Mobile
1/13/2016
05:00 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

The State Of Mobile Insecurity

It's deja vu all over again as mobile app development looks like traditional dev shops did a half a decade ago.

The speedy churn of the mobile application development lifecycle and a lack of testing embedded within this lifecycle is threatening the security of the entire mobile ecosystem. A new Ponemon Institute study out today shows that three-quarters of app developers and security professionals say that securing mobile apps is hard and a lot of the blame is due to a lack of mobile app security expertise, infrequent testing, and the all-important rush to release code to production.

“Building security into mobile apps is not top of mind for companies, giving hackers the opportunity to easily reverse engineer apps, jailbreak mobile devices and tap into confidential data,” said Caleb Barlow, Vice President of Mobile Management and Security at IBM, which sponsored the study.

The study queried over 600 experts involved in the development and securing of mobile applications. Based on their experience, many respondents reported that they expect the next 12 months to be rocky for their organization's mobile applications and devices. Approximately 61 percent of them say they believe the presence of malware-infected mobile devices and apps will increase within their environments in the next year.

Getting a little more specific, over half reported that cross-site scripting (XSS) through insecure mobile apps will increase in the next year. Given that XSS vulnerabilities are a pretty basic flaw -- the sort of security 101 problem that many organizations have rooted out in new code for most traditional applications -- this stat offers a pretty good indication of the overall perceived inadequacies of appsec in mobile apps.

The study found that on average, organizations are spending about 5.5 percent of their mobile development budgets on security. The average enterprise mobile development budget is approximately $33.8 million, while the average mobile app security program receives $1.8 million in funding. As things stand, fewer than half of mobile apps developed in the enterprise are tested for flaws. Of those that are tested, 30 percent are found to contain flaws.

"Rush to release and lack of training makes mobile apps insecure," Ponemon writes. "The practices and policies of organizations are to blame for mobile apps that contain vulnerable code."

More than three quarters of organizations say scheduling pressures on the mobile dev team is the biggest impediment to adding more security to the mix, while nearly the same amount report training on secure coding practices lag. Meanwhile, 68 percent of organizations report a lack of QA and test procedures are holding things up on the security front.

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
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Current Issue
Security Operations and IT Operations: Finding the Path to Collaboration
A wide gulf has emerged between SOC and NOC teams that's keeping both of them from assuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of IT systems. Here's how experts think it should be bridged.
Flash Poll
New Best Practices for Secure App Development
New Best Practices for Secure App Development
The transition from DevOps to SecDevOps is combining with the move toward cloud computing to create new challenges - and new opportunities - for the information security team. Download this report, to learn about the new best practices for secure application development.
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2017-0290
Published: 2017-05-09
NScript in mpengine in Microsoft Malware Protection Engine with Engine Version before 1.1.13704.0, as used in Windows Defender and other products, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code or cause a denial of service (type confusion and application crash) via crafted JavaScript code within ...

CVE-2016-10369
Published: 2017-05-08
unixsocket.c in lxterminal through 0.3.0 insecurely uses /tmp for a socket file, allowing a local user to cause a denial of service (preventing terminal launch), or possibly have other impact (bypassing terminal access control).

CVE-2016-8202
Published: 2017-05-08
A privilege escalation vulnerability in Brocade Fibre Channel SAN products running Brocade Fabric OS (FOS) releases earlier than v7.4.1d and v8.0.1b could allow an authenticated attacker to elevate the privileges of user accounts accessing the system via command line interface. With affected version...

CVE-2016-8209
Published: 2017-05-08
Improper checks for unusual or exceptional conditions in Brocade NetIron 05.8.00 and later releases up to and including 06.1.00, when the Management Module is continuously scanned on port 22, may allow attackers to cause a denial of service (crash and reload) of the management module.

CVE-2017-0890
Published: 2017-05-08
Nextcloud Server before 11.0.3 is vulnerable to an inadequate escaping leading to a XSS vulnerability in the search module. To be exploitable a user has to write or paste malicious content into the search dialogue.

Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
In past years, security researchers have discovered ways to hack cars, medical devices, automated teller machines, and many other targets. Dark Reading Executive Editor Kelly Jackson Higgins hosts researcher Samy Kamkar and Levi Gundert, vice president of threat intelligence at Recorded Future, to discuss some of 2016's most unusual and creative hacks by white hats, and what these new vulnerabilities might mean for the coming year.