Welcome Guest. | Log In | Register | Membership Benefits

CSI Annual Report: Financial Fraud, Malware On The Increase

Security pros generally happy with products; not so much with awareness programs

Nov 24, 2009 | 04:54 PM | 

By Tim Wilson

Malware and financial fraud were among the chief "growth threats" posed to businesses in 2009, according to a new study from the Computer Security Institute that will be published next week.

CSI's 14th annual security survey, which will be distributed in conjunction with a free Dec. 1 Webcast, covers a wide range of issues related to security management, including current threats, data loss statistics, and trends in technology usage.

Respondents reported big jumps in the incidence of financial fraud (19.5 percent, over 12 percent last year); malware infection (64.3 percent, over 50 percent last year); denials of service (29.2 percent, over 21 percent last year), password sniffing (17.3 percent, over 9 percent last year); and Web site defacement (13.5 percent, over 6 percent last year).

The survey showed significant dips in wireless exploits (7.6 percent, down from 14 percent in 2008), and instant messaging abuse (7.6 percent, down from 21 percent).

"The financial fraud was a major concern because the cost of those incidents is so high," says Sara Peters, senior editor at CSI and author of this year's report. Financial fraud costs enterprises approximately $450,000 per incident, according to the study.

While financial fraud costs rose in 2009, average losses due to security incidents of all types are down this year -- from $289,000 per respondent to $234,244 per respondent, CSI says. Those numbers are still higher than 2005 and 2006 figures.

Twenty-five percent of respondents stated the majority of their financial losses in the past year were due to nonmalicious actions by insiders.

For the first time, CSI asked security professionals not only about the technologies they are using, but also about their satisfaction with those technologies. Interestingly, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being the lowest satisfaction level, none of the security product categories received anything lower than a 3.0.

"What that says to us is that people are generally satisfied, if not overjoyed, with the performance of the products they're using," Peters says. "They're not blaming their problems on technology."

When asked which security technologies ranked highest on their wish lists, many respondents named tools that would improve their visibility -- better log management, security information and event management, security data visualization, security dashboards, and the like, CSI says.

Respondents also were generally satisfied with the amount of money their organizations have invested in their security programs, with one exception: security awareness training.

"In the past, when we saw low spending on security awareness programs, we assumed that it was because those programs simply don't cost that much to put together," Peters says. "But now we see that some security departments aren't getting the funding they need to put together the strength and quality of awareness programs that they would like."

To get a free copy of the report and register for the Webcast, click here.

Have a comment on this story? Please click "Discuss" below. If you'd like to contact Dark Reading's editors directly, send us a message.



Currently we allow the following HTML tags in comments:

Single tags

These tags can be used alone and don't need an ending tag.

<br> Defines a single line break

<hr> Defines a horizontal line

Matching tags

These require an ending tag - e.g. <i>italic text</i>

<a> Defines an anchor

<b> Defines bold text

<big> Defines big text

<blockquote> Defines a long quotation

<caption> Defines a table caption

<cite> Defines a citation

<code> Defines computer code text

<em> Defines emphasized text

<fieldset> Defines a border around elements in a form

<h1> This is heading 1

<h2> This is heading 2

<h3> This is heading 3

<h4> This is heading 4

<h5> This is heading 5

<h6> This is heading 6

<i> Defines italic text

<p> Defines a paragraph

<pre> Defines preformatted text

<q> Defines a short quotation

<samp> Defines sample computer code text

<small> Defines small text

<span> Defines a section in a document

<s> Defines strikethrough text

<strike> Defines strikethrough text

<strong> Defines strong text

<sub> Defines subscripted text

<sup> Defines superscripted text

<u> Defines underlined text

Dark Reading encourages readers to engage in spirited, healthy debate, including taking us to task. However, Dark Reading moderates all comments posted to our site, and reserves the right to modify or remove any content that it determines to be derogatory, offensive, inflammatory, vulgar, irrelevant/off-topic, racist or obvious marketing/SPAM. Dark Reading further reserves the right to disable the profile of any commenter participating in said activities.

Disqus Tips To upload an avatar photo, first complete your Disqus profile. | View the list of supported HTML tags you can use to style comments. | Please read our commenting policy.
Subscribe to RSS












Featured Webcasts
Featured Whitepapers
Featured Reports
Bugs
ENTERPRISE VULNERABILITIES
Vulnerability:ssl-vpn end-point interrogator/installer activex control
Published:2010-11-03
Severity:High
Description:Stack-based buffer overflow in SonicWALL SSL-VPN End-Point Interrogator/Installer ActiveX control (Aventail.EPInstaller) before 10.5.2 and 10.0.5 hotfix 3 allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary code via long (1) CabURL and (2) Location arguments to the Install3rdPartyComponent method.
Vulnerability:gvim
Published:2010-11-03
Severity:High
Description:Untrusted search path vulnerability in VIM Development Group GVim before 7.3.034, and possibly other versions before 7.3.46, allows local users, and possibly remote attackers, to execute arbitrary code and conduct DLL hijacking attacks via a Trojan horse User32.dll or other DLL that is located in the same folder as a .TXT file. NOTE: some of these details are obtained from third party information.
Vulnerability:cforms
Published:2010-11-03
Severity:Medium
Description:Multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vulnerabilities in wp-content/plugins/cforms/lib_ajax.php in cforms WordPress plugin 11.5 allow remote attackers to inject arbitrary web script or HTML via the (1) rs and (2) rsargs[] parameters.
Vulnerability:links, wsn links, wsn links
Published:2010-11-03
Severity:High
Description:Multiple SQL injection vulnerabilities in search.php in WSN Links 5.0.x before 5.0.81, 5.1.x before 5.1.51, and 6.0.x before 6.0.1 allow remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the (1) namecondition or (2) namesearch parameter.
Vulnerability:deluxebb
Published:2010-11-03
Severity:Medium
Description:SQL injection vulnerability in misc.php in DeluxeBB 1.3, and possibly earlier, when magic_quotes_gpc is disabled, allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary SQL commands via the xthedateformat parameter in a register action, a different vector than CVE-2005-2989, CVE-2006-2503, and CVE-2009-1033.



Briefing Centers
POWERFUL INFORMATION
AT YOUR FINGERTIPS
(SPONSORED LINKS)