5 Things You Probably Missed In The Verizon DBIR
1 of 6
Source: Verizon
If you're still digesting this year's massive Verizon Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR), you're not alone. The super-sized 2015 DBIR came with the usual popular data and rare insight on real-world incidents and breach cases, but with the addition of loads of data contributed by 70 other organizations from around the world.
Unless you've been combing the DBIR regularly since it was published in April, there's a good chance you missed a few things in it. Marc Spitler, co-author of the DBIR and senior risk analyst with Verizon, joined Dark Reading Radio yesterday and shared what may have been some of the possibly lesser-noticed or publicized nuggets from the report.
So grab your copy of the DBIR, and follow along to see what key research points you may have missed. Consider it a little summer reading for the beach.
Kelly Jackson Higgins is Executive Editor at DarkReading.com. She is an award-winning veteran technology and business journalist with more than two decades of experience in reporting and editing for various publications, including Network Computing, Secure Enterprise ... View Full Bio
1 of 6
Comment |
Print |
More Insights
Comments
Newest First | Oldest First | Threaded View
Re: 5 things you missed
ata and rare insight on real-world incidents and breach cases, but with the addition of loads of data contributed by 70 other organizations from around the world.
Unless you've been com
Unless you've been com
Re: Mobile Malware not a significant threat
I think you forgot the word "yet." ;)
Sure, Windows is where the action is...but that's more a function of its proliferation/market dominance and less a function of how many vulnerabilities it has. (In 2014, for instance, several times more vulnerabilities -- and of greater severity on the whole -- were discovered in Linux, OSX, and iOS than in any Windows OS.)
Same thing if we look at mobile only, too. iOS has way more vulnerabilities than Android, but Android is attacked way more often than iOS because there are so many more Android phones out there than iOS phones (and because it's far easier to attack people via malicious apps on Android than it is on iOS because of Apple's tight iTunes Store controls).
Anyway, it's worthwhile to keep an eye on everything across the board. There's little telling how the results will differ five or ten years from now.
Sure, Windows is where the action is...but that's more a function of its proliferation/market dominance and less a function of how many vulnerabilities it has. (In 2014, for instance, several times more vulnerabilities -- and of greater severity on the whole -- were discovered in Linux, OSX, and iOS than in any Windows OS.)
Same thing if we look at mobile only, too. iOS has way more vulnerabilities than Android, but Android is attacked way more often than iOS because there are so many more Android phones out there than iOS phones (and because it's far easier to attack people via malicious apps on Android than it is on iOS because of Apple's tight iTunes Store controls).
Anyway, it's worthwhile to keep an eye on everything across the board. There's little telling how the results will differ five or ten years from now.
5 things you missed
I like your way of presentation.Thanks dear for such an informatic blog.
Re: Mobile Malware not a significant threat
Yep, attackers always start with the easy entry point. But as Marc Spitler said, it's only a matter of time before mobile devices are a big part of the attack chain.
Mobile Malware not a significant threat
It is nice to see this confirmation that, despite all the products and hot air from security vendors, mobile devices are not where the security breaches are happening. Windows is still by far the low hanging fruit for attackers.
relying on their customers' security
Great stuff Kelly. I love the way they put this: "What we have here are companies ... relying on the security of their customer base. Over one half of Web app attacks came from the use of stolen credentials." So basically organizations are outsourcing security to their customers, and I suppose to the other organizations that the customers do business with.
White Papers
Video
3 Comments
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
Flash Poll
Online Malware and Threats: A Profile of Today's Security Posture
This report offers insight on how security professionals plan to invest in cybersecurity, and how they are prioritizing their resources. Find out what your peers have planned today!
Twitter Feed
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database CVE-2018-19367
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-19
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database CVE-2018-19367
PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Portainer through 1.19.2 provides an API endpoint (/api/users/admin/check) to verify that the admin user is already created. This API endpoint will return 404 if admin was not created and 204 if it was already created. Attackers can set an admin password in the 404 case.
CVE-2018-19335PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Google Monorail before 2018-06-07 has a Cross-Site Search (XS-Search) vulnerability because CSV downloads are affected by CSRF, and calculations of download times (for requests with a crafted groupby value) can be used to obtain sensitive information about the content of bug reports.
CVE-2018-19334PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Google Monorail before 2018-05-04 has a Cross-Site Search (XS-Search) vulnerability because CSV downloads are affected by CSRF, and calculations of download times (for requests with an unsupported axis) can be used to obtain sensitive information about the content of bug reports.
CVE-2018-10099PUBLISHED: 2018-11-20
Google Monorail before 2018-04-04 has a Cross-Site Search (XS-Search) vulnerability because CSV downloads are affected by CSRF, and calculations of download times (for requests with duplicated columns) can be used to obtain sensitive information about the content of bug reports.
CVE-2018-17906PUBLISHED: 2018-11-19
Philips iSite and IntelliSpace PACS, iSite PACS, all versions, and IntelliSpace PACS, all versions. Default credentials and no authentication within third party software may allow an attacker to compromise a component of the system.
- Terms of Service
- Privacy Statement
- Legal Entities
- Copyright © 2018 UBM, All rights reserved
Tweet This