systems. A breach, it sounds like. Not good. 
IT-security-gladiator
100%
0%
IT-security-gladiator,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/10/2014 | 12:30:13 PM
100% Proof of who and what caused the Target breach
Yup Microsoft servers again: http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies/Case_Study_Detail.aspx?CaseStudyID=4000009407
IT-security-gladiator
100%
0%
IT-security-gladiator,
User Rank: Apprentice
1/10/2014 | 12:30:03 PM
100% Proof of who and what caused the Target breach
Yup Microsoft servers again: http://www.microsoft.com/casestudies/Case_Study_Detail.aspx?CaseStudyID=4000009407
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading December Tech Digest
Experts weigh in on the pros and cons of end-user security training.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-1421
Published: 2014-11-25
mountall 1.54, as used in Ubuntu 14.10, does not properly handle the umask when using the mount utility, which allows local users to bypass intended access restrictions via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2014-3605
Published: 2014-11-25
** REJECT ** DO NOT USE THIS CANDIDATE NUMBER. ConsultIDs: CVE-2014-6407. Reason: This candidate is a reservation duplicate of CVE-2014-6407. Notes: All CVE users should reference CVE-2014-6407 instead of this candidate. All references and descriptions in this candidate have been removed to pre...

CVE-2014-7839
Published: 2014-11-25
DocumentProvider in RESTEasy 2.3.7 and 3.0.9 does not configure the (1) external-general-entities or (2) external-parameter-entities features, which allows remote attackers to conduct XML external entity (XXE) attacks via unspecified vectors.

CVE-2014-8001
Published: 2014-11-25
Buffer overflow in decode.cpp in Cisco OpenH264 1.2.0 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an encoded media file.

CVE-2014-8002
Published: 2014-11-25
Use-after-free vulnerability in decode_slice.cpp in Cisco OpenH264 1.2.0 and earlier allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via an encoded media file.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Now that the holiday season is about to begin both online and in stores, will this be yet another season of nonstop gifting to cybercriminals?