Dark Reading is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

Attacks/Breaches

3/20/2015
02:45 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
LinkedIn
RSS
E-Mail
100%
0%

Rush To Release Resulting In Vulnerable Mobile Apps

IT organizations overlooking security in their haste to crank out mobile apps, Ponemon Institute report finds.

Growing pressure on IT organizations to enable enterprise mobility initiatives is introducing new security risks at many companies, often due to the rush to release new mobile applications to meet demand from business customers.

The expertise and resources needed to address security risks are also often lacking at many businesses implementing mobility projects. Meanwhile, budgets for mobile security remain precariously low, even as enterprises appear willing to spend more on mobile application development overall.

A new survey of IT managers at 670 organizations by the Ponemon Institute identified such issues as common among companies that are deploying mobile applications for use by employees and customers.

One of the biggest takeaways from the report is the impact that customer needs and demands have on mobile application security.  About 65 percent of the respondents strongly felt that the security of mobile applications was being put at risk because of the pressure on IT to release applications quickly in response to mobility requirements.

“The 'rush to release' phenomenon challenges an organization’s ability to stop the risks of data leakage and malware,” the Ponemon report says. Most organizations say they expect to see an increase in malware-infected mobile applications and devices over the next 12 months as a direct result of this phenomenon.

The survey found that IT organizations at large companies on average spend about $34 million on developing mobile applications for their customers. But because of the rush to get them into the hands of users as quickly as possible, many companies fail to first scan the products for security vulnerabilities. Four out of 10 companies surveyed say they aren't scanning the applications they build for flaws that could result in malware infections, data leaks, and other problems.

Most do not run any security tests on either the mobile apps that are developed internally, outsourced from third parties, or purchased from mobile application stores.  And when organizations do test applications for security flaws, they usually inspect less than half of them. Of the applications that were tested, more than 30 percent on average were found to contain security flaws. And though the companies surveyed had an average of 110 mobile applications, the budget allocated for securing them was only about $2 million.

Jim Szafranski, vice president of mobile management at IBM, which sponsored the Ponemon study, said the numbers reveal a disconcerting lack of attention being paid by companies to securing mobile applications.

“To me, the one number that sticks out is the 40 percent of companies that are not scanning their mobile applications for vulnerabilities,” Szafranski says. “If I was a CIO, and I was running a business and someone told me that in the most immature area of our business we are not taking precautions—that would scare me.”

Security is often the first casualty in a market that is moving as fast as the enterprise mobility space is, he said. When skills are short and product update cycles keep happening as fast as they do in the mobile space, IT can have a hard time keeping up, he said.

“Whether it is an application in an mobile app store or an internal app catalog, mobile apps are being updated at such a pace I am not surprised that businesses are struggling to keep pace.”

The Ponemon data is another reminder of the growing risks to enterprise security from the enterprise mobility movement. Over the past few years, a growing number of enterprises have adopted Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies that have resulted in what many say is an incredible array of mobile devices being introduced into the workplace. A vast number of these devices are unmanaged, meaning they connect to enterprise applications and data without any IT control over the access.

[Everything you need to know about today’s IT security challenges – but were afraid to ask. Register with Discount Code DRBLOG to save $100 for this special one-day event, Dark Reading's Cyber Security Crash Course at Interop on Wednesday, April 29.]

In a survey of 198 companies last November by Tech Pro, nearly 75 percent said they already permit or plan to permit BYOD polices in their companies. Tech Pro found that the trend is more pronounced among smaller companies than in larger ones, while governments were the most likely to prohibit it.

Enterprise mobile applications that sit side by side with consumer applications often create a huge exposure for companies, a HP report on mobile application security found in 2013.  HP scanned more than 2,100 mobile applications published by companies on Forbes list of Global 2000 companies and found that 86 percent lacked basic protections against modern attacks, 75 percent do not use proper encryption, and 97 percent could access at least one private information source on a mobile device.

That report too, found the frantic rate of mobile application deployment to be the primary cause for vulnerabilities.

"As a result, mobile applications represent a real security threat, emphasizing the need for a mobile application security strategy that enables businesses to go from 'fast-to-market' to 'ecure-and-fast-to-market,': the report said.

Jai Vijayan is a seasoned technology reporter with over 20 years of experience in IT trade journalism. He was most recently a Senior Editor at Computerworld, where he covered information security and data privacy issues for the publication. Over the course of his 20-year ... View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
xmarksthespot
50%
50%
xmarksthespot,
User Rank: Strategist
3/22/2015 | 12:21:11 AM
Risk acceptance
Jai Vijayan: as always with the insightful articles. Thanks!

Investopia has a great definition:

"Accepting risk occurs when the cost of managing a certain type of risk is accepted, because the risk involved is not adequate enough to warrant the added cost it will take to avoid that risk".

Fully informed decisions are made concerning these risks. 
Commentary
Ransomware Is Not the Problem
Adam Shostack, Consultant, Entrepreneur, Technologist, Game Designer,  6/9/2021
Edge-DRsplash-11-edge-ask-the-experts
How Can I Test the Security of My Home-Office Employees' Routers?
John Bock, Senior Research Scientist,  6/7/2021
News
New Ransomware Group Claiming Connection to REvil Gang Surfaces
Jai Vijayan, Contributing Writer,  6/10/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: Zero Trust doesn't have to break your budget!
Current Issue
The State of Cybersecurity Incident Response
In this report learn how enterprises are building their incident response teams and processes, how they research potential compromises, how they respond to new breaches, and what tools and processes they use to remediate problems and improve their cyber defenses for the future.
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
How Enterprises are Developing Secure Applications
Recent breaches of third-party apps are driving many organizations to think harder about the security of their off-the-shelf software as they continue to move left in secure software development practices.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2020-25414
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
A local file inclusion vulnerability was discovered in the captcha function in Monstra 3.0.4 which allows remote attackers to execute arbitrary PHP code.
CVE-2021-32078
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
An Out-of-Bounds Read was discovered in arch/arm/mach-footbridge/personal-pci.c in the Linux kernel through 5.12.11 because of the lack of a check for a value that shouldn't be negative, e.g., access to element -2 of an array, aka CID-298a58e165e4.
CVE-2021-31818
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
Affected versions of Octopus Server are prone to an authenticated SQL injection vulnerability in the Events REST API because user supplied data in the API request isn’t parameterised correctly. Exploiting this vulnerability could allow unauthorised access to database tables.
CVE-2021-34825
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
Quassel through 0.13.1, when --require-ssl is enabled, launches without SSL or TLS support if a usable X.509 certificate is not found on the local system.
CVE-2021-32944
PUBLISHED: 2021-06-17
A use-after-free issue exists in the DGN file-reading procedure in the Drawings SDK (All versions prior to 2022.4) resulting from the lack of proper validation of user-supplied data. This can result in a memory corruption or arbitrary code execution, allowing attackers to cause a denial-of-service c...