Risk

6/22/2005
04:49 PM
Patricia Keefe
Patricia Keefe
Commentary
50%
50%

Data Security: IT's Oxymoron

In case you haven't noticed, the last decade in banking has been all about mergers (each one bigger than the last), big-buck CEOs, increasing fees, and decreasing access to human beings. Sure, some consumer accounts got lost or crunched in the slamming together of newlywed bank systems, but who cared? Not the regulators and not the banks.

In case you haven't noticed, the last decade in banking has been all about mergers (each one bigger than the last), big-buck CEOs, increasing fees, and decreasing access to human beings. Sure, some consumer accounts got lost or crunched in the slamming together of newlywed bank systems, but who cared? Not the regulators and not the banks.What the finance industry seems to care about, besides the obvious--ever-more money and expansion--are two things: rules and computerization. If ever there was a stickler for fine print and dates, it's the money men. They cut consumers no slack and have done their best to obliterate community branches and any hint of a free service. When they aren't inundating us with credit-card offers and come-ons for new financial services, they have been relentlessly driving the masses toward electronic banking. ATM cards, debit cards, online banking--all are designed to rid the system of paper checks and human tellers, while simultaneously collecting masses of data more easily than ever before. Data that's sold, loaned, processed, and cross-tabulated again and again to rank our credit worthiness in order to adjust our credit-card rates and fill up our mailboxes with offers we don't want.

In return, consumers have gained convenience and ease of access to their funds, of course, but apparently, so have the ever-sophisticated thieves.

It seems in the rush to build banking monopolies and cut costs, the banks have been so focused on the front end, they've left the back end to their systems wide open. So wide open that the Anti-Phishing Working Group's Activity Trends Report for April shows financial services to be the biggest phishing target (84%) by far.

Little wonder we read today of banks scrambling to contain the damage from the recent spate of hacks and data losses. They spent bazillions on automation and the creation of new services, but not enough on safeguarding their clients. And among those banks that knew enough to batten down their own hatches, many have failed to look beyond the end of their noses at their third-party partners, some of whom are in flagrant violation of their banking partners' security rules. Who knew? Not the banks, but they should have known. They just aren't watching very closely, according to Gartner analyst Avivah Litan.

This quote from Ted Crooks, VP of global fraud solutions at Fair Isaac Corp., which provides customer-data-analytics services, sums it up: "Unfortunately, too many companies factor in the need for absolute evidence and the lowest possible cost for protection. This event [the CardSystems Solutions breach] was scary, but I wasn't bowled over with surprise, and it could have been avoided."

The financial-services sector can't have it both ways: It can't tell the public it's going to share our data with pretty much whomever it pleases (have you ever tried to decipher one of those privacy statements?) and then not protect that data.

And now that the jig is up, who better to feel the weight of rules and regulations, and the punitive sting of financial penalties? Now that's talking a language we know they'll understand.

Data thieves may be mightily attracted to the financial sector, but their reach is by no means limited to that industry. And sometimes it's unthinking IT design mistakes that leave consumers vulnerable. Do you think you have the right strategies, tools, and policies in place to defend your network and data? Check out our Global Information Security Survey. Your completed survey also enters you in our $4,000 prize drawing for a laptop or iPods!

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
Want Your Daughter to Succeed in Cyber? Call Her John
John De Santis, CEO, HyTrust,  5/16/2018
Don't Roll the Dice When Prioritizing Vulnerability Fixes
Ericka Chickowski, Contributing Writer, Dark Reading,  5/15/2018
New Mexico Man Sentenced on DDoS, Gun Charges
Dark Reading Staff 5/18/2018
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: "Security through obscurity"
Current Issue
Flash Poll
[Strategic Security Report] Navigating the Threat Intelligence Maze
[Strategic Security Report] Navigating the Threat Intelligence Maze
Most enterprises are using threat intel services, but many are still figuring out how to use the data they're collecting. In this Dark Reading survey we give you a look at what they're doing today - and where they hope to go.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2018-7268
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-21
MagniComp SysInfo before 10-H81, as shipped with BMC BladeLogic Automation and other products, contains an information exposure vulnerability in which a local unprivileged user is able to read any root (uid 0) owned file on the system, regardless of the file permissions. Confidential information suc...
CVE-2018-11092
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-21
An issue was discovered in the Admin Notes plugin 1.1 for MyBB. CSRF allows an attacker to remotely delete all admin notes via an admin/index.php?empty=table (aka Clear Table) action.
CVE-2018-11096
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-21
Horse Market Sell & Rent Portal Script 1.5.7 has a CSRF vulnerability through which an attacker can change all of the target's account information remotely.
CVE-2018-11320
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-21
In Octopus Deploy 2018.4.4 through 2018.5.1, Octopus variables that are sourced from the target do not have sensitive values obfuscated in the deployment logs.
CVE-2018-8142
PUBLISHED: 2018-05-21
A security feature bypass exists when Windows incorrectly validates kernel driver signatures, aka "Windows Security Feature Bypass Vulnerability." This affects Windows Server 2016, Windows 10, Windows 10 Servers. This CVE ID is unique from CVE-2018-1035.