The bad guys use search engines to seek out weak spots. Here's how to beat them to the punch.
10 Companies Driving Mobile Security
(click image for larger view and for slideshow)
[The following is excerpted from "Using Google To Find Vulnerabilities In Your IT Environment," a new report posted this week on Dark Reading's Vulnerability Management Tech Center.]
The vast volumes of information available on the Internet are of great value to businesses--and to hackers. For years, hackers have been using Google and other search engines to identify vulnerable systems and sensitive data on publicly exposed networks. The practice, known as Google hacking, has seen a resurgence of late, providing new challenges for IT professionals striving to protect their companies from threats growing in number and sophistication.
Google hacking--a term used for penetration testing using any search engine--surged in popularity around 2004, when computer security expert Johnny Long first released his book Google Hacking for Penetration Testers and the Google Hacking Database (GHDB). The database was designed to serve as a repository for search terms, called Google-Dorks, that exposed sensitive information, vulnerabilities,
passwords, and much more.
There recently has been an upswing in Google hacking, with a few factors playing a role in the practice's growth. For one thing, the amount of data indexed and searchable by Google and other search engines has skyrocketed in the last few years. Simply put, this has given hackers much more to work with.
InformationWeek is conducting a survey to determine the types of measures and policies IT is taking to ensure the security of the full range of mobile assets on cellular, Wi-Fi, and other wireless technologies. Upon completion of our survey, you will be eligible to enter a drawing to receive an 32-GB Apple iPod Touch. Take our Mobile Security Survey now. Survey ends March 16.
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...
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...
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...
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/.