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.

Cloud

8/13/2019
12:20 PM
50%
50%

700K Guest Records Stolen in Choice Hotels Breach

Cybercriminals reportedly stole the information from an exposed MongoDB database on a third-party server.

Hotel franchisor Choice Hotels has confirmed a breach in which attackers stole 700,000 guest records from a publicly available MongoDB database without a password or any authentication.

The unsecured server, which the hotel chain says belonged to a third-party vendor, contained multiple databases holding more than 5.6 million records. Choice Hotels says most of this was "test data," including fields referring to reservation details, passwords, and payment cards. Most of the 700,000 compromised records were in a database of 2.4 million records labeled "privacy log" and located in the same MongoDB instance. Exposed consumer data included names, physical and email addresses, phone numbers, and consent statuses, Comparitech reports.

Security researcher Bob Diachenko found the database on July 2, shortly after it was indexed by search engine BinaryEdge, and worked with Comparitech to analyze it. A ransom note demanding 0.4 Bitcoin was already there, likely left by an automated script targeting publicly accessible MongoDB databases, he believes. Diachenko notified Choice Hotels following his discovery; the firm secured the database on July 2 and began an investigation on July 28.

Choice Hotels says it will not be collaborating with this vendor in the future, and it's taking a closer look at its vendor relationships to put additional controls in place. It also plans to implement a responsible disclosure program to learn of future security incidents.

Read more details here.

Dark Reading's Quick Hits delivers a brief synopsis and summary of the significance of breaking news events. For more information from the original source of the news item, please follow the link provided in this article. View Full Bio
 

Recommended Reading:

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
tdsan
50%
50%
tdsan,
User Rank: Ninja
8/13/2019 | 4:22:56 PM
Re: And the circle goes round and round .....
I am with you buddy, it seems the "SAGA" continues, it seems that companies and people are not familiar with the technology so they are just putting it out there without having a third-party vendor validate their design/implementation.

He also stated that it was a test environment to give Choice a new tool to test out new functionality. If that was the case, then why wasn't the system put in an enclosed network that does not allow Internet access and encrypt the data using AES2048 bit encryption, even if they got the data it would not be any good to them (of course if they happen to get the keys, then that is another story).

Choice Hotels Bitcoin Reply

I am like you, "come on people", and why did they use live data (700,000 records were real-data). Why wasn't the data created in an artificial scripted manner (per another article, they said 5.6 million records were artificial, so it looks like a marketing coverup but oh well, same story, different day)?

Time of Breach

Also, look at the timeline when Diachenko identified the issue:
  • June 30: The exposed database was first indexed by search engine BinaryEdge.
  • July 2: Security researcher Bob Diachenko discovered the database and immediately notified Choice Hotels about the exposure. It already contained the ransom note. Choice Hotels says it unintentionally filtered the email so that it was not read.
  • July 2: Database access was secured.
  • July 28: Diachenko sent a second notification and Choice Hotels began its investigation of the incident.

All I can say is wow.

T

 

 
News
Former CISA Director Chris Krebs Discusses Risk Management & Threat Intel
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  2/23/2021
Edge-DRsplash-10-edge-articles
Security + Fraud Protection: Your One-Two Punch Against Cyberattacks
Joshua Goldfarb, Director of Product Management at F5,  2/23/2021
News
Cybercrime Groups More Prolific, Focus on Healthcare in 2020
Robert Lemos, Contributing Writer,  2/22/2021
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win an Amazon Gift Card! Click Here
Latest Comment: This comment is waiting for review by our moderators.
Current Issue
2021 Top Enterprise IT Trends
We've identified the key trends that are poised to impact the IT landscape in 2021. Find out why they're important and how they will affect you today!
Flash Poll
Building the SOC of the Future
Building the SOC of the Future
Digital transformation, cloud-focused attacks, and a worldwide pandemic. The past year has changed the way business works and the way security teams operate. There is no going back.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2021-27225
PUBLISHED: 2021-03-01
In Dataiku DSS before 8.0.6, insufficient access control in the Jupyter notebooks integration allows users (who have coding permissions) to read and overwrite notebooks in projects that they are not authorized to access.
CVE-2021-27132
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
SerComm AG Combo VD625 AGSOT_2.1.0 devices allow CRLF injection (for HTTP header injection) in the download function via the Content-Disposition header.
CVE-2021-25284
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in through SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. salt.modules.cmdmod can log credentials to the info or error log level.
CVE-2021-3144
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
In SaltStack Salt before 3002.5, eauth tokens can be used once after expiration. (They might be used to run command against the salt master or minions.)
CVE-2021-3148
PUBLISHED: 2021-02-27
An issue was discovered in SaltStack Salt before 3002.5. Sending crafted web requests to the Salt API can result in salt.utils.thin.gen_thin() command injection because of different handling of single versus double quotes. This is related to salt/utils/thin.py.