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.

Endpoint

7/13/2018
01:20 PM
Connect Directly
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

8 Big Processor Vulnerabilities in 2018

Security researchers have been working in overdrive examining processors for issues - and they haven't come up empty-handed.
Previous
1 of 9
Next

Image Source: Adobe Stock (Shawn)

Image Source: Adobe Stock (Shawn)

Since the Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities knocked the glow off of the new year, 2018 has been the year of the CPU bug. Security researchers have been working in overdrive examining processors for design flaws, firmware bugs, and other vulnerabilities that put an entire computing architecture at risk.

They haven't come up empty-handed.

Here's what we've had to contend with this year on the CPU vulnerability front — and what we can expect in a couple of weeks when new research hits the stage at Black Hat.

 

 

 

Black Hat USA returns to Las Vegas with hands-on technical Trainings, cutting-edge Briefings, Arsenal open-source tool demonstrations, top-tier security solutions and service providers in the Business Hall. Click for information on the conference and to register.

 

Ericka Chickowski specializes in coverage of information technology and business innovation. She has focused on information security for the better part of a decade and regularly writes about the security industry as a contributor to Dark Reading.  View Full Bio

Previous
1 of 9
Next
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Threaded  |  Newest First  |  Oldest First
tomas.honzak@gooddata.com
100%
0%
[email protected],
User Rank: Author
7/17/2018 | 3:02:32 PM
Excellent overview -- but does it end here?
Nicely summarized the evolution of the biggest hardware-level nightmare of 2018 (I hope I don't have to include "so far"...) 

After spending a good part of this year watching our infrastructure engineers and security experts trying to come up with a solid mitigation plan that would not kill our SaaS platform immediately and seeing how our response strategy had to change more than a dozen times as the new and updated kernel patches and CPU microcodes were published and recalled, and new and updated attack vectors and vulnerabilities were discovered, it became literally impossible to keep track of our overall exposure and risks.

Not to mention our enterprise customers, who tried so hard to keep track on our patching progress for the first three months of the year, after which they gave up as the development of this crisis turned into an unmanageable nightmare.

In the end, similarly to how the industry seems to be getting used to the fact that data breaches are the new reality and the overwhelming amount of new incidents does not come out as a surprise anymore, we need to accept that the complexity of today's CPUs, together with the fact that the primary focus of the manufacturers was, is and will be the performance, means that there might be many additional hw-level security flaws to be discovered over the next months and years.

To me, the takeaway is very simple: security and privacy are ongoing end to end process and rather than relying on particular technology or safeguard, we need to continue looking on risks and mitigate them on all the levels, starting by collecting just the minimal data needed - and ending by continuously improving the layered security.
7 Tips for Infosec Pros Considering A Lateral Career Move
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/21/2020
For Mismanaged SOCs, The Price Is Not Right
Kelly Sheridan, Staff Editor, Dark Reading,  1/22/2020
Register for Dark Reading Newsletters
White Papers
Video
Cartoon Contest
Write a Caption, Win a Starbucks Card! Click Here
Latest Comment:   It's a PEN test of our cloud security.
Current Issue
IT 2020: A Look Ahead
Are you ready for the critical changes that will occur in 2020? We've compiled editor insights from the best of our network (Dark Reading, Data Center Knowledge, InformationWeek, ITPro Today and Network Computing) to deliver to you a look at the trends, technologies, and threats that are emerging in the coming year. Download it today!
Flash Poll
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
How Enterprises are Attacking the Cybersecurity Problem
Organizations have invested in a sweeping array of security technologies to address challenges associated with the growing number of cybersecurity attacks. However, the complexity involved in managing these technologies is emerging as a major problem. Read this report to find out what your peers biggest security challenges are and the technologies they are using to address them.
Twitter Feed
Dark Reading - Bug Report
Bug Report
Enterprise Vulnerabilities
From DHS/US-CERT's National Vulnerability Database
CVE-2014-9720
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
Tornado before 3.2.2 sends arbitrary responses that contain a fixed CSRF token and may be sent with HTTP compression, which makes it easier for remote attackers to conduct a BREACH attack and determine this token via a series of crafted requests.
CVE-2015-1525
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
audio/AudioPolicyManagerBase.cpp in Android before 5.1 allows attackers to cause a denial of service (audio_policy application outage) via a crafted application that provides a NULL device address.
CVE-2015-1530
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
media/libmedia/IAudioPolicyService.cpp in Android before 5.1 allows attackers to execute arbitrary code with media_server privileges or cause a denial of service (integer overflow) via a crafted application that provides an invalid array size.
CVE-2015-2688
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
buf_pullup in Tor before 0.2.4.26 and 0.2.5.x before 0.2.5.11 does not properly handle unexpected arrival times of buffers with invalid layouts, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon exit) via crafted packets.
CVE-2015-2689
PUBLISHED: 2020-01-24
Tor before 0.2.4.26 and 0.2.5.x before 0.2.5.11 does not properly handle pending-connection resolve states during periods of high DNS load, which allows remote attackers to cause a denial of service (assertion failure and daemon exit) via crafted packets.