Editorial Poll
8/21/2014
00:00 AM
Dark Reading
Dark Reading
Flash Poll
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Security of 'Things'



Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
8/26/2014 | 7:24:30 AM
Re: We have a new poll on your least(?) favorite "Things"
Umm.... Kind of a trick question. With all the stories from Black Hat & elsewhere about the  IoT we wanted to get a conversation going on Dark Reading. So thanks for your help getting it started @ccoldren. #trueconfession
ccoldren
50%
50%
ccoldren,
User Rank: Apprentice
8/24/2014 | 12:50:59 PM
Re: We have a new poll on your least(?) favorite "Things"
"The greatest potential security risk"...

Risk of breach?
Risk of actual theft?
Risk of substantial loss?

Or was this a trick question...?
Marilyn Cohodas
50%
50%
Marilyn Cohodas,
User Rank: Strategist
8/21/2014 | 10:10:51 AM
We have a new poll on your least(?) favorite "Things"
Which "Thing" of the Internet of Things represents the greatest potential security risk? Take the poll and let us know why in the comments. 
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading Must Reads - September 25, 2014
Dark Reading's new Must Reads is a compendium of our best recent coverage of identity and access management. Learn about access control in the age of HTML5, how to improve authentication, why Active Directory is dead, and more.
Flash Poll
10 Recommendations for Outsourcing Security
10 Recommendations for Outsourcing Security
Enterprises today have a wide range of third-party options to help improve their defenses, including MSSPs, auditing and penetration testing, and DDoS protection. But are there situations in which a service provider might actually increase risk?
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2012-5485
Published: 2014-09-30
registerConfiglet.py in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote attackers to execute Python code via unspecified vectors, related to the admin interface.

CVE-2012-5486
Published: 2014-09-30
ZPublisher.HTTPRequest._scrubHeader in Zope 2 before 2.13.19, as used in Plone before 4.3 beta 1, allows remote attackers to inject arbitrary HTTP headers via a linefeed (LF) character.

CVE-2012-5487
Published: 2014-09-30
The sandbox whitelisting function (allowmodule.py) in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote authenticated users with certain privileges to bypass the Python sandbox restriction and execute arbitrary Python code via vectors related to importing.

CVE-2012-5488
Published: 2014-09-30
python_scripts.py in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1 allows remote attackers to execute Python code via a crafted URL, related to createObject.

CVE-2012-5489
Published: 2014-09-30
The App.Undo.UndoSupport.get_request_var_or_attr function in Zope before 2.12.21 and 3.13.x before 2.13.11, as used in Plone before 4.2.3 and 4.3 before beta 1, allows remote authenticated users to gain access to restricted attributes via unspecified vectors.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
In our next Dark Reading Radio broadcast, we’ll take a close look at some of the latest research and practices in application security.