Vulnerabilities / Threats
3/11/2010
07:02 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

GDC: Developers Vs. Cybercriminals

At the Game Developers Conference, accounts of run ins with hackers show many gaming firms haven't grasped how cybercrime can ruin everything.

Among the possible defenses, Wyatt suggests device fingerprinting, proxy detection, phishing site detection and takedown, transaction reviews, telephone verification, shipping address verification, two-channel authentication, and use of game analytics to watch for unusual behavior.

He stressed using two-channel authentication -- using a PC and mobile phone for example -- rather than two-factor authentication -- a hardware device for a code entered through a PC -- because gaming trojans on PCs can intercept two-factor authentication codes. Using two channels means that even if the PC is compromised, a hacker would still have to have malware on the user's phone to intercept the mobile communication.

Wyatt also advised having source code on a separate network, having strong authentication for developers and operations personnel, and investing in physical site security.

Wyatt is not a big fan of DRM solutions, like nProtect GameGuard and Blizzard's Warden, which he said are essentially rootkits. "Nobody likes being spied on," he said.

In addition to considering security measures, game companies should also think about ways to improve business operations that may affect security, Wyatt suggested. Legalizing and overseeing in-game currency trading to reduce fraud, as Eve has done with its PLEX system, was one example he cited.

Another example is being nice to employees and paying them fairly. "I've heard a number of horror stories about working in the game industry...when people figure out they're not being treated well, they may take it out on you...give them profit sharing," he said.

Companies should expect to be hacked, he said, and security through obscurity is not security. The only answer, he stressed, is defense in depth, giving the security team insight into all areas of the business, and striving to continually watch for problems.

InformationWeek's GDC Coverage:

GDC: OnLive Takes Gaming To The Cloud

GDC: Sony Unveils PS3 Motion Controller

GDC: Microsoft Surface Plays Dungeons & Dragons

GDC: iPhone Developers Face Hidden Risks

Previous
2 of 2
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
Partner Perspectives
What's This?
In a digital world inundated with advanced security threats, Intel Security seeks to transform how we live and work to keep our information secure. Through hardware and software development, Intel Security delivers robust solutions that integrate security into every layer of every digital device. In combining the security expertise of McAfee with the innovation, performance, and trust of Intel, this vision becomes a reality.

As we rely on technology to enhance our everyday and business life, we must too consider the security of the intellectual property and confidential data that is housed on these devices. As we increase the number of devices we use, we increase the number of gateways and opportunity for security threats. Intel Security takes the “security connected” approach to ensure that every device is secure, and that all security solutions are seamlessly integrated.
Featured Writers
White Papers
Cartoon
Current Issue
Dark Reading's October Tech Digest
Fast data analysis can stymie attacks and strengthen enterprise security. Does your team have the data smarts?
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2013-4594
Published: 2014-10-25
The Payment for Webform module 7.x-1.x before 7.x-1.5 for Drupal does not restrict access by anonymous users, which allows remote anonymous users to use the payment of other anonymous users when submitting a form that requires payment.

CVE-2014-0476
Published: 2014-10-25
The slapper function in chkrootkit before 0.50 does not properly quote file paths, which allows local users to execute arbitrary code via a Trojan horse executable. NOTE: this is only a vulnerability when /tmp is not mounted with the noexec option.

CVE-2014-1927
Published: 2014-10-25
The shell_quote function in python-gnupg 0.3.5 does not properly quote strings, which allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via shell metacharacters in unspecified vectors, as demonstrated using "$(" command-substitution sequences, a different vulnerability than CVE-2014-1928....

CVE-2014-1928
Published: 2014-10-25
The shell_quote function in python-gnupg 0.3.5 does not properly escape characters, which allows context-dependent attackers to execute arbitrary code via shell metacharacters in unspecified vectors, as demonstrated using "\" (backslash) characters to form multi-command sequences, a different vulner...

CVE-2014-1929
Published: 2014-10-25
python-gnupg 0.3.5 and 0.3.6 allows context-dependent attackers to have an unspecified impact via vectors related to "option injection through positional arguments." NOTE: this vulnerability exists because of an incomplete fix for CVE-2013-7323.

Best of the Web
Dark Reading Radio
Archived Dark Reading Radio
Follow Dark Reading editors into the field as they talk with noted experts from the security world.