Attacks/Breaches

4/11/2018
04:58 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
0%
100%

Attacker Dwell Time Still Too Long, Research Shows

New DBIR and M-Trends reports show the window between compromise and discovery are still way too long.

In the past seven years, cybersecurity teams have cut down the time it takes to discover a security intrusion by fourfold. Unfortunately, that improvement in the window between initial attack and discovery of the incident isn't nearly enough to actually make a difference in blocking the typical intrusion from turning into a full-fledged data breach.

In fact, data from several new industry reports out in the last week show that most organizations would need to make that time to discover at least 100 times faster to actually prevent most successful breaches of data.

First among the latest spate of statistics are the numbers from FireEye/Mandiant's 2018 M-Trends report. According to the study, the most recently measured dwell time - that is, the time between initial attack and discovery of the incident - equals an average of about 101 days for organizations worldwide.

That's up by two days since last year, but the good news is that this number is down significantly from 416 days back in 2011. Another positive sign the report relates is that the percentage of incidents discovered internally versus those disclosed by a third party is way up. Approximately 62% of incidents are now discovered internally, which shows organizations are doing work to raise the bar on their detection capabilities, FireEye says.

Nevertheless, these are just silver linings on thunderclouds. Yesterday's Verizon Data Breach Investigation Report (DBIR) showed that once they've compromised their target, the time it takes attackers to breach data is orders of magnitude shorter than the time it takes for victims (or third parties) to discover an attack.

"When breaches are successful, the time to compromise continues to be very short. While we cannot determine how much time is spent in intelligence gathering or other adversary preparations, the time from first action in an event chain to initial compromise of an asset is most often measured in seconds or minutes," write the authors of this year's DBIR.

That's scary, considering discovery time is measured by weeks and months - sometimes even years. The DBIR numbers show that 87% of compromises took minutes or less. Only 3% of compromises were discovered as quickly. Meanwhile, 68% of them took months or years to be discovered. 

Many IT leaders are at least aware of this huge delta between compromise and discovery time. Another study out yesterday from LogRhythm showed a significant lack of confidence among IT decision makers in the ability of their systems and processes to discover all potential breaches -about four in 10 report they lack confidence in the thoroughness of their detection capabilities.

And, here's the thing: time to discovery is just the start of the journey in responding to a compromise. There's also the time it takes to respond to, contain, and investigate a threat. According to the LogRhythm study, fewer than one-third of organizations say that even if they detected a major incident they'd be unable to contain it within an hour. And that time to contain compromises is going up. A different study conducted by Ponemon Institute on behalf of IBM Resilient Systems earlier this year shows that 57% of organizations are experiencing longer times to resolve security incidents.

Related content:

 

Interop ITX 2018

Join Dark Reading LIVE for two cybersecurity summits at Interop ITX. Learn from the industry’s most knowledgeable IT security experts. Check out the security track here. Register with Promo Code DR200 and save $200.

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Understanding Evil Twin AP Attacks and How to Prevent Them
Ryan Orsi, Director of Product Management for Wi-Fi at WatchGuard Technologies,  11/14/2018
Veterans Find New Roles in Enterprise Cybersecurity
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  11/12/2018
To Click or Not to Click: The Answer Is Easy
Kowsik Guruswamy, Chief Technology Officer at Menlo Security,  11/14/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Online Malware and Threats: A Profile of Today's Security Posture
Online Malware and Threats: A Profile of Today's Security Posture
This report offers insight on how security professionals plan to invest in cybersecurity, and how they are prioritizing their resources. Find out what your peers have planned today!
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-19301
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-15
tp4a TELEPORT 3.1.0 allows XSS via the login page because a crafted username is mishandled when an administrator later views the system log.
CVE-2018-5407
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-15
Simultaneous Multi-threading (SMT) in processors can enable local users to exploit software vulnerable to timing attacks via a side-channel timing attack on 'port contention'.
CVE-2018-14934
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-15
The Bluetooth subsystem on Polycom Trio devices with software before 5.5.4 has Incorrect Access Control. An attacker can connect without authentication and subsequently record audio from the device microphone.
CVE-2018-14935
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-15
The Web administration console on Polycom Trio devices with software before 5.5.4 has XSS.
CVE-2018-16619
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-15
Sonatype Nexus Repository Manager before 3.14 allows XSS.